The U.S. Supreme Court has Ruled

reply to post by Juston


Thanks for that, my friend.
Words to live by in the blogging world of debate.

reply to post by Afterthought


I knew this couldn't be real anyway. The state police have authority over any and all police in the state, including county sheriffs and city cops. City cops (usually) only have jurisdiction in their city limits; the county police have jurisdiction anywhere in their county; and state police have jurisdiction anywhere in their state.

The state police have been and always will be the highest form of law enforcement in a state next to federal law enforcement (FBI, DEA, etc.), not a county sheriff.

Nye county sheriff Tony DeMeo talks about handling unconstitutional acts by the federal government.

part 1



part 2


part 3

Originally posted by thisguyrighthere
Very few if any sheriffs will not allow the federal government to trample their districts.

The number one reason any "public servant" bothers to acknowledge the existence of the federal government at all is because every time they kiss the federal boot they get a shiny nickle.

How else is a completely landlocked town going to get their cool cop hovercraft? How else is Andy Griffith and Barney Fife going to get MP-5's and m-4's and APC's and nifty black suits?

It's amazing how easily people sell their souls for money. Even when they dont need it.

That's right, the state will be stripped from federal funds if they do not
allow them to do as they please..

Money trumps the citizens..

I'm sure they find away to get a little *kick back* out of that money too.

reply to post by CherubBaby


There is also another checks and balance that a lot of people do not know about, it has been implemented once....

If the federal government passes a law that is considered unfit, if all 50 governors of the states sign a veto, they can negate the law. in other words, if all the governors think something smells bad, they can turn it over.

reply to post by popsmayhem


Plenty of states also withhold money from the feds if they need to get a point across, money also trickles up.

reply to post by RussianScientists


I appreciate you posting the information, but you are wrong on legal jurisdictions, it is more complicated.

Airports are state owned and federally legislated. Sheriffs have absolutely no jurisdictions there. Citizens have no rights. YOu sign a contract when you buy an airline ticket that gives the TSA full permission to do what they do.
Once you step onto airport property, the usual rights do not apply.Period.Airports are exempt.
When is the last time you have seen a sheriff patrol an airport?

There are a lot of crimes and investigations that involve the FBI, no sheriff will ever have enough clout to keep them out. If it involves any serious crime, act of terrorism, or it goes across many jurisdictions, that is the jurisdiction of the FBI. If it becomes high profile, it can become FBI.

I do agree with the ruling that any federal agency has to notify locals of their presence, I believe that is a good decision, for safety and inter agency communication if anything, but you can't keep out the feds.
In a lot of cases, you wouldn't want too.

I find it odd that people are commenting that it is a sign of taking back the country, when a sheriff is nothing but another elected politician. There isn't much difference.

Originally posted by nixie_nox
reply to post by CherubBaby

 

There is also another checks and balance that a lot of people do not know about, it has been implemented once....

If the federal government passes a law that is considered unfit, if all 50 governors of the states sign a veto, they can negate the law. in other words, if all the governors think something smells bad, they can turn it over.

Which article/amendment of the US Constitution is that?

Interesting.. But the corrupt old bastards in dizzy city wont let anyone bollox up their twisted plans.. Sheriff or not .. Get in the way too much and accidents happen... Never underestimate your opponant and the lengths they will go to in order to maintain power..

reply to post by RussianScientists


Wonderful news I did not know about this one; thanks so much for the post. Local is always the best way.

reply to post by RussianScientists


Wow, I'm speechless, this is so awesome. Someone punch me, I must be dreaming.

This is a step in the right direction. We'll get our freedom and rights back one county at a time!

I am replying to let you know that you may have made a mistake. I am not 100% certain, but I'm relatively sure that the court case you refer to, Case No. 2:96-cv-099-J, is not a legitimate case number. I believe the entire story of the sheriff having the authority to arrest federal agents was a hoax.

If anyone does not believe me, simply see if you can find anything relating to this case online from a government agency. It doesn't exist at all. The best that I could do was a news article, which apparently is wrong as well. I just thought I would let you know, because if I am right, you may have to check your source for other mistakes and/or misinformation.

reply to post by Shadowalker


What?

If you're going to try to sound erudite, please learn how to write grammatically sound sentences. Don't forget to use antecedents with your pronouns, dammit!

it is the united states of america. it is not one nation, but 50 independent states bound by the articles of the constitution.

but really, the last time these "independent" states tried to withdraw from the union, civil war broke out and wiped out hundreds of thousands.

and texans are the worst ones. their motto is texas first. they don't give a flying rats a** about the united states or federal laws or anybody on the globe not from texas.

when they get into power they are shameless in their pursuit of their interests and equally shameless in who's left carrying the consequences and bill of their actions.

bush is a state hero in texas. they're filthy oil rich and the rest of america is in a financial disaster.

they did the texas two step on the rest of the 49 states.

So does this mean that Sheriff Joe Arpio can then uphold the law , dealing will illegals and the Feds can not get involved?

Makes no sense. How can the supreme court rule for this but against the sheriff in Arizona for trying keep illegals out? You can not have your cake and eat it too . So if this is true, it trumps them all.

"We have learned that it has been reported, erroneously, that the court made a legal ruling in the Castaneda case regarding the authority of federal law enforcement officials to conduct operations in the County. There was no such ruling or decision.

Instead, the court simply granted a motion, submitted jointly by all the parties, to dismiss the case because the parties had settled.

This Court has never issued an order which would serve to limit the lawful activities and duties of federal law enforcement officers and other federal employees in the District of Wyoming.

Furthermore, this Court has never made the comments attributed to it which purports to advise state officers they can prohibit federal law enforcement officers or agents from entering a Wyoming County. Those alleged quotations are utterly false.

Any person who interferes with federal officers in performance of their duties subjects themselves to the risk of criminal prosecution.

William F. Downes
Chief Judge, District of Wyoming"
Link

reply to post by RussianScientists

You also need a good prosecutor and judge to keep them in jail a while after they get arrested, so they won't want to come back to your county. Then you need the people to support them when the backlash comes.

Even if it was real, you'd have a hell of a time with it.

As a Rez Dog (someone who's from a Reservation), I say....good luck with that.

Originally posted by amatrine
So does this mean that Sheriff Joe Arpio can then uphold the law , dealing will illegals and the Feds can not get involved?

Makes no sense. How can the supreme court rule for this but against the sheriff in Arizona for trying keep illegals out? You can not have your cake and eat it too . So if this is true, it trumps them all.

it is simple really the constitution expressly gives the federal government the power to enforce our borders. they do a piss poor job of it, however it is their prevue by law not the states.

reply to post by RussianScientists

I think its time that you search out such officials and to start electing them the sheriff and regain your citizens rights.

It sounds that they have a brand new puppet in the closet.

non confrontational manner

Means a new way that TPTB has chosen to take people back to their home.

The Sheriff Has More Power In His County Than The President Of The United States: U.S. Constitution U.S. Supreme Court ~ Quashes Obama’s Claim To “Supremacy Clause”

How is the sheriff elected and how is it guarantied that he is not a new puppet ?

If you want to take back America, take it back legally

Legally mean that you should play by the rules. but, Who ruled the rules ? the same old guys.

Then how do you expect a change ?