The Sheriff Has More Power In His County Than The President Of The United States

Yes, there is indeed a power that Obama cannot override. And while the Congress and the Courts were designed to be a counterbalance, they have proven themselves all too often to be enablers that rolled over when Obama demanded obedience or silence.

But the amazing thing is that our local sheriffs have more power in their own counties than the president of the United States does, and that could save the nation.

The “supremacy clause” is dealt with in Mack/Printz, in which the U.S. Supreme Court stated once and for all that the only thing “supreme” is the Constitution itself. Where by those powers, the Sheriff reigns supreme above the president.

My guess is that in the minds of many Americans the sheriff is an antiquated figure who lives in the movies. He has no modern relevance.

But now here comes Sheriff Richard Mack, elected and re-elected in Graham County, Arizona, where he served for eight years. During his tenure, three federal agents came to a meeting of Arizona sheriffs and told them in certain terms how they would be dragooned as unpaid federal bureaucrats and [would be required to] administer the new, federal Brady gun registration law.

Richard Mack and the other Arizona sheriffs at the meeting rebelled. Sheriff Richard says the language he heard – in which he did not participate – could not be repeated in the presence of genteel Christian ladies, so we can’t tell you here what the sheriffs said. But Sheriff Mack did take the government to court. He sued the United States, and Sheriff Jay Printz of Montana joined him as plaintiff.

On June 27th, 1997, the sheriffs won; in Printz v. U.S. (521 U.S. 898) the U.S. Supreme Court struck Brady down. Associate Justice Antonin Scalia wrote the ruling for the Court, in which he explained our system of government at length. The justly revered system of checks and balances is the key:

“. . . The great innovation of this design was that ‘our citizens would have two political capacities, one state and one federal, each protected from incursion by the other’” – “a legal system unprecedented in form and design, establishing two orders of government, each with its own direct relationship, its own privity, its own set of mutual rights and obligations to the people who sustain it and are governed by it.” (P. 920)

Scalia quotes President James Madison, “father” of the Constitution: “[T]he 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.

He quotes President Madison again: “In The compound Republic Of America, the power surrendered 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.” (P. 922)

No one could make this any clearer. The primary purpose of the Fathers was to prevent someone from grabbing all the power. When that happens, they knew, the result is arbitrary, confiscatory government, the kind Thomas Jefferson described in the Declaration of Independence. We would call it totalitarian.

Madison explains: “The accumulation of all powers, legislative, executive, and judiciary, in the same hands, whether of one, a few, or many, and whether hereditary, self-appointed, or elective, may justly be pronounced the very definition of tyranny.” Federalist No. 48, February 1, 1788.

Madison says this: “Besides the advantage of being armed, which the Americans possess over the people of almost every other nation, the existence of subordinate governments, to which the people are attached and by which the militia officers are appointed, forms a barrier against the enterprises of ambition, more insurmountable than any which a simple government of any form can admit of.” Loc. Cit.

What does all this mean today in the Battle for America? Sheriff Mack says it proves that the sheriff is the highest governmental authority in his county. Within that jurisdiction – inside his county – the sheriff has more power than the governor of his state. Indeed, the sheriff has more power in his county than the President of the United States. In his county, he can overrule the President and kick his people out. Remember, the President has few and limited powers.

Of course just because it is stated in the Constitution, cited by our founding fathers, and confirmed in the Supreme Court does not mean that Obama will agree with the decision and abide by its limitations. And that is why the 2nd Amendment is so important.

Gun control fanatics will grudgingly concede the right of citizens to own firearms that are only for hunting, at least for the present. So a single load shotgun may be permitted until such a time as liberals can confiscate all guns. But the 2nd Amendment is and was not about hunting. It is and was about preserving our freedom and fighting tyranny with force. That is why Obama and Democrats want to disarm America, and why Americans must fight that effort with every ounce of strength that they have.

Local citizens are under attack, as we have seen in the Nevada and Oregon standoffs against Federal agents who want to overwhelm rural Americans and control them or drive them from the land. The barricade against federal government domination of this nation begins with local sheriffs and an armed citizenry. Do not assume that once Obama leaves office the effort for complete domination of the country by the Federal government will cease. Rest assured that it is just picking up speed as the criminal Obama seeks to turn the worlds most successful democracy into a socialist kingdom of serfs.

Source: politicalvelcraft.org