Help ATS with a contribution via PayPal:
learn more

Memorandum of Law - The Authority of the County Sheriff

page: 1
58
<<   2 >>

log in

join
+37 more 
posted on Feb, 12 2013 @ 02:34 AM
link   
It is amazing to me that so many important laws and rulings have fallen into such obscurity that when you tell people about them they scoff or even try and ridicule you. We wonder why the constitution is ignored so much it is simply because of a lack of knowledge by the people and even the officers of the law and courts.

So I have put together this memorandum of law on the Authority of the County Sheriff where it derives from and why the county Sheriff could save America if he understands his oath to uphold the constitution and rises to the occasion. They could be the heroes of America if they do so. Anyway without further delay here it is:

Memorandum of Law - The Authority of the County Sheriff

The County Sheriff is a long established icon for keeping the peace and administering the law. Not only in American Jurisprudence but also in English and UK jurisprudence and in history along with many other European nations and even India.

The Sheriff is the only Officer of the law that is duly Elected by the people and thus answers to them and no one else as will be shown by this memorandum. He is not appointed and therefore is directly chosen by the people as their duly elected representative and defender of their rights. This is a very important point that has been forgotten and largely lost in these modern times.

Therefore it is the Sheriffs duty to serve and protect those who have entrusted him with their delegated authority to keep the peace and protect their rights. This is a great responsibility and not to be taken lightly. It is the hope that this memorandum of law citing the law and Rulings of the Supreme court that we can reestablish the importance of this Sacred office and educate the people and the county Sheriffs to the awesome responsibility the office of Sheriff holds in protecting the freedoms of the people of his county.

Let us look at the law and some supreme court rulings on the matter:

U.S. Constitution, Article Six, Clause 2:

This Constitution, and the Laws of the United States which shall be made in Pursuance thereof;
and all Treaties made, or which shall be made, under the Authority of the United States, shall be the supreme Law of the Land; and Judges in every State shall be bound thereby, any Thing in the Constitution or Laws of any State to the Contrary notwithstanding.
(The Supremacy Clause of the U.S. Constitution)


Here we have the US Constitution established as the supreme law of the land and the Judges in every state are bound by it. This is very important. All the state constitutions also very closely resemble the US Constitution. This means the Bill of Rights applies in every state and Judges and officers are bound by it and obligated to uphold these rights and take an oath to uphold the US Constitution.

Marbury v. Madison : 5 US 137 (1803):

“No provision of the Constitution is designed to be without effect,” “Anything that is in conflict is null and void of law”, “Clearly, for a secondary law to come in conflict with the supreme Law was illogical, for certainly, the supreme Law would prevail over all other laws and certainly our forefathers had intended that the supreme Law would be the bases of all law and for any law to come in conflict would be null and void of law, it would bare no power to enforce, in would bare no obligation to obey, it would purport to settle as if it had never existed, for unconstitutionality would date from the enactment of such a law, not from the date so branded in an open court of law, no courts are bound to uphold it, and no Citizens are bound to obey it. It operates as a near nullity or a fiction of law.”


Norton v. Shelby County 118 USR 425:

“An unconstitutional act is not law. It confers no rights, it imposes no duties, it affords no protections, it creates no office. It is in legal contemplation as inoperative as though it has never been passed.”


Here in Marbury v. Madison with Norton v. Shelby corroborating the supreme court has ruled that if any law is passed that comes into conflict with the Constitution it is null and void from the minute it has been passed and there is no obligation to obey nor power to enforce and it is as if it had never existed. This is very important for Peace officers to understand and adhere to. These rulings have never been over turned and are landmark cases in American Jurisprudence.

Title 5, US Code Sec. 556(d), Sec. 557, Sec.706:

Courts lose jurisdiction if they do not follow Due Process Law.


Title 18, US Code Sec.2381:

In the presence of two or more witnesses of the same overt act, or in a open court of law, if you
fail to timely move to protect and defend the Constitution of the United States and honor your oath of
office, you are subject to the charge of capital felony treason.



This is very important for all officers of the law to understand for their oaths of office are to uphold the Constitution. This is explicitly to protect the people and their rights from being abused. It is hoped that all officers think and ponder deeply on this especially in this information age when errant officers whose actions have reflected badly on the rest have been broadcast nationally. Further more officers should reflect on any acts they enforce and whether they are constitutional. As we shall see in more rulings it is not just for the courts to decide as many now believe.

