Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
WYOMING SHERIFFS PUT FEDERAL OFFICERS ON CHOKE CHAINS
County sheriffs in Wyoming are insisting that all federal law enforcement officers and personnel from federal regulatory agencies must clear all their activities in a Wyoming county with the Sheriff's Office. Speaking at a press conference following the recent US District Court decision (case No 2:96-cv-099-J) Bighorn County Sheriff Dave Mattis stated that all federal officials are forbidden to enter his county without his prior approval.
"If a sheriff doesn't want the Feds in his county he has the constitutional power and right to keep them out or ask them to leave or retain them in custody." The court decision came about after Mattis & other members of the Wyoming Sheriffs' Association brought a suit against both the BATF and the IRS in the Wyoming federal court district seeking restoration of the protections enshrined in the United States Constitution and the Wyoming Constitution. The District Court ruled in favor of the sheriffs, stating that, "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."
The Wyoming sheriffs are demanding access to all BATF files to verify that the agency is not violating provisions of Wyoming law that prohibit the registration of firearms or the keeping of a registry of firearm owners. 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 state courts.
Sheriff Mattis stated:
"I am reacting 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."
This case is evidence that the Tenth Amendment is not yet dead in the United States. It may also 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 Tenth Amendment explicitly reserves to the People, if they are not granted to the federal government and specifically prohibited to the States.
Case Notes:
Case: Castaneda v. USA
Filed: 10th May 1996
Closed: 29th April 1997
Case No: 2:1996cv00099 Wyoming District Court, Casper
Nature of Suit: Civil Rights
I ran across this tonight. I have often heard things like a county in Florida and one in Lousianna where the sheriffs weren't gonna enforce gun laws. Maybe this is where they get their authority. If it is, then maybe grassroots paople should be talking to sheriffs and not carbon-stamped politicians.
Awesome everyone needs to read this!
==============Awesome everyone needs to read this ONE!========= This should save lives lives of many American citizens across the country if more Sherrifs will do their duty.
==============Awesome everyone needs to read this ONE!========= This should save lives lives of many American citizens across the country if more Sherrifs will do their duty. After all the Constitution was meant to be like chains on the Government! ===========WAY========TO=======GO======WYOMING=======SHERRIFS=====!!!
There is still hope for AMERICA !
This can't be true, it is the first evidence of cojones, by a public official since Truman dropped the big one. There is hope yet.
It's about time these Sheriffs inforce the Constitution,My hat is off to this gentleman.You can bet the Democrates will try to push him out of office next election.
Thanks for posting this,it's great news!
"If a sheriff doesn't want the Feds in his county he has the constitutional power and right to keep them out or ask them to leave or retain them in custody."
Constitutionally,the sheriff is the highest law-enforcement officer around. Also, agencies part of the executive branch do not have jurisdiction within the several states.
This will prevent WACOS and RUBY RIDGE incidents !
The cool thing about this case is that is it a Fed. Court decision (as opposed to state); thus it can provide some precedent for Fed. Courts in other areas of the country. Not as good an appellate decision, but a start.
Please keep the thread going people need to see this!
Well as Gomer Pile usta say...
SHAZAAM!!!!
Hat's off and a full-fledged FReeper salute to Bighorn County Sheriff Dave Mattis!
Yep, Now I think about it, I do beleave that sheriff in a southern Louisianna parish said he wanted all his people to have guns. It was a blip on the news when Brady first sprang up. He wasn't doing any background checks, and I dont remember anything about the government coming back on him.
I'm fixin to go on vacation, when I get back I'm gonna research this a little further, then make sure our sheriff gets a copy. It's a start.
Other Sherrifs had previously done this in Idaho. Owyhee county was the first in Idaho. Then also you have Nye County, Neveda.
Sherrif Mack of Arizona went all the way to the Surpreme Court and won. It ruled that no Sherrif has to do the background check. Nor does any citizens have to for that matter!
BIG BUMP
Assuming this is accurate, it is extremely good news. The County "Lord High Sheriff" is and should be the pre-eminent law enforcer at the local level. That is because, in most cases, he is elected.
Regards
J.R.
Every Sheriff around the country needs to see this. After all : ===========IT"S=======THE=======CONSTITUTION========STUPID=======!!!!!!
There may be hope! My next vacation will be in Wyoming.
The court decision came about after Mattis & other members of the Wyoming Sheriffs' Association brought a suit against both the BATF and the IRS in the Wyoming federal court district seeking restoration of the protections enshrined in the United States Constitution and the Wyoming Constitution
You might go further than your own sheriff. Do most states have Sheriffs’ Associations? Wouldn’t these be a places that should be notified of the Wyoming stand and win? State associations already have lists and communications vehicles. You might consider working with them.
Then Sheriff Mack lost the next election,could the election have been rigged.I'd say the chances are pretty good that they were,Bubba was in office and we know how evil he is.
To it's ever lasting disgrace the Legislature of Mass. has abolish the Sheriffs in the state that gave US : Lexington, Boston and Concord !
The cool thing about this case is that is it a Fed. Court decision (as opposed to state); thus it can provide some precedent for Fed. Courts in other areas of the country. Not as good an appellate
These federal goon squads are even showing up at auto accidents. If they have a jurisdiction, it should reach no further than the boundries of the city limits of Washington D.C...Who knows, local police could start gaining the respect of the people...
Great Point!
Sheriff Mattis thank -you
According to Jim Collier (GOD rest his sole) There was voter Fraud in Arizona in the 1996 PRESIDENTIAL Election.
