RP would be proud.

[cska80]

http://www.keenefreepress.com/mambo/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=439&Itemid=36

Couldn't find this in any other news publication, but I heard about it on the Quinn and Rose show this morning. Please read!

[cska80]

Bump. Spread this article around! I couldn't find it anywhere besides their local paper.

[acptulsa]

Wow. The one local office mandated by the Constitution just got stronger--as long as the Supreme Court doesn't strike that ruling down. Outstanding! I'd vote for one of those if I found one running in my county. I like this guy!

[LittleLightShining]

THAT is awesome!

[MikeStanart]

Somone buy this sheriff a round of drinks.

[Danke]

Excellent!

[OhioMichael]

that... is... awesome!

[Yom]

Awesome news!

[humanic]

freakin awesome

[georgiaboy]

http://www.keenefreepress.com/mambo/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=439&Itemid=36

Couldn't find this in any other news publication, but I heard about it on the Quinn and Rose show this morning. Please read!

embedded for convenience. I noticed it said Feb 2007, so this is over a year old?
Great news nonetheless!!


Keene Free Press


County Sheriff Can Bust Big Bro
Friday, 16 February 2007

The duly elected sheriff of a county is the highest law enforcement official within a county. He has law enforcement powers that exceed that of any other state or federal official.

This is settled law that most people are not aware of.

County sheriffs in Wyoming have scored a big one for the 10th Amendment and states rights. The sheriffs slapped a federal intrusion upside the head and are insisting that all federal law enforcement officers and personnel from federal regulatory agencies must clear all their activity in a Wyoming County with the Sheriff’s Office. Deja vu for those who remember big Richard Mack in Arizona.



Bighorn County Sheriff Dave Mattis spoke at a press conference following a recent U.S. District Court decision (Case No. 2:96-cv-099-J (2006)) and announced that all federal officials are forbidden to enter his county without his prior approval ......

"If a sheriff doesn’t want the Feds in his county he has the constitutional right and power to keep them out, or ask them to leave, or retain them in custody."

The court decision was the result of a suit against both the BATF and the IRS by Mattis and other members of the Wyoming Sheriff’s Association. The suit in the Wyoming federal court district sought restoration of the protections enshrined in the United States Constitution and the Wyoming Constitution.

Guess what? The District Court ruled in favor of the sheriffs. In fact, they stated, Wyoming is a sovereign state and the duly elected sheriff of a county is the highest law enforcement official within a county and has law enforcement powers exceeding that of any other state or federal official." Go back and re-read this quote.

The court confirms and asserts that "the duly elected sheriff of a county is the highest law enforcement official within a county and has law enforcement powers EXCEEDING that of any other state OR federal official." And you thought the 10th Amendment was dead and buried — not in Wyoming, not yet.

But it gets even better. Since the judge stated that the sheriff "has law enforcement powers EXCEEDING that of any other state OR federal official," the Wyoming sheriffs are flexing their muscles. They are demanding access to all BATF files. Why? So as to verify that the agency is not violating provisions of Wyoming law that prohibits the registration of firearms or the keeping of a registry of firearm owners. This would be wrong.

The sheriffs are also demanding that federal agencies immediately cease the seizure of private property and the impoundment of private bank accounts without regard to due process in Wyoming state courts.

Gosh, it makes one wish that the sheriffs of the counties relative to Waco, Texas and Oklahoma City, Oklahoma regarding their jurisdictions were drinking the same water these Wyoming sheriffs are.

Sheriff Mattis said, "I am reacting in response to the actions of federal employees who have attempted to deprive citizens of my county of their privacy, their liberty, and their property without regard to constitutional safeguards. I hope that more sheriffs all across America will join us in protecting their citizens from the illegal activities of the IRS, EPA, BATF, FBI, or any other federal agency that is operating outside the confines of constitutional law. Employees of the IRS and the EPA are no longer welcome in Bighorn County unless they intend to operate in conformance to constitutional law." [Amen].

However, the sad reality is that sheriffs are elected, and that means they are required to be both law enforcement officials and politicians as well. Unfortunately, Wyoming sheriffs are the exception rather than the rule . . . but they shouldn’t be. Sheriffs have enormous power, if or when they choose to use it. I share the hope of Sheriff Mattis that "more sheriffs all across America will join us in protecting their citizens."

If Wyoming Sheriffs can follow in the steps of former Arizona Sheriff Richard Mack and recognize both their power and authority, they could become champions for the memory of Thomas Jefferson who died thinking that he had won those "states’ rights" debates with Alexander Hamilton.