16Am Jur 2d., Sec. 97:

“That the constitution should receive a literal interpretation in favor of the Citizen, is especially true, with respect to those provisions which were designed to safeguard the liberty and security of the Citizen in regard to person and property.”


Bary v. United States - 273 US 128

“Any constitutional provision intended to confer a benefit should be liberally construed in favor of
the clearly intended and expressly designated beneficiary”


We the people are the express beneficiaries of the US Constitution.

Mudook v. Penn. 319 US 105
1943)

“A state may NOT impose a charge for the enjoyment of a right granted by the Federal Constitution
... No state may convert any secured liberty into a privilege and issue a license and a fee for it.”


This is another land mark case. We see here the supreme court as ruled that no state can charge a fee to exercise a right nor can it convert a secured liberty into a privilege and issue a license and fee for it. This is violated daily now in America. This ruling has not been overturned. Violation of this provision happens largely because both the people and officers are unaware of this ruling and its daily violation has become a matter of routine therefore tolerated as a necessary evil so to speak. One wonders how such an important Supreme court ruling could fall into such obscurity?

And further:
Shuttlesworth v. Birmingham Al. 373 US 262
1962)

“If the state does convert your right into a privilege and issue a license and a fee for it, you can ignore the license and a fee and engage the right with impunity.”


Here the supreme court has ruled that such acts can be ignored with impunity. Again how does such an important landmark case fall into obscurity? Isn't it time for Americans to rediscover their history and rights?

Now let us look at a specific landmark Case brought by two County Sheriffs against the Federal government and the important implications of this case in regards to the County Sheriff's Authority and who he answers to. These Sheriff's were Sheriff Jay Printz of Montana and Sheriff Richard Mack of Arizona. This was in regards to the enforcement of the Brady Bill by Local Sheriff's and their refusal to do so however its rulings extend far beyond just that. This clarifies where the Sheriffs authority is derived from and that its the people who elected him and his duty to use his authority protect their rights.

Printz v. United States (95-1478), 521 U.S. 898 (1997)

"We adhere to that principle today, and conclude categorically, as we concluded categorically in New York: "The Federal Government may not compel the States to enact or administer a federal regulatory program." Id., at 188. The mandatory obligation imposed on CLEOs to perform background checks on prospective handgun purchasers plainly runs afoul of that rule."

"Not only do the enactments of the early Congresses, as far as we are aware, contain no evidence of an assumption that the Federal Government may command the States' executive power in the absence of a particularized constitutional authorization, they contain some indication of precisely the opposite assumption."


Here the court clearly states the Federal government has no authority in the County Sheriff's Jurisdiction and even states that the opposite of having any authority is the case. This is significant as we will see in further rulings.


...the Guarantee Clause, Art. IV, §4, which "presupposes the continued existence of the states and . . . those means and instrumentalities which are the creation of their sovereign and reserved rights," Helvering v. Gerhardt, 304 U.S. 405, 414-415 (1938). Residual state sovereignty was also implicit, of course, in the Constitution's conferral upon Congress of not all governmental powers, but only discrete, enumerated ones, Art. I, §8, which implication was rendered express by the Tenth Amendment's assertion that "[t]he powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people."


Here the Court upholds the Sovereignty of the States and the people reaffirming the tenth Amendment and even quoting part of it and that there are rights the people have that are not listed and they are every bit as binding as those listed in the Bill of Rights.

And now for perhaps the most important part of this ruling:


***"The Constitution thus contemplates that a State's government will represent and remain accountable to its own citizens. See New York, supra, at 168-169; United States v. Lopez, 514 U.S. 549, 576-577 (1995) (Kennedy, J., concurring). Cf. Edgar v. MITE Corp., 457 U.S. 624, 644 (1982) ("the State has no legitimate interest in protecting nonresident[s]"). As Madison expressed it: " The local or municipal authorities form distinct and independent portions of the supremacy, no more subject, within their respective spheres, to the general authority than the general authority is subject to them, within its own sphere." The Federalist No. 39, at 245. [n.11]"***


Read that again if you will! Local or municipal authorities form distinct and independent portions of the supremacy and are not subject to the General authority any more then it is subject to them within its own sphere. Did you hear that? The Sheriff is not subject to the state authority nor the federal Authority within his own sphere anymore then they are to him!!! That means the Sheriff is the highest officer of the law in his jurisdiction and the only authority he answers too is the People! That means he has the authority to protect his county from federal encroachment and enforcement of unconstitutional acts statutes and polices.