One thing is for sure the media in Arizona did everything they could to destroy Sheriff Mack.
WOOOHOOOOO!! GREAT NEWS... READ THIS AND PASS IT TO YOUR SHERIFF....
One thing is for sure the media in Arizona did everything they could to destroy Sheriff Mack. !!!!!!!!!!!!!! KEEP THIS GOING !!!!!!!!
When will they do this in CALIFORNIA ? Do you folks also see the light at the end of the tunnel ?
Great post. Let Chris Dim know that us Freepers aren't the only ones who think the Toons Feds are a large crime organization.
BUMP! BUMP! BUMP!
BUMP TO THE TOP
BUMP TO THE TOP!!
Boy, can I be proud! My father and grandmother were born in Bighorn County, Wyoming. Both grandparents buried there, in Cowley. Should anyone wonder, why I am on Free Republic? It is in my ancestry. This time of the (cold) year, folks don't have too much to do, except piss off the feds.
To it's ever lasting disgrace the Legislature of Mass. has abolish the Sheriffs in the state that gave US : Lexington, Boston and Concord ! <=========This was totally unConstitutional and never should have happened! Without the Sheriff you have no elected law enforcement!
Now that you bring it up, any California SKS owners out there know if their Sheriffs know the law? I figured California is preparing for action by now. ie, draw a line in the sand
FINALLY SOMEONE WITH COJONES IS WEARING THE BADGE...
re: your #22
Am I to understand you no longer have County Sheriff's?
Regards
FINALLY SOMEONE WITH COJONES IS WEARING THE BADGE...
FINALLY SOMEONE WITH COJONES IS WEARING THE BADGE...
Good tell you relatives there the signifigance of it .
As good as this looks, I suspect that it may not be as good as everyone is hoping/believing. 1st - look at the date .... no way this would have been below the horizen for so long and 2- as we all know, just because something shows up on the net on a neat looking site does not mean it is true. I hope it is but won't bet any money on it.
Bookmarked, and BUMPED
I'll pass this along to those on my list..thanks
===================SOMEBODY WITH BALLS===========!!!!!!!!!!!
MOVE TO WYOMING... IT MIGHT BE COLD, BUT YOU GOT YOUR ARMS..
===================SOMEBODY WITH BALLS===========!!!!!!!!!!!
To it's ever lasting disgrace the Legislature of Mass. has abolish the Sheriffs in the state that gave US : Lexington, Boston and Concord ! <=========This was totally unConstitutional and never should have happened! Without the Sheriff you have no elected law enforcement! GOD Bless Wyoming!
WAY TO GO Bighorn County Sheriff Dave Mattis
This does my heart gooooood!!! BUMP!
Sherrif Mack of Arizona went all the way to the Surpreme Court and won. It ruled that no Sherrif has to do the background check. Nor does any citizens have to for that matter! We can win if we stand up to evil and don't fear it !
WAY TO GO Bighorn County Sheriff Dave Mattis
SUCH POSTS ARE INTOXICATING
Sherrif Mack of Arizona went all the way to the Surpreme Court and won. It ruled that no Sherrif has to do the background check. Nor does any citizens have to for that matter! We can win if we stand up to evil and don't fear it ! BUUUUUUUUUUMMMMMMMMPPPPPPYYYYYYYYYY RIDE!
===================SOMEBODY WITH BALLS===========!!!!!!!!!!!
AND A BADGE
Thank you, thank you, thank you!
I think what started this sheriff's taking back control of their own jurisdiction started because of a Sheriff in Hamilton, MT, who refused to comply with the feds request to do gun checks without compensation....he was joined, I believe, by one of the sheriff's in Arizona or NM.
Praise this Sheriff's courage and watch his back.
We're really proud of our Sheriff over here in Idaho. These federal goons come to public meetings packing heat...ole Bruce Babbitt tried to start a war....he got nailed for setting up a public hearing, and then cancelling it through the news media because "they felt threatened--that our sheriff offer them the same guarantee he gives his citizens...he's do the best job he can to protect human life...any human...whether he liked them or not...said that's what he swore to do...that and uphold and defend the Constitution!
===================SOMEBODY WITH BALLS===========!!!!!!!!!!!
FROM Bighorn County
Other Sherrifs had previously done this in Idaho. Owyhee county was the first in Idaho. Then also you have Nye County, Neveda. And let's not forget the Sheriffs in Florida's Panhandle who made all the able bodied citizens in their counties official members of the county militia !
TIME TO CALL YOUR SHERIFF AND START SEARCHING FOR HIS COJONES...
Other Sherrifs had previously done this in Idaho. Owyhee county was the first in Idaho. Then also you have Nye County, Neveda. And let's not forget the Sheriffs in Florida's Panhandle who made all the able bodied citizens in their counties official members of the county militia ! =========Some=======MEN=======STILL=======HAVE=======COURAGE======!!!!!
We spent our vacation out your way this past summer. Thermopolis. Amongst other towns and states... hope to go back!
Other Sherrifs had previously done this in Idaho. Owyhee county was the first in Idaho. Then also you have Nye County, Neveda. And let's not forget the Sheriffs in Florida's Panhandle who made all the able bodied citizens in their counties official members of the county militia ! =========Some=======MEN=======STILL=======HAVE=======COURAGE======!!!!! =====SOME======MEN=======DO=======THE=======RIGHT=======THINK====!!!
I think Sheriff Mack is the one that went with Sheriff Jay Printz out of Hamilton, MT!
I think the "Owy" case here in Idaho has been since then.
