Wyoming sheriffs put feds in their place

Posted April 4th, 2008 by sjidaho

Un-Verified to date, but the link below is currently active:

http://disinter.wordpress...

February 18, 2007Here's one the mainstream media isn't going to tell
you: County sheriffs in Wyoming are demanding that federal agents
actually abide by the Constitution, or face arrest. Even better, a
U.S. District Court agreed according to the Keene Free Press:

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."

James Foley
Property Rights AdvocateKlamath River, California

/////

Bookmark/Search this post with:

output

I made a thread about this

On April 4th, 2008 winstonkirk says:

I made a thread about this last week. While the elected county sheriff is the highest law enforcement officer in that county, and can, presumably, do what Dave Mattis did, there is a huge amount of misinformation on this topic.

First, this happened in 1997, not recently. It stems from a complaint against the INS for breaking into the homes of a couple who were American citizens. I think the break in happened in 1993, though I could be off there. Rather than ask for a large cash settlement the plaintiffs asked that the sheriff's department ensure that this kind of thing didn't happen again. Mattis complied and, it seems, made at least some of the statements quoted in the article.

That is where the truth ends and the mis/disinformation begins. First, there was no court decision. If you look into the case you will find that there is no listing for a decision for the case number given in the district court records. None of the articles I found state the judge's name, very uncommon for a legitimate article on a court case. Since the case decision can't be found, meaning that it almost certainly didn't happen, and the judge's name is never given, I find it strange that all of these articles seem to be able to quote from the decision. I suspect that there was an initial report written up which contained wrong information, whether intentionally or not, which then has been repeated over and over since in other articles.

One can easily find out that all of the authors of the articles that imply, or state, that this is a recent court case and recent statements didn't do even a little homework since its easy to find out that Mattis isn't even sheriff of the county anymore. The link below is to the Big Horn county sheriff's page, which clearly states that Kennith Blackburn is the current sheriff.

http://www.bighorncountyw...

To boil it down, I haven't even been able to confirm that any of this happened, though I suspect that Mattis did make statements similar to those quoted and the Feds did leave him alone. Its very unlikely that the court decision ever happened. The legal question of whether a county sheriff can indeed kick out the Feds, or more precisely arrest the Feds for violations of the Constitution, remains undecided as far as I can tell. This story is at least partially, if not wholly, just another of the "patriot myths".

Like I said, I made a thread on this last week and did a days worth of research on the topic. Beware deceivers when this topic is brought up. In all likelihood they are being deceived themselves but there is something fishy here. If you don't believe me, do the research yourself. Hopefully you can prove me wrong as I'd like it if this case were real.

this is what is written in the same paper the next day,,FALSE

On April 4th, 2008 rwol9999 says:

"County Sheriff Can Bust Big Bro" has utterly false and baseless statements
Saturday, 24 February 2007
I completely agree that it is every citizen's responsibility to not only question government but to question what you read and people say. In that vein, I was interested when I read the article on your website:

"County Sheriff Can Bust Big Bro"

and the ruling of District court and the statement that:

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." in Case No. 2:96-cv-099-J

So, I looked into that case and lo, and behold, the court never issued a ruling or opinion that said anything that was mentioned in the article. The case was dismissed on a joint motion of both parties and the court never issued a ruling or opinion, let alone one that said that.

Anyone can easily verify, as do I, the pleadings filed in any Federal case through PACER, http://pacer.psc.uscourts...

You can do so and see that the article you have posted on your website has utterly false and baseless statements.

Unfortunately for me, that reflects upon the credibility of all that you have on your site. It is a shame because it seems like you are trying to provide the truth.

Thanks for the Pacer link.

On April 4th, 2008 winstonkirk says:

Thanks for the Pacer link. I'm an engineer with little experience in legal matters so I had a difficult time confirming the non-existence of the case. Take a look at my response below, we came to very similar conclusions in our research.

BUMP!

On April 4th, 2008 GREEDisBAD says:

THE DESIRE TO ENFORCE GOOD IS THE ROOT OF ALL EVIL.

Hmmm...

On April 3rd, 2008 Gilgamesh73 says:

Could Wyoming be the Ron Paul state that we all move to to reclaim the Constitution and our once great country???
--
Remember: Debt is a form of slavery.

An aside

On April 3rd, 2008 Gilgamesh73 says:

Here in Indy the Mayor has recently relieved the sheriff and has assumed all of his duties and authority. When I first heard of the story I was immediately shocked and of course the city paper was quick at work brainwashing everyone saying it was a move for the better and everyone should be happy.......
--
Remember: Debt is a form of slavery.