Now to any Sheriffs who may be reading this do you see your awesome responsibility of the authority that has been conferred on you? Will you protect the people of your county from Federal agents who enforce unconstitutional laws now knowing your authority? Especially since the Supreme court has ruled in several cases (and none of them have been over turned) that an unconstitutional law is null and void from inception and is as if it had never been passed? Please dear Sheriff's think and ponder long and hard on this and resolve to uphold your oaths! We are either a nation of laws or we are not!

let us look at a few more provisions of this Land mark ruling


This separation of the two spheres is one of the Constitution's structural protections of liberty. "Just as the separation and independence of the coordinate branches of the Federal Government serve to prevent the accumulation of excessive power in any one branch, a healthy balance of power between the States and the Federal Government will reduce the risk of tyranny and abuse from either front." Gregory, supra, at 458. To quote Madison once again: "In the compound republic of America, the power [delegated] by the people is first divided between two distinct governments, and then the portion allotted to each subdivided among distinct and separate departments. Hence a double security arises to the rights of the people. The different governments will control each other, at the same time that each will be controlled by itself." The Federalist No. 51, at 323.

***"When a "La[w] . . . for carrying into Execution" the Commerce Clause violates the principle of state sovereignty reflected in the various constitutional provisions we mentioned earlier, supra, at 19-20, it is not a Law . . . proper for carrying into Execution the Commerce Clause," and is thus, in the words of The Federalist, "merely an act of usurpation" which "deserves to be treated as such."***


Again we have reiteration that any unconstitutional act is not law and should be treated as such from inception. There is no need to wait for a court ruling on the law we already have the court rulings many of which our listed in this memorandum.


"Accordingly, the judgment of the Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit is reversed.
It is so ordered."


www.law.cornell.edu...

Obviously the point is now made with no room for misunderstanding. A link is provided to the case if one wishes to read the entire case. Also Sheriff Richard Mack has written a book on his experience and discovery of the importance of the office of Sheriff called "County Sheriff Americas Last Hope" which everyone is strongly encouraged to read especially Sheriff's. sheriffmack.com...

In conclusion here is a partial list of Sheriffs who have exercised their authority in their counties and prevented the federal government from enforcing unconstitutional statutes:

Sheriff Jay Printz Montana
Sheriff Richard Mack Arizona
Sheriff Dave Mattis Wyoming
Sheriff Gary Aman Idaho
Sheriff Tony DeMeo Arizona

There are more and one can do an internet search on any of their names to learn more.

Sheriffs who know and understand their authority really are Americas last hope and it is gratifying to see more and more of them speaking out and affirming our constitutional rights to keep and bear arms during this time. It is our hope that this memorandum of law affirming that they have authority to prevent federal agents from enforcing unconstitutional acts will embolden them to rise to the occasion. Please forward to any and all Sheriffs nation wide and let them know the law and the People are on their side if they are willing to uphold their oaths of office!

edit on 12-2-2013 by hawkiye because: (no reason given)




posted on Feb, 12 2013 @ 10:41 AM
link   
It's amazing how a thread like this fails to get any attention here.

A thread about the truth of the citizen's last line of defense against federal tyranny, well researched and documented and not a single reply...S@F and applause if I could



posted on Feb, 12 2013 @ 10:54 AM
link   
Nicely done!

I am going to use this thread as a bookmark for future reference.
It clearly explains the severely unconstitutional acts of several states.
Not just with rights, but the licensing and fees associated with them.
I have always had a problem with alot of "fees" in what seems to be our rights.
Now, it's much clearer to me.



Excellent job putting this together!


*S&F*





posted on Feb, 12 2013 @ 11:25 AM
link   
reply to post by havok
 


I bookmarked this as well...strange that


To the OP, you have been friended. I don't do it lightly and it is the only accolade I have to bestow



posted on Feb, 12 2013 @ 12:20 PM
link   

Originally posted by havok
Nicely done!

I am going to use this thread as a bookmark for future reference.
It clearly explains the severely unconstitutional acts of several states.
Not just with rights, but the licensing and fees associated with them.
I have always had a problem with alot of "fees" in what seems to be our rights.
Now, it's much clearer to me.



Excellent job putting this together!