This case is not just some amusing mountain melodrama. This is a BIG deal. This case is yet further evidence that the 10th Amendment is not yet totally dead, or in a complete decay in the United States. It is also significant in that it can, may, and hopefully will be interpreted to mean that "political subdivisions of a State are included within the meaning of the amendment, or that the powers exercised by a sheriff are an extension of those common law powers which the 10th Amendment explicitly reserves to the People, if they are not granted to the federal government or specifically prohibited to the States."

Winston Churchill observed, "If you will not fight for right when you can easily win without bloodshed; if you will not fight when your victory is sure and not too costly; you may come to the moment when you will have to fights with all the odds against you with only a precarious chance of survival. There may be a worse case. You may have to fight when there is not hope of victory at all, because it is better to perish than to live as slaves."

Dave Robinson, Brunswick, Maine maine-patriot.com

[Banana]

WOW!

This is fucking great!


I remember when I was taking my International Law class, my teacher made an announcement, and he made quite a big deal about it- the announcement was regarding Patriot Act, and that basically reversed the sheriffs/federal agents' roles and everyone should be very concerned about it. The students were apathetic or at least more like "and the big point is...?"

He would be pleased as punch to hear that. :) Even if it's last year!

[DealzOnWheelz]

Can anyone say "WE JUST FOUND OUR BACKDOOR WAY TO BRINGBACK THE CONSTITUTION"


If we can get liberty minded individuals to run for this position in a large amount of counties we can literally halt the abuse of rights

[constituent]

yep.

and let's not forget district attorneys and other forms of prosecutors either.

we can pwn this country in a number of years if we make quick and decisive action to get
freedom minded people into these sorts of local positions.

[Jason726]

I hate to burst anyone's bubble, because this seems like great news, but at the bottom of the page there is a "next" button. I clicked it and it takes me to a rebuttal that makes me wonder about the validity of this article.

[ultimaonliner]

bump

[TruthAtLast]

I LOVE IT! anyone send this to Ron Paul? Can we spread this message to other liberty organizations. Everyone should be aware that Freedom still exists and people are still fighting for it.

[ronpaulhawaii]

yep.

and let's not forget district attorneys and other forms of prosecutors either.

we can pwn this country in a number of years if we make quick and decisive action to get
freedom minded people into these sorts of local positions.

+2010

[Mahkato]

DIGG: h ttp://digg.com/politics/Sheriff_Has_Authority_to_Expel_Federal_Agents_From _County

[acptulsa]

I hate to burst anyone's bubble, because this seems like great news, but at the bottom of the page there is a "next" button. I clicked it and it takes me to a rebuttal that makes me wonder about the validity of this article.

See what you mean. However, the mere fact that the federal government backed down instead of pursuing the case is most promising. Remember that county sheriffs are mandated by the Constitution. That's more than the BATF, FBI, NSA, CIA, IRS, NHTSA or much of any other federal alphabet soup can lay claim to...

[humanic]

I hate to burst anyone's bubble, because this seems like great news, but at the bottom of the page there is a "next" button. I clicked it and it takes me to a rebuttal that makes me wonder about the validity of this article.

The contents of the article Jason726 is talking about is below. I'm feeling lazy-- does anyone want to check and see who is right (this article or the original)?


County Sheriff Can Bust Big Bro" has utterly false and baseless statements
Saturday, 24 February 2007

I completely agree that it is every citizen's responsibility to not only question government but to question what you read and people say. In that vein, I was interested when I read the article on your website:

"County Sheriff Can Bust Big Bro"

and the ruling of District court and the statement that:

The court confirms and asserts that "the duly elected sheriff of a county is the highest law enforcement official within a county and has law enforcement powers EXCEEDING that of any other state OR federal official." in Case No. 2:96-cv-099-J

So, I looked into that case and lo, and behold, the court never issued a ruling or opinion that said anything that was mentioned in the article. The case was dismissed on a joint motion of both parties and the court never issued a ruling or opinion, let alone one that said that.

Anyone can easily verify, as do I, the pleadings filed in any Federal case through PACER, http://pacer.psc.uscourts.gov/

You can do so and see that the article you have posted on your website has utterly false and baseless statements.

Unfortunately for me, that reflects upon the credibility of all that you have on your site. It is a shame because it seems like you are trying to provide the truth.

Dan