Did you know they pulled a swat action on a very rural county disaster control center....snuck thru the sagebrush and all to do their raid!
I never followed it to the end, but it seems like there was a question on how they acquired some bedding and other disaster relief stuff. Really, really stupid! The county employees said they would have ben happy to provide them any info they requested.
Other Sherrifs had previously done this in Idaho. Owyhee county was the first in Idaho. Then also you have Nye County, Neveda. And let's not forget the Sheriffs in Florida's Panhandle who made all the able bodied citizens in their counties official members of the county militia ! =========Some=======MEN=======STILL=======HAVE=======COURAGE======!!!!! =====SOME======MEN=======DO=======THE=======RIGHT=======THINK====!!! =========BBBBBBUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUMMMMMMPPPPP!!!!!!!
OWYHEE HAS been a few years ago. And they can't do a damn thing about it!
Other Sherrifs had previously done this in Idaho. Owyhee county was the first in Idaho. Then also you have Nye County, Neveda. And let's not forget the Sheriffs in Florida's Panhandle who made all the able bodied citizens in their counties official members of the county militia ! =========Some=======MEN=======STILL=======HAVE=======COURAGE======!!!!! =====SOME======MEN=======DO=======THE=======RIGHT=======THINK====!!! =========BBBBBBUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUMMMMMMPPPPP!!!!!!!
Other Sherrifs had previously done this in Idaho. Owyhee county was the first in Idaho. Then also you have Nye County, Neveda. And let's not forget the Sheriffs in Florida's Panhandle who made all the able bodied citizens in their counties official members of the county militia !
Get all the info you can get and distribute to locals and on the net.
Get all the info you can get and distribute to locals and on the net. We must be the modern day PAMPLETEERS!
Ruf ,
The sheriffs are right!! The county sheriff is the top dog LAW officer in the county. When a state or federal offical comes into the county he is supposed to go to the sheriff and confer with him before any legal action may be done. Of course here lately, the Feds are trying to get around this legal point and they will succeed if the sheriff in your county gives into the heavy handed tactics of the Federal Alphabet Soup agencies.
Tell your local sheriff that you will not vote him another term and will sue him for violating his oath of office, if he gives into Federal pressures. This may give your sheriff some backbone if he waffles any. But, if he is a good law-abiding man, this should not be neccesary.
SUPORT YOUR LOCAL SHERIFF.
CATO
Gotta love these patriotic Americans!
A bump for the Constitution.
I think from the responses it is probably true. I beleave what these people are saying here. I do have trouble beleaving the news organizations as they are biased.
I did find another link to the article just now, it's dated 3-9-99. I don't know why it's late getting out. I just read it on a message board posted today. I suspect news supression. I wish everyone could read what all these fine people are posting and even members of gun groups. Heck, until tonight, I didn't know sheriffs had authority over feds.
This is big news to many I imagine, and when I get back from vacation, I don't intend to just sit on it.
Good Luck, All
This will prevent WACOS and RUBY RIDGE incidents !
Now let's not get carried away here. Sheriffs (and deputies) are still people, too, with all the human failings that go along with being people. While this may not prevent the attrocities you describe, it will certainly put those responsible for their misdeeds much closer to the people to whom they are directly accountable. Whether that prevents incidents of the type you describe is not guaranteed, but it does at least seem to address the need for accountability and - more importantly - justice.
And having said all of that, I think what these sheriffs are doing is a very good thing.
Later...
Get all the info you can get and distribute to locals and on the net. We must be the modern day PAMPLETEERS! BUMP IT DAMN IT !
See also this FR thread
HOT DIGGITY! It's the first step in what I hope will be a revolution. Let's hope it catches on.
WACO could have been prevented if had the Sheriff Asserted himself and deputized the all able bodied Citizens in his County!
WACO could have been prevented if had the Sheriff Asserted himself and deputized the all able bodied Citizens in his County! It is the duty of the Sheriff to protect his Citizens.
re: your #22
No more county sheriffs?
Regards
J.R.
WACO could have been prevented if had the Sheriff Asserted himself and deputized the all able bodied Citizens in his County! It is the duty of the Sheriff to protect his Citizens. ======LET======FREEDOM======Reign======Throughout====THE=====LAND===!!!
YES no more Sheriffs in MASS.!
YES no more Sheriffs in MASS.! SAD BUT TRUE!
SHARE THIS INFO WITH ALL!
I think I wanna' move to WYOMING !
re: your #36
You are one of the few who realize the importance of the fact that the County Sheriff is elected. I applaud you. I had a good working relationship with my Sheriff in MO. I was transferred to Illinois, (gaak, ptuui). Haven't tried yet, but I bet I need an appointment to meet this Sheriff, that was not the case in Cooper County MO.
Regards
J.R.
Sheriff Macks book is still the best source around to explain the Constitutional Right to bear arms.For those interested,the books title is"From My Cold Dead Fingers,Why America needs Guns"
THE REASON WHY WYOMNG IS SO COOL IS BECAUSE THEY ONLY HAVE ON CONGRESSMAN - which means min federal intrusion
Waco still sickens me. People heal with time, emotions dwindle with time, anger settles with time, government knows this too well. Stall the truth long enough and public fervor and interests dwindles.
I also lost faith in militias during Waco. I thought that was the kind of thing they were for. Of course the government news outlets were demonizing the Davidians. You gotta admit, this group of criminals are good at what they do.
Maybe you're right, when the sheriff got that emergency call from the Davidians, he should have deputized people and went out to order the Feds off the property. Heck, he had an instant crime scene that was his duty to investigate.