*S&F*




Yeah I kind of figured this would not get the attention it should but wanted to put it out there anyways for all to see if they will just look. This should be a top priority for anyone concerned with the erosion of our rights.



posted on Feb, 12 2013 @ 12:36 PM
link   
S&F from me as well.
Great thread. Thank you for putting all of this together.



posted on Feb, 12 2013 @ 03:07 PM
link   

Originally posted by hawkiye

Originally posted by havok
Nicely done!

I am going to use this thread as a bookmark for future reference.
It clearly explains the severely unconstitutional acts of several states.
Not just with rights, but the licensing and fees associated with them.
I have always had a problem with alot of "fees" in what seems to be our rights.
Now, it's much clearer to me.



Excellent job putting this together!


*S&F*




Yeah I kind of figured this would not get the attention it should but wanted to put it out there anyways for all to see if they will just look. This should be a top priority for anyone concerned with the erosion of our rights.


Interesting read, thanks.. I think maybe it wouldve gotten more attention if you wouldve posted it in a different forum, not many visit the "education and media" forums.



posted on Feb, 12 2013 @ 03:46 PM
link   
reply to post by hawkiye
 


S&F very informative,If this thread get's any attention could you touch on the two type's of federal law.Responsibillty to the Constitution where the Supremacy Clause can be invoked, and Implied Responsibillty to the people where the Supremacy Clause is not eligible because it is not a Constitutional issue.



posted on Feb, 12 2013 @ 04:58 PM
link   
I would like to add Sheriff Harry Lee of Jefferson Parish of Louisiana to that list. When Hurricane Katrina came in with FEMA (you all know how that turned out) they tried to take over everything in the area. I dont work there but in Tangipahoa Parish. However Harry Lee was very proud also of his office and put up with NO ONE unsurping his authority! Fema came in and took over all of his fuel depots and other precious (at the time) resources claiming they had ultimate authority as they were part of the federal government. He had all his deputies lock and load and march on them. They were forced to retreat or be shot. He met their supervisors later and gave a public announcement that HE was the ultimate authority in that area per the constitution and NO ONE had any authority to take anything from him or his men that they need to uphold the law of the land and assist the people who willfully voted him in. He further advised them that if they needed supplies they could ask or call Bush and have HIM bring it to them. Gotta tell you he was one hell of a man!

On a sidebar he earned massive point when the (Sarcasm) "Reverand" Sharpton came into town to go to New Orleans when all the looting and rioting was taking place to stir up his usual problems. He was met by Harry Lee who promply told him he could "load your a$$ back on your plane and leave this area. We dont need your problems here. You are part of no recognized orginization and disorder and mayhem seem to follow you where ever you go. We have enough of that now!" (Paraphrasing as I dont recall it word for word only the feeling of pride I had) He was then escorted away form the city and BANNED from it until the crisis was over.

Oh and when he got back to Hammond where he flew out of, his car was keyed quite bad and all 4 tires were flat. But I have no knowledge of that


S&F
edit on 12-2-2013 by sempul because: spelling
edit on 12-2-2013 by sempul because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 12 2013 @ 08:58 PM
link   
Awesome idea that could be the savior that you suggest, thank you for the time and effort to lay this out.

I don't think we are close to recovering our sovereignty enough to break through to the 14th amendant citizens and convince them that the de facto is in fact unlawful.

Too many Dept.'s around the country are militarizing for a coming domestic event, not to protect us, but to protect themselves and the state / states interests.

When the slaves of the 14th amendment wake up to the robbery of their homeland by a foreign de facto that highjacked the republic by using deceptive and cunning tactics to deprive the sovereign people of this land, of their property, and their labor and future labor.

The Federal government corporation is a scam on the american people perpatrated by elite international banksters.

The people consent to it all the time. You bow to the machine at every turn, when you buy a house, you don't own the house, you get a deed, which allows you to hold it in trust for the beneficiary. The go'vt has also given you a car certificate of title, this allows you to hold the car as if it was yours, but not yours at all if you don't release it from its certificate of title. And Once titled, it must now be registered and taxed and then becomes their new car.
They have already taken everything away from the people, and have held the facade from coming down, but I think it is unravelling a little for them and the end game could get elevated



posted on Feb, 12 2013 @ 11:12 PM
link   
I had to reply to tell the author that I greatly admire the effort put into starting this thread.

