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. Déjà 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

Source: Keene Free Press

Slide Back Up And Close This Article

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.

Bighorn County Sheriff Dave Mattis comments:

“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.”

“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.”

The implications are huge:

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.

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.”

It appears to me that one office where the Libertarian Party should focus it’s limited resources is County Sheriff. The change that could be made is nothing to laugh at. Meanwhile, there are still a bunch of nuts wasting valuable resources supporting those that seek offices that will never be won.

Slide Back Up And Close This Article

 Well, county government is a branch of state government and when the state is broke…

I tell you this because state revenue is not meeting expectations. More cuts are coming. I need to bring to your attention the serious concerns we have in reference to our state budget crisis. We are already finding ways to work through the 56 hours of furlough time we are required to take because of budget cuts. It’s going to get worse! The state legislature is about to go into special session…again. Brian Livingston, Exec. Director of the Arizona Police Association is lobbying hard on our behalf, but more cuts will be coming. We have been told to…  
 

“…expect revenue streams to state agencies as well as those revenues streams dedicated to cities, towns and counties to be significantly and negatively affected by the end of the special session.” 

“State tax collections continued their downward slide in October, with revenues for the month coming in more than $140 million below forecast and the state slipping deeper into a sea of red ink. In the first four months of the fiscal year, the state's revenue is short $376 million compared to earlier projections. October was the 15th consecutive month revenues declined by double digits over the previous year.”

“…the latest budget projections for the 2011 state budget sits at -$3B to -$3.5B. If these budget projections hold true, law enforcement and correctional funding will undoubtedly be considered in play of drastic fund stream reductions.”

This afternoon one of the general revenue bills submitted for this special legislative session was amended at the request of the Maricopa County government lobbyist to include the following language:

“Notwithstanding any other law, a county may meet any statutory funding requirements of this section from any source of county revenue designated by the county, including funds of any countywide special taxing district in which the board of supervisors serves as the board of directors.”

As stated in this revision ANY source may be used to balance a county’s budget deficit. This means law enforcement funding including special designated funding may be cut and reverted to a county’s general fund to balance a county’s budget. If such a provision passes there is strong likelihood that county  law enforcement officers and support personnel may be laid off for the sake of balancing a county’s general fund budget. This is not just a Maricopa County bill because it is written in a way that will affect every county sheriff’s office in this state!

This is the first salvo at cutting law enforcement funding which I believe should be met with solid resistance. This provision has been discussed with Sen. Russell Pearce and he has agreed to amend the last line of the provision to read, 

“…board of supervisors serves as the board of directors, except a county may not use funds designated for victims of crime, police, sheriffs and prosecutors.”
Sen. Pearce has asked for our support of his amendment.

This morning the APA took a contrary position to the General Revenue Bill (SB 1003) as it relates to a County Board of Supervisors access to state designated funds allocated to county governments. After adopting this position, the APA supported an amendment offered by Sen. R. Pearce that changed the current wording of the bill to protect several  law enforcement entities financial interests.

Prior to a final vote on the amendment, Sen. Pearce received word from county supervisors that they wished to negotiate with him and the APA on the funding issue. Their action caused Mr. Pearce to pull his amendment (for the time being) to allow this discussion to take place.  Mike Williams is negotiating the APA position.

FYI - The APA was singled out as the only law enforcement group to respond to Sen. Pearce’s request for input on the bill’s provision and his amendment. Our mere presence at the meeting was acknowledged as extremely important towards finding a resolution to this funding issue. 

As an organizational member of the APA, we need to work together to make our voices heard at the state legislature as they prepare to go back into special session. Public safety cannot afford to lay off employees.  During economic times like these crime rates are on the rise, requiring an increased response from law enforcement.   
These cuts will have an affect on all of us. We are fortunate to have many law makers who understand our state’s priorities and strive hard to protect public safety funds.
Let’s all work together, our jobs may depend on it.

Slide Back Up And Close This Article

“During the next legislative special session, revenue and state budget issues will be discussed. It has been said, SEVERE cuts are coming to all state agencies and local funding sources. The APA (Arizona Police Assoc.) position on all of the legislative proposals will be determined at this special meeting.”

Public Safety Personnel Retirement System

“A discussion was held on the state of PSPRS. The information offered to the board was disturbing. A meeting will be held December 16th at 9 a.m. at PSPRS (3010 E. Camelback Road, Suite 200, Phoenix, Arizona 85016) to discuss the fund balance issue. I do suggest you or your representative attend this meeting. Representatives from local governments are expected to attend this meeting as well. The meeting is an open meeting called by officials at PSPRS.” Exec. Dir. ,Brian Livingston  

Slide Back Up And Close This Article