Maybe the some sheriffs are as afraid as some sheople of the Feds.
They sure are human...they are the closed law enforcement to the people. I know in our County if the feds were giving Sheriff Brett a hard time, they had better have their backs covered because the people here are more than sick of em.
They can boldly come in and threaten elderly farmers, lie, threaten, intimidate all they want and we have our sheriff.
I live in a large county with maybe 6,000 people total.
Back in Jan 95 after that dumbass federal judge locked everything out of the forests here, we mustered 2500 county folk into the local fair rodeo area which had about a foot of snow in it and temperature hovering around 15%. This occured by spreading the call in just a couple of days by word of mouth! Listened to speakers including the Lt Gov and Secy of State who drove all the way over winter roads from Boise!!! TV camers and photos which were supposed to be distributed nationwide. We even had men in their wheelchairs doing their damnest to get in.
We've asked, begged, pleaded for elected federal officials to step in and do their jobs....they dart and duck and act ever the cowardly b******s they are, drawing their 6 digit salaries and loving the perks, and it's the sheriff and his crew who are the only ones following the Constitution. Doing the right thing, they know they've got their people willing to stand behind them if needed.
Has anyone else noticed....we've found two judges who apparently believe in the Constitution and application of justice to all...Judge Royce Lambeth and now this Judge.....gives one a little more ray of hope that all isn't lost.
Oh, what a welcome sight this is! Thank you for the flag, Cool Guy. (BTW, my husband has worn the badge for fifteen years, and he's never lacked cojones! LOL!)
"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."
Woah!
Great post!
A BUMP for freedom!
Score one for the Judiciary!
I love it! CONSERVATIVE judicial activism, for a change!
Take that, US Supreme Court!
Best thing of all would be for the USSC court to refuse to hear the appeal!
I'll never see a CALIFORNIA court rule with such common-sense in my lifetime. Not this liberal hell hole we call the People's Democratic Republic of Kalifornia!
Yes Virginia, my guns are registered with the BATF. Count on it!
California law REQUIRES registration of any gun described by law as an assault weapon.
Well, Kalifornia can kiss my Freeper ass! I will NEVER register my guns!
Never.
I take it you're a proud Californian. Whats up with the Sporster people, and how does your sheriff stand on this issue, seeing how he has a right to keep Feds out?
BUMP TO SHERIFF OF BIGHHORN AND BADGE HOLDERS LIKE YOUR HUSBAND, WHO HAS COJONES ( I beleive you on your comment about your husband's cojones. I guess no one else will be in a better position to comment on it;-))
BUMP TO SHERIFF OF BIGHHORN AND BADGE HOLDERS LIKE YOUR HUSBAND, WHO HAS COJONES
LOL! You're very kind.
(I'm pretty fond of the guy, and I like to give him a plug every chance I get.)
Well. A little searching on the net produced this....
sorry about the length. :^)
Heads Up
September 5, 1997
Issue #51
by: Doug Fiedor
BENEFITING FROM SEPARATE JURISDICTIONS
Last week we wrote about "Using Separate Jurisdictions," and how that concept could and should be implemented for the protection of citizens in all States. And, as often happens, readers responded positively.
In fact, the State of Montana, we were notified, has just such a bill in the House right now! We understand that it has a good chance of passing, too.
The introduction of Montana House Bill 415 states the purpose concisely:
"An act regulating arrests, searches, and seizures by Federal employees; providing that Federal employees shall obtain the County Sheriff's permission to arrest, search, and seize; providing for prosecution of Federal employees violating this act; rejecting Federal laws purporting to give Federal employees the authority of a County Sheriff in this State; and providing an immediate effective date."
The bill recoups many Tenth Amendment policing rights of the State and "declares that any federal law purporting to give federal employees the authority of a county sheriff in this state is not recognized by and is specifically rejected by this state. . . ."
Section 1 sets the purpose of the bill to "prevent misadventure affecting Montana citizens and their rights" by federal employees. Section 2 declares that in most cases federal employees must first seek the "permission" of the Sheriff, or the sheriff's "designee" before attempting to make an arrest, search, or seizure. And Section 3 makes it mandatory that County Prosecutors prosecute federal employees violating this law.
The words "federal employees" is a very interesting term as used in this bill. That would include all federal police and regulatory agents -- the IRS, FBI, EPA, BATF, and the rest of them. And by extension, it would also include all federal telephone wiretaps and snooping through e-mail files on the Internet.
The Montana Proposal is an excellent beginning in protecting the rights of citizens against an out of control federal bureaucracy. The only change we would propose is that the sheriff's office be required to attend and supervise all actions by federal employees -- not necessarily to participate as a law officer, but primarily as an official representative of the local people. The function then, would be to insure that all Constitutional rights of local citizens within that jurisdiction were respected.
All public officials take an oath of office in which they swear to support the United States Constitution. And the Bill of Rights is part of our Constitution. Therefore, any public official violating the rights and liberties of a citizen should be immediately arrested by the closest available law officer. The Montana Proposal would make that possible, and tend to keep all concerned honest.
This concept is under study in other states too. In fact, as the Knoxville Journal reported last month: Sheriff Dave Mattis of Big Horn County, Wyoming, said this week that as a result of Case #96-CV099-J, U.S. District Court, District of Wyoming, he how has a written policy that forbids federal officials from entering his county and exercising authority over county residents unless he is notified first of their intentions.