Unfortunately, there will probably be an ATS'er saying that we "interpreted" the Supreme Court cases wrong...



posted on Feb, 13 2013 @ 01:10 AM
link   

Originally posted by SmoothRhythm
I had to reply to tell the author that I greatly admire the effort put into starting this thread.

Unfortunately, there will probably be an ATS'er saying that we "interpreted" the Supreme Court cases wrong...


if they do they would be doing so in ignorance. The Cases are pretty clear as to thier meanings and there is also the Volumes of American Jurisprudence (Am Jur) that tell the judges how to interpret the constitution and apply it and every case cited here agrees with the Am jur on the constitution.

If anyone wants to learn how to use and apply the Constitution to defend their rights check these links its pretty easy to do and this is the revolution we should wage first before anything else.

privateaudio.homestead.com...

www.youtube.com...

www.youtube.com...

www.youtube.com...

edit on 13-2-2013 by hawkiye because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 13 2013 @ 07:35 AM
link   
Obama is in direct violation of the Constitution, and should be charged and impeached along with all those who plotted against the Constitution with him,
Obamama if anyone surely knows what he has done, but has the gall to think he can rewrite our Constitution

Someone get a Sheriff and go arrest him now. and the rest the gang of crooks..



posted on Feb, 13 2013 @ 08:12 AM
link   
reply to post by hawkiye
 


From one patriot to another, thank you for this thread.



posted on Feb, 13 2013 @ 10:14 AM
link   
This thread is great. Star and Flag! The only problem I see is that county sherrifs don't realize how much power theu really have against the federal government. I don't know how it works in the rest of the nation, but I live in the south, and a lot of sherrifs are just "good ol' boys" who have no clue as to what the law is. Basically, they do drug busts and issue speeding tickets.
Since I live in a county that is primarily farm land, our sheriff (a former state trooper with a hitler mentallty) we have someone who will kiss FEMA's a$$ and let them march us into camps. I voted for this guy, because I thought I knew him. I won't make that mistake again.
When the next election rolls around, I will be asking questions and demanding honest answers. I am going to do my best not to let these bastards scam me again.
'



posted on Feb, 13 2013 @ 10:33 AM
link   
Superb job...I have been trying to explain this to my family for months and haven't been able to make them understand. I can't wait to get home and have them read this...It should upgrade me from a retard in their eyes. Thank you so much!



posted on Feb, 13 2013 @ 01:27 PM
link   
This really is a FANTASTIC post! Thanks very much! I have to admit, I was blind to some of this. As a member of my county's Search and Rescue Team, I have heard references to our Sherriff "having far more power than our police chiefs". This really sheds light on all of that.



posted on Feb, 13 2013 @ 03:31 PM
link   
I must say this is the firs ATS thread I have ever bookmarked. Lots of useful information to share. I have seen most of this before but never in one place condensed in this way. S&F!

Thanks for posting this!



posted on Feb, 13 2013 @ 06:32 PM
link   
reply to post by hawkiye
 
This is great, I have been looking for something that would tell me if the Sheriffs have the authority they say they do and it would seem they do. Reason being is I don't belive in much and even less hope so when a law officer comes forward and says he is willing to die for his beliefs...........then I have found something to belive in and it actually promotes a tiny ray of hope.
Great post !!




posted on Feb, 13 2013 @ 10:34 PM
link   

Originally posted by kettlebellysmith
This thread is great. Star and Flag! The only problem I see is that county sherrifs don't realize how much power theu really have against the federal government. I don't know how it works in the rest of the nation, but I live in the south, and a lot of sherrifs are just "good ol' boys" who have no clue as to what the law is. Basically, they do drug busts and issue speeding tickets.
Since I live in a county that is primarily farm land, our sheriff (a former state trooper with a hitler mentallty) we have someone who will kiss FEMA's a$$ and let them march us into camps. I voted for this guy, because I thought I knew him. I won't make that mistake again.
When the next election rolls around, I will be asking questions and demanding honest answers. I am going to do my best not to let these bastards scam me again.
'


Which is why I sent a copy of this to my County Sheriff. He already made a statement that he would not enforce unconstitutional gun control but he did not say he would prevent the feds from doing so. This tells me he has some fortitude but is ignorant of the law. So I praised him for the statement he did make and encouraged him to read the memorandum.






top topics



 
58
<<   2 >>

log in

join


Help ATS Recover with your Donation.
read more: Help ATS Recover With Your Contribution