‘Constitutional sheriffs’ won’t enforce laws that infringe on Constitutional rights
In response to Gary Kent: The sheriff is elected by the people and takes an oath to defend the Constitution of the United States. Even though the states should have sovereignty over their own matters, they may not put into effect any law or ordinance that is against the Constitution of the United States. In other words, NYS cannot have a law that infringes on its citizens’ natural rights, if that right is enumerated in the Constitution itself.
The Constitution is a simple written document, not an oral statement that changes with the times. Our rights do not change—they remain the same—freedom of speech, worship, assembly, the press, to petition the government; the right to bear arms; the right of property, to be free from unreasonable searches and seizures; due process–just to name a few. If any reader is not clear on what these mean, I refer you to KrisAnne Hall for deeper insight. Any law that is counter to any right that is enumerated in the Constitution is an unConstitutional law, and can be nullified. If that seems simple, it’s because it is.
Police officers are hired by the municipality, be it town, county, or state, and their job is to enforce codes and warrants. They do not have to consider the rightness or wrongness of those codes—they are mandated by paycheck, and answer to their superiors, who also answer to theirs. But in that system, none of them answer to the people.
The sheriff does answer directly to the people and his main duty is to make sure their Constitutional rights are not infringed upon. So yes, he must vet the local “laws” and codes, and if they do not conform to the Constitution, the law of the land, he absolutely must nullify them. If he does not, and allows the oppression to continue, he is to be blamed for running a lawless county.
Unfortunately, we have been programmed to believe that the sheriff is the “top cop” and nothing else. But as people wake up to what is happening to the “grand experiment” in liberty, they are beginning to understand how far they are from the original intent of those who established this country.
There is a growing movement among sheriff’s associations in understanding what their true function is and returning to it, resisting the overreach of state and federal government forces and protecting the rights of the people in their care. Most of that resistance is currently out west because of extreme federal intrusions, but it is also here. If you have been following Steve Felano on Facebook, he has been posting updates as the DA in each county in WNY has promised not to prosecute a certain portion of the SAFE Act (7-round limit). And quietly, many of the sheriffs in NYS have promised not to enforce this unConstitutional law.
That is why the public needs to put our sheriff candidates under extreme vetting before deciding: do we want just another police officer, or do we want someone who will look out for our inherent rights and see to it that those rights are not mangled by any institution, legal or otherwise?