According to the report, the sheriff grants permission on a case-by-case basis only. When asked what, if any, repercussions he had gotten from the Feds, the sheriff quickly and confidently replied, "None whatsoever." He explained by saying, "They know they do not have jurisdiction in my county unless I grant it to them." Mattis said he grants them permission to proceed if he is convinced they are operating within the legal parameters and authority limitations set forth in the U.S. Constitution.
It is time that safeguards for the rights of American citizens were written into law and strictly enforced in every State in the nation. Montana House Bill 415 goes far in getting that started.
We suggest that all Americans demand that a similar bill be passed in their own respective States. Towards that end, we include the full text of the Montana bill below.
MONTANA HOUSE BILL 415
"An act regulating arrests, searches, and seizures by Federal employees; providing that Federal employees shall obtain the County Sheriff's permission to arrest, search, and seize; providing for prosecution of Federal employees violating this act; rejecting Federal laws purporting to give Federal employees the authority of a County Sheriff in this State; and providing an immediate effective date."
Be it enacted by the Legislature of the State of Montana:
Section 1. Purpose.
It is the intent of the legislature to ensure maximum cooperation between federal employees and local law enforcement authorities; to ensure that federal employees who carry out arrests, searches, and seizures in this state receive the best local knowledge and expertise available; and to prevent misadventure affecting Montana citizens and their rights that results from lack of cooperation or communication between federal employees operating in Montana and properly constituted local law enforcement authorities.
Section 2. County sheriff's permission for federal arrests, searches, and seizures -- exceptions.
(1) A federal employee who is not designated by Montana law as a Montana peace officer may not make an arrest, search, or seizure in this state without the written permission of the sheriff or designee of the sheriff of the county in which the arrest, search, or seizure will occur unless:
(a) the arrest, search, or seizure will take place on a federal enclave for which jurisdiction has been actively ceded to the United States of America by a Montana statute;
(b) the federal employee witnesses the commission of a crime the nature of which requires an immediate arrest;
(c) the arrest, search, or seizure is under the provisions of 46-6-411 or 46-6-412;
(d) the intended subject of the arrest, search, or seizure is an employee of the sheriff's office or is an elected county or state officer; or
(e) the federal employee has probable cause to believe that the subject of the arrest, search, or seizure has close connections with the sheriff, which connections are likely to result in the subject being informed of the impending arrest, search, or seizure.
(2) The county sheriff or designee of the sheriff may refuse permission for any reason that the sheriff or designee considers sufficient.
(3) A federal employee who desires to exercise a subsection (1)(d) exception shall obtain the written permission of the Montana attorney general for the arrest, search, or seizure unless the resulting delay in obtaining the permission would probably cause serious harm to one or more individuals or to a community or would probably cause flight of the subject of the arrest, search, or seizure in order to avoid prosecution. The attorney general may refuse the permission for any reason that the attorney general considers sufficient.
(4) A federal employee who desires to exercise a subsection (1)(e) exception shall obtain the written permission of the Montana attorney general. The request for permission must include a written statement, under oath, describing the federal employee's probable cause. The attorney general may refuse the request for any reason that the attorney general considers sufficient.
(5) (a) A permission request to the county sheriff or Montana attorney general must contain:
(i) the name of the subject of the arrest, search, or seizure;
(ii) a clear statement of probable cause for the arrest, search, or seizure and a federal arrest, search, or seizure warrant that contains a clear statement of probable cause;
(iii) a description of specific assets, if any, to be searched for or seized;
(iv) a statement of the date and time that the arrest, search, or seizure is to occur; and
(v) the address or location where the intended arrest, search, or seizure will be attempted.
(b) The request may be in letter form, either typed or handwritten, but must be countersigned with the original signature of the county sheriff or designee of the sheriff or by the Montana attorney general, to constitute valid permission. The permission is valid for 48 hours after it is signed. The sheriff or attorney general shall keep a copy of the permission request on file.
Section 3. Remedies.
(1) An arrest, search, or seizure or attempted arrest, search, or seizure in violation of [section 2] is unlawful, and individuals involved must be prosecuted by the county attorney for kidnapping if an arrest or attempted arrest occurred, for trespass if a search or attempted search occurred, for theft if a seizure or attempted seizure occurred, and for any applicable homicide offense if loss of life occurred. The individuals involved must also be charged with any other applicable criminal offenses in Title 45.
(2) To the extent possible, the victims' rights provisions of Title 46 must be extended to the victim or victims by the justice system persons and entities involved in the prosecution.
(3) The county attorney has no discretion not to prosecute once a claim of violation of [section 2] has been made by the county sheriff or designee of the sheriff, and failure to abide by this mandate subjects the county attorney to recall by the voters and to prosecution by the attorney general for official misconduct.
Section 4. Invalid federal laws.
Pursuant to the 10th amendment to the United States constitution and this state's compact with the other states, the legislature declares that any federal law purporting to give federal employees the authority of a county sheriff in this state is not recognized by and is specifically rejected by this state and is declared to be invalid in this state.
Section 5. Effective date.
[This act] is effective on passage and approval.
Section 6. Severability.
If a part of [this act] is invalid, all valid parts that are severable from the invalid part remain in effect. If a part of [this act] is invalid in one or more of its applications, the part remains in effect in all valid applications that are severable from the invalid applications.
We're really proud of our Sheriff over here in Idaho.
Hey, Rowdee! I didn't realize you were in Idaho!
Have you visited the NW FReeper thread? If you haven't, but would like to, here's a link. (Just post your name to the list when you get there.)
California courts have ruled that Citizens can travel in there car without a Driver licsense or reigistration. There is a Patriot movement in Northern California which does just that!
=================SOMEBODY======WITH======BALLS=================!!!!!!
This is great news. I hope it becomes a landmark decision.
We should consider using the principal for land use as well. Each state government should have the right to take lands in its border that is under federal control if the state chooses. If the state feels that the federal government has mis-managed the federal lands or that it is in the state's interest to take over responsibility for managing the land, then the state should be allowed, per the constitution, to take that land back.
This could get interesting. The decision will probably be appealed to Supreme Court.
Bless Sheriff Mattis! We can still win this war!
Although it gets a litte cool up there, now and then...
Now heres a law enforcement officer I will address as SIR!
THANK YOU SHERIFF MATTIS!
Thank you for posting this...what a way to start my day!!! Testicular fortitude still exists. I hope it is contagious.
heavyd, appreciate your enthusiasm, but Sheriff Mattis is bold enough...
Thanks for this post. There's more coming on this issue and I believe that there is support in the highest federal court. Slick Willey's train is going to be wrecked, before he leaves office, I hope. Regards Gypsy II
If the McClendon County Texas Sherriff had exercised this power, WACO would still be just a name on the Texas map!
Man oh man oh man .... how did you know I've been looking for this information. You just settled a GREAT BIG argument I've been having with a local talk show host over this very issue! Had a rather hot conversation (on air) with a candidate for county sheriff about a sheriff's duty to protect the people of his county from federal abuses. He was adament that he would work hand in glove with the feds because thats what he thinks a sheriff is 'supposed to do'. I used Sheriff Mattis as an example but had no docket number or documentation to back it up. NOW I DO. Thank you, thank you, thank you.
If this article is true, I can understand why the federal authorities would want to keep it quiet. Under our system of divided government, the states are supposed to be the primary shield against the abuse of citizens by the federal government. This sheriff, if this case is real, obviously understands and accepts this responsibility.
Not only the 10th amendment grants the power to the states to oppose federal abuse, but also a little noticed part of the Constitution requires that the US government enforce the self-government powers of the states: Article IV, Section 4 "The United States shall guarentee to every state in this union a Republican Form of Government, and shall protect each of them against invasion..." "Republican" form of government was well understood during that time to mean a system of limited and divided government in which local authorities were soverign except in areas specifically noted as federal in the constitution.
I agree that if our Texas authorities had reacted to Clinton's BATF and FBI with demands for proof of their accusations and asserted their state authority to protect the children, then Waco wouldn't have happened. Unfortunately what I can only explain as "political cronyism " reared its ugly head through Clinton's friend and admirer Governor Ann Richards who couldn't have been quicker on the draw to facilitate Clinton's scheme. The tragic result was to deprive her citizens (including children who she had a duty under state law to protect) of their lives as well as their state and federal constitutional rights including the right not to have abusive and excessive federal force used against them as well as their right not to have federal officials misrepresent the evidence presented in warrants used to justify the use of force against them (remember the allegations of a "drug lab which supposedly "allowed" the use of military weaponry?) Even more unfortunately, the present Governor George Bush, supposedly not a political crony of Clinton's, has steadfastly refused to perform his duty to find out the truth about Waco and prosecute the federal officials responsible.
The old adage, "power corrupts, and absolute power corrupts absolutely" is proven true again and again. Waco was America's Kristallnacht and unfortunately the majority of Americans reacted to it the same way the Germans did in 1938 -- outright approval or disinterested acquiescence. When will we learn?
Best news I have heard in the last eight years or so. Time to copy to the local sherrif! (I have a feeling that he may already know.)
Renewed hope
BUMP!
This post is what makes Waco so terrible. The Feds were there with the approval of the local sheriff (The original meaning of steriff was the chief officer of the shire). The local sheriff should have known what was happening in the compound.
The Feds actions imply that they were out of control acting without the sheriff's approval, or that the local sherrif went along with their actions.
I have always wondered where the Texas Rangers were when Texas citizens were being burned alive (18 to 20 were less than 18 months old).
Just sent this as a letter to the editor to my local paper, suggest everyone in Maine does the same thing.
Thanks for a great post.
Must admit I woke up a little depressed today with all the Hillary suck-up newspapers posting how great she was on Letterman. Depressed that New Yorkers may rethink their vote and her poll numbers may soar and there was little I could do about it. Depressed hearing the white majority will be a white minority anytime SOON. Depressed because we still have another year to deal with Xlintoon who is on a spending spee unlike any other in history. Depressed that Lanny Davis and Carville will simply not leave the airwaves and we have to endure more and more of it until 2002. HOWEVER YOU LIFTED MY SPIRITS SOMEWHAT AND THIS ARTICLE SHOULD BE SENT TO EVERY FREEPING NEWSPAPER AND MEDIA NEWS NETWORK WORLD WIDE. THANKS AND A MAJOR BUMP.
I seem to recall another Sheriff in Utah who told the Feds the same thing. I believe the Sheriff's name was Phillips.
"The Feds were there with the approval of the local sheriff"
"I have always wondered where the Texas Rangers were when Texas citizens were being burned alive (18 to 20 were less than 18 months old)."
I believe the local sheriff opposed the BATF/FBI tactics, at least he has been vocal in stating his opposition since the event. The raid and stand-off was quickly taken above the head of the sheriff to Gov. Ann Richards who approved the use of military might against the Davidians.
The Texas Rangers were used as defacto federal agents, with the approval and authority of Gov. Ann Richards, to assist in the PROSECUTION of the surviving Davidians. There were no Texas officials acting on behalf of the Davidians as far as I can tell from the books and the accounts I have read. Only the local child protective authorities and the sheriff warned against the use of force and the FBI's terror tactics.
Is this the county where the Fetterman Massacre took place?
Ruf, you made my day. Now, this is the way it's supposed to be done. GO WYOMING!!!!!!!
Hey, Thunder! Have you ever heard of Sheriff Richard Mack, I think he was from Arizona..successfully sued the Feds over Brady! He is the real deal! I met him and hope he would be more of a national figure...of course the media isn't going to let that happen! Good to see you here!
B.
Cool Guy! Good news, what do we do with that???? This is great and my guy was born and raised in Wyoming...I think we're goin' home!!!!
There is hope until the next election... if the people of his county are not behind him in enforcing the law... then he is out. We had a sheriff here in Houston County TN... he enforced the law regardless of who you were (including his kin), we had 24 hour patrols, 7 days a week, a decrease in crime.... now they voted him out of office... no patrols crime is up 63% in one year and I have drug dealers on my road (again) and no one but me cares. I wish the man all the luck in the world... and hope he has eyes in the back of his head!
Sir, bumped, Sir!
How many people can Wyoming hold? This may start another westward land-rush.
bump
I was born and raised in Platte County Wyoming. I now reside in Kentucky. This makes me proud of my heritage!
BTTT
I am having trouble verriffiing this post. Is this a Hoax???
You may cite to support your argument to the talk show host the Federalist Papers #27 by Alexander Hamilton. In answering critics of the proposed federal government who feared a standing federal army would abuse their civil liberties Hamilton said:
"..Power being almost always the rival of power, the general government will at all times stand ready to check the usurpations of the state governments and these will have the same disposition toward the general government. The people, by throwing themselves into the scale, will infallibly make it preponderate. If their rights are invaded by either, they can make use of the other as the instrument of redress....It may safely be received as an axiom in our political system, that the State governments will, in all possible contingencies, afford complete security against invasions of the public liberty by the national authority."
BTTT :(
bump!
This is ancient law in every county in every state in the union. The sheriffs just haven't been enforcing it. It is a sheriff's duty investigate the motives of federal officials conducting "business" in his county. I suspect few sheriffs even know know of their authority in that area, and I'm willing to wager long odds that the people don't know that they can demand the sheriff do this.
I'm also willing to bet that a citizen can burn a sheriff if he allows federal agents to abuse that citizen's rights without proper leave and authority, which happens all the time. Your state Code has the duties and responsibility of sheriffs clearly laid out, with notations regarding the common law that applies to the matter.
Is it a hoax? It better not be! I'll try to get some time and do some research....darn, why do I have to earn a living?!!!!!Such a waste of time!
The Sheriff in Lemhi County Idaho acted this very scenario out several years ago with Federal Agents over the Wolf issue. When the Feds threatened to come back, many of us over in Montana (where I lived at the time) were ready to come and support that Sheriff if necessary.
Many Sheriff's in the West and a few in the South understand the Constitutional nature of their office and uphold it.
politeia, Waco is not over yet, and when you realize the extent of the Federal corruption that is still on-going , is is well nigh immpossible for anyone, including George W, to get to the bottom of any scandal.
The entire klintoon machine must be thrown out of office before any honest investigation can even begin. The Texas Rangers seemed to have sensed this, and may well have preserved enough evidence to put the lie to the klintoon-Reno-FBI-ATF bastards, and we should be able to read them their rights eventually.
But not until their power is removed by the ballot-box! Focus!...FRegards
Have you seen this? The folks in Jarbidge need to know about it, when we have verified that it is correct...may give Jarbidge some ammo.
The response to all this by J Reno and the Klintoon spin machine will be interesting........but I am really looking forward to hearing what Owl Gore has to say about this one.
BTTT
Smiling Libertarian bump!
"Have you seen this? The folks in Jarbidge need to know about it, when we have verified that it is correct...may give Jarbidge some ammo."
Yes, it's great news!!!
Thanks, Jeff...Sheriff Brett Barsalou is really a neat guy...lots of respect over here...he's one of "us citizens".
In Fiedor's article above, the following paragraph he uses to describe a section of the proposed Montana law, "Section 1 sets the purpose of the bill to "prevent misadventure affecting Montana citizens and their rights" by federal employees. Section 2 declares that in most cases federal employees must first seek the "permission" of the Sheriff, or the sheriff's "designee" before attempting to make an arrest, search, or seizure. And Section 3 makes it mandatory that County Prosecutors prosecute federal employees violating this law"....
FOR THOSE UNFAMILIAR WITH WHAT JEFF AND I ARE REFERRING TO;
Had the goons that showed up threatening 70 somethiing year old Gene Hussey, with guns prominently displayed, had contacted Sheriff Brett (who else in government would/should be closed to the locals and be aware of problems or problem types), he'd have told them of Gene's character...in all likelihood, he could have called Gene and said something like "Hey Gene, you gotta a problem showing some officers around your place"...and Gene would have had lunch ready for them and given him the keys to his front door (if he even locks it)...or Sheriff Brett would have personally driven them out there and he and Gene would have had a cup of coffee while the feds looked around.
As it was, it nearly came to gunfire...thankfully, neighbors out here look out for each other...someone got Sheriff Brett on the phone and he drove like a bat out of hell to get there before blood was shed....and asked Gene face to face if he minded...and apparently the "coffee scene" I described above took place.
None of this was necessary...the federal govt "told" us they were putting wolves in here...didn't even bother to tell our County Commissioners they were going to be released anywhere close to the city limits!
Observant concerned citizens contacted the commissioners who drove out to prevent the release; sad to say, the feds just moved on a little further! So much for state laws against releasing animals into the wild!
It was Gene Hussey himself who contacted the Sheriff to tell him somebody had shot a wolf that had killed one of his calves; it was Sheriff Brett who contacted various federal authorities....knowing how the feds operate, Gene took the precautions to call our local vet who deals in large animals and a neighbor with a camcorder....they did an on-the spot autopsy of the calf to determine whether it had been born dead or the wolf was just eating a stillborn calif...the vet looked at the lungs and determined they were "pink" (oxygenated) and the stomach and determined there were milk curds there which proves the calf had been alive in order to suckle milk.
The on-the-scene fed agents took note of everything, including tracks, etc, and said it was a "wolf kill". They sent the carcass to a lab in Oregon for confirmatioon of their findings...lo and behold, they denied it was a wolf kill...but of course they lost the carcass and any documentary evidence!
So then, the feds began threatening Hussey for killing an endangered species....fines and imprisonment are the punishment.
For those unfamiliar with Idaho, most of her people are proud, law-abiding citizens minding their own business and expect others to do so. They are respectful of others and expect the same treatment. So, when unknown outside fed forces come in and act like jack-booted hooligans, we don't take kindly to it...half the time, I honestly believe the feds are looking for any sort of resistance just so they can prove we're "racists, separatists, gubment haters, etc.
Jeff, I'm going to copy this Montana law, and offer a suggested amendment to it...I don't like the state A/G getting involved...he isn't as concerned about us as a local magistrate who lives among us is....and send it to my state rep....now, there's a lady who despises federal government intrusion...big believer in states rights...see if she'll run with this. What do you think are the chances of getting this passed? Do you know folks in other counties...maybe put a little pressure on their own local reps here in the State?
Well at last someone witht he Cajones to enact the Posse Comitatus law.
Damn, being from Wyoming I knew I was proud of the people there but this is great.
The feds were smart enough not to appeal the decision therefore the decision means nothing because it can't be used as reference for future cases.
Regarding their spin....they will continue to believe in "their" rights, not the peoples' rights.
A few years back, there was a County commissioner, Dick Carver, of Nye county, NV, who faced a "road" problem with the forest service or BIA....the road in question, if closed, would have required the folks in one part of the County to make a long, unnecessary detour route to get to the other side of the county.
Dick and the other commisioners decided they were going to open that road....Dick also drove the county grader or bulldozer...it was on national tv...he was driving that grader, citizens all around him, and chicken s**t feds walking backwards up the road...trying to tell him "he couldn't do that"....he just kept driving!! A bunch of us locals drove over 60 miles in the winter one time to see and hear Dick speak personally (before it had reached the judicial level)...I believe it was Sheriff Mack who also attended (can't recall for sure the last name--a real Constitutionalist). If memory serves me right, some judge ruled against Nye County...so much for equality under the law.
Good news, what do we do with that????
Take this to your SHERIFF and try to find his COJONES ;-)
Hey there Cool Guy, thanks for the heads up! This action taken by the Sheriff's office is phenomenal! It does my heart good to see someone who has the courage to stand up to the Goliath. And to think there are actually judges who upheld the Sheriff's actions!! The people in that county in Wyoming have to be jubilant and proud at the stand taken on their behalf and on behalf of the Constitution. This needs to be circulated all across the country. How exciting! Thanks again.
THIS ARTICLE SHOULD BE SENT TO EVERY FREEPING NEWSPAPER AND MEDIA NEWS NETWORK WORLD WIDE
Would really appreciate it if you can send it to some local talk show hosts ;-). Heard they are damn good in your area :-). BUMP TO THE COUNTY OF BIGHORN.
It wasn't a real question, Guy! I have a call in to the good Sheriff now for an update...will keep you posted.
Anyone want to help me load my truck? I'm moving to Wyoming!
bump
Hey, Thunder! Have you ever heard of Sheriff Richard Mack,
I sure have,I recomended his book for any one interested earlier in this thread.It's the clearest explaniation of our 2nd. ammendment rights that I've found.A well written book.
I spoke with Sheriff Mattis' office and gave them my 800#. If he gets time he will call today and we'll get an interview to find out how it's going up there. His office pretty much verified the validity of the article.
bump
"I am having trouble verriffiing this post. Is this a Hoax??? "
I am having trouble findng anything on this case with the quick search I did. I am troubled with some of the text.
For example: "The District Court ruled in favor of the sheriffs, stating that, "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."
This seems rather odd language for a District Court. However, I will reserve judgement. I would like to find some article, or the actual court papers before I take this as true.
Thanks, I have had no luck so far either.
His office pretty much verified the validity of the article.
Impressive work. I will be interested in your final report.
It is GREAT to see some law enforcement agencies still have guts. Wyoming Sheriffs, you show the rest of the Nation how it should be done!
BUMP! (thx, cg)
I did a metacrawler search for "Sheriff Dave Mattis"
and came up with this link...
A Sheriff's Duty,
in addition to my post # 99 above.
I'll be moving to Wyoming tomorrow.
Thanks for the link. Still waiting to hear from Sheriff Mattis.
bump
You're welcome! I'll be looking forward to hearing what he has to say.
Here are a couple more, for whatever they may be worth.
BIG HORN COUNTY, WY SHERIFF'