A national group of sheriffs that claims the top law enforcers in American counties are not bound by federal law has successfully spread its doctrine to dozens of states in recent years.
Sovereign Citizen, Cop Edition.
ACAB
Cops: we don’t get to pick and choose what laws we enforce.
Also cops:
That’s cool. I’ll ignore federal law too since I’m now a constitutional lawyer and scholar. Not really but that’s how dumb they sound.
That is not how the rule of law works at all.
Yeah, this is where “law and order” is diametrically opposed to “rule of law”. These people feel like they can do whatever in their fiefdoms, free of the law applying to them. I’m not comfortable with the “ACAB” slogans, but when I encounter LEO like this that are getting too big for their britches, it makes it hard not to believe that there is something fundamentally wrong with the institution of policing.
“law and order” is and always has been a euphemism for “beat up black people”
Or those damn poors! Sometimes it’s hard to tell the difference through all that grime …
Just a reminder to arm yourselves against the cops. They’re not going to give up their power quietly. 5.56/.223 are excellent for piercing plates.
The group, known as CSPOA, teaches that elected sheriffs must “protect their citizens from the overreach of an out-of-control federal government” by refusing to enforce any law they deem unconstitutional or “unjust.”
“The safest way to actually achieve that is to have local law enforcement understand that they have no obligation to enforce such laws,” Mack said in an interview. “They’re not laws at all anyway. If they’re unjust laws, they are laws of tyranny.”
Not like that
It all started with the legalize marijuana movement, now we are here.
Do you want local governance or top down governance from a thousand miles away? At what distance does it become colonialism? States are not required to enforce federal law, they just can’t violate the constitution.
Legalized weed led to fascist, smooth-brained cops?
I would rather have a shitty federal liberal democracy than a local fascist police gang? Thank you very much?
A big distinction being that sheriffs didn’t legalize weed, State legislatures did. That does set up a big constitutional issue that the federal government has just ignored, but the linked article is different than that.
State legislatures repealed the laws against it that they had. After that it’s no distinction at all. State law enforcement was directed to not enforce federal law, because they’re not required to.
There’s no big constitutional issue: states cannot be compelled to enforce federal law, this is already clearly settled. This is why things like the age to drink alcohol are forced onto states by withholding highway funding, the federal government can’t pass a national 21 and over law and expect it to be enforced, so they told the states “pass your own over 21 law or we won’t give you federal highway money” which is constitutional they say under the equal protection clause because the condition applies to all states, and the courts have ruled this way. Now every state has their own individual 21 and over law, something many states didn’t want to do. This has to happen because state law enforcement cannot be compelled to enforce federal law.
These sheriffs, and the state gun law repeals and the silencer laws and all that kind of stuff are applying the same concept. Legalizing weed is really what kicked this movement into high gear, it was the first time in a century or more that states managed to prominently just not enforce federal law, now it’s become a broader movement. Nobody but feds are required to enforce any federal law, they’re just required to abide by the constitution.
