Results 1 to 5 of 5

Thread: Local Sheriffs vs. the Feds: Who is Protecting our Constitutional Rights?

  1. #1

    Local Sheriffs vs. the Feds: Who is Protecting our Constitutional Rights?

    The federal government has continued to spend energy and resources in hunting down Amish raw milk farmers. Raw milk advocate David Gumpert recently reported about a federal effort to prosecute two raw milk farmers by requiring them to appear before a federal Grand Jury in Detroit:

    Though Peanut Corp of America has been cited for responsibility in nine deaths and more than 700 illnesses from Salmonella in its peanut butter, its president, Stewart Parnell, has remained seemingly immune from prosecution nearly three years after the fact. Same with Austin “Jack” DeCoster of Wright County Egg, which was linked to as many as 1,700 illnesses from Salmonella in its eggs in 2010. But a relatively small 2010 Midwest outbreak of 25 illnesses (and no deaths) from Campylobacter in raw milk seems to have brought the ire of law enforcement down on the owners of two tiny farms in Indiana and Michigan. A federal grand jury in Detroit is investigating bringing criminal charges against an Amish farmer David Hochstetler in Indiana who produced the milk, and a Michigan farmer Richard Hebron who helped distribute it to several private food clubs. (Full article here:

    Today, Kentucky Food Club leader John Moody reported that the scheduled grand jury date for Amish farmer David Hochstetler in Detroit was canceled, and that Hochstetler has been released from his subpoena. What happened to cause this turn of events? According to Moody:

    Local Sheriff Brad Rogers, stepped in to the situation and notified the DOJ that if they wanted to have any dealings with those under his protection and jurisdiction, they would have to go through him. He also warned the DOJ that if they continued to visit David’s farm/property without a proper warrant, he or his officers would arrest them for trespassing. (Full article here:

    Moody goes on to report that the Justice Department “threatened Sheriff Rogers with a FELONY ARREST for doing his job and fulfilling his oath of office.” Gumpert gave some details as to the exchange between Sheriff Rogers and the DOJ’s Mr. Goldstein:

    Rogers emailed Goldstein that there had been “a number of inspections and attempted inspections on (Hochstetler’s) farm…” He warned that “any further attempts to inspect this farm without a warrant signed by a local judge, based on probable cause, will result in Federal inspectors’ removal or arrest for trespassing by my officers or I.”

    That prompted Goldstein to cite the U.S. Constitution’s “Supremacy Clause,” which he said “has been interpreted since the earliest days of this nation to mean that federal law trumps state law whenever the two conflict.”

    Goldstein argued further that the Federal Food Drug and Cosmetic Act allowed federal agents “to enter Mr. Hochstetler’s property…without a warrant at all–pursuant to a long line of federal cases…” Moreover, he warned the sheriff that federal agents could arrest him– “that the ‘refusal to permit entry or inspection as authorized by section 374′ is in itself a federal criminal offense, which under certain circumstances is a felony punishable by imprisonment for up to three years…”

    The Goldstein letter prompted Rogers to reply, in a letter just being sent today, “When you assert that federal law trumps state law, it is a distortion of the intent, content and extent of the supreme law of the land–the U.S. Constitution-seen through a myopic and misunderstood view of Article VI, section 2 (The Supremacy Clause).”

    He also asserted that “the Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act could be deemed unconstitutional if and when challenged vis-a-vis the Tenth Amendment juxtaposed with The Commerce Clause.”

    He added that “our form of government was based on the principle that all officials exist to secure ‘Life, Liberty, and the Pursuit of Happiness.’…Your ‘cosmetic’ regulations will never ‘trump’ those principles. The citizen in question is a good man and has committed no crime. He is an upstanding member of this community. He does not have to allow you access to his property for the FDA to conduct random inspections.” (Read the Full Article Here:

    So what’s with this Sheriff Brad Rogers standing up to the federal government? Is he some kind of renegade Sheriff?

    Actually, no. Sheriff Rogers is part of a large and growing movement across America of Sheriffs standing up for the constitutional rights of the citizens in their district, and standing against the federal government and its effort to infringe upon States rights and citizen’s constitutional rights. Unlike federal bureaucratic departments like the FDA, the EPA, U.S. Forest Service, etc., Sheriffs are elected officials that take an oath of office to uphold the constitution.

    Sheriff Rogers is part of the County Sheriff Project started by Sheriff Richard Mack, who challenged the Clinton administration on the implementation of the Brady bill in Arizona, all the way to the Supreme Court, and won. You can learn more about Sheriff Rogers in this video:

    Full Article here:
    There is no fear in love, but perfect love casts out fear. For fear has to do with punishment, and whoever fears has not been perfected in love.
    (1 John 4:18)

  2. Remove this section of ads by registering.
  3. #2
    Here's another story that just came out today about the feds acting as the prosecution in a rural area of Wisconsin, attacking a small raw milk farmer:

    A Sauk County farmer who has clashed with state regulators over his continued sale of raw milk and other dairy products has been charged with four criminal offenses related to his operation.

    Vernon Hershberger of Loganville operated a retail food establishment, as a milk producer, and a dairy farm without a license, and violated a prior holding order regarding his milk production, all unclassified misdemeanors, according to a criminal complaint filed Tuesday. Three of the counts are punishable by up to 6 months in jail, and the holding order violation carries a maximum one year sentence. All counts also carry a possible $10,000 fine.

    The charges were brought by the state Department of Justice acting as special prosecutor for Sauk County.

    The complaint says Hershberger was warned in 2007 that selling milk, even to a closed group of members, did not exempt him from getting a retail establishment license.

    In early 2010, the state revoked Hershberger’s milk producer’s license, and neither he nor his farm, Grazin’ Acres, ever had a dairy plant license.

    An inspection in summer 2010 revealed Hershberger appeared to be making cheese, ice cream, yogurt and butter, which was labeled and displayed for sale.

    Hershberger had said he only sold to about 100 families who paid an annual fee to become members eligible to buy from his farm.
    There is no fear in love, but perfect love casts out fear. For fear has to do with punishment, and whoever fears has not been perfected in love.
    (1 John 4:18)

  4. #3
    Things are about to get tough for the Sheriff's - if they have not sold out.
    Experience teaches us that it is much easier to prevent an enemy from posting themselves than it is to dislodge them after they have got possession.
    ~ George Washington

  5. #4
    great to know the FBi is protecting our freedoms from the terrorists
    A society that places equality before freedom with get neither; A society that places freedom before equality will yield high degrees of both

    Make a move and plead the 5th because you can't plead the 1st

  6. #5
    Contact Judge Napolitano and ask him to interview this Sheriff Rogers who is standing up to threats from the DOJ. His story needs to go national and give more exposure to the Constitutional Sheriffs movement. One of the few positive things happening currently in this country....
    There is no fear in love, but perfect love casts out fear. For fear has to do with punishment, and whoever fears has not been perfected in love.
    (1 John 4:18)

Similar Threads

  1. Are there REALLY any Constitutional Sheriffs?
    By Tod in forum Individual Rights Violations: Case Studies
    Replies: 20
    Last Post: 02-07-2013, 09:18 PM
  2. Replies: 2
    Last Post: 01-23-2012, 11:20 PM
  3. Replies: 1
    Last Post: 02-28-2011, 10:08 AM
  4. We Need Constitutional Sheriffs Now!
    By ninepointfive in forum U.S. Political News
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 07-10-2010, 07:36 AM
  5. Do our Constitutional rights supersede local laws?
    By wgadget in forum Grassroots Central
    Replies: 9
    Last Post: 12-08-2007, 02:36 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts