I got a video in my email today from my local tea party representative and could not find any mention of it on ATS although it is not new. I was
excited to see that their has actually been a supreme court ruling for states rights and stating local authority over federal
The following is excepts from a dialogue written by Richard Mack on
Ron Paul's Website in May of
2008.
the Constitution’s conferral upon Congress of not all governmental powers, but only discreet, enumerated ones.”
Scalia then quotes the basis of the sheriffs’ suit in quoting the Tenth Amendment which affirms the limited powers doctrine, “The powers not
delegated to the United States by the Constitution…are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.” To clarify this point, we need to
understand that the powers and jurisdiction granted to the federal government are few, precise, and expressly defined.
This is the video I received.
Oathkeepers ex sheriff Richard Mack video
Sorry, not savvy enough to know how to embed.
He is saying that he and a person named Printz brought a lawsuit against the Brady bill and won because the US can't force a local sheriff to take on
a government mandate.
Okay, I may not have said it right but here are other links and those of you who have a better understanding than myself can affirm or deconstruct.
From the same Ron Paul website.
The office of sheriff has a long and noble history. It dates back over a thousand years and originated in England. The sheriff is the only elected
law enforcement official in America. He is the last line of defense for his citizens. He is the people’s protector. He is the keeper of the peace,
he is the guardian of liberty and the protector of rights. A vast majority of sheriffs will agree with all of this until they are asked to apply these
principles of protection to federal criminals...
...and some sheriffs have indeed taken very courageous stands against the feds coming in to their counties to “enforce” their laws. Cattle,
lands, homes, bank accounts, cash, and even children have been seized and prisons filled all in the name of federal enforcement of EPA rules, The
Endangered Species Act, IRS rules, (of which there are over 10 million pages) Forest Service and Dept. of the Interior technicalities and the list
goes on and on. The sheriff of NYE County, Nevada stopped federal agents from seizing a rancher’s cattle and even threatened to arrest the feds if
they proceeded against his orders. Sheriffs in Wyoming have told the agents of all federal bureaus to check with them before serving any papers,
making any arrests, or confiscating any property.
Yes, he has the right and the duty to do so. In Mack/Printz v USA, the U S Supreme Court declared that the states or their political subdivisions,
“are not subject to federal direction.” The issue of federal authority is defined even further in this most powerful Tenth Amendment decision. The
two sheriffs who brought the suit objected to being forced into federal service without compensation pursuant to some misguided provisions of the
Brady Bill. The sheriffs sued the USA (Clinton adm.) and won a major landmark case in favor of States’ Rights and local autonomy.
There are many mores issues in this worthy of discussion but I must admit I am not well versed enough at this point. Hopefully enough savvy ATS
members will post their take on this to help all of us understand it better.
This is a discussion of the lawsuit at
Cornell University
It was interesting to me and gave the gov.'s standing as well as the dissenter's standing.
I have come to understand that unless you give a very strong or controversial viewpoint here on ATS that not much notice is taken. It is my sincere
desire that this be affirmed or denied and/or understood for what it is.
It would also be great for each of us to know if your county sheriff is in agreement and supports this ruling. If any local sheriff does not adhere
to this we can simply get the word out and vote them out. To me, this gives us greater power to protect our freedom than anything the fed may try to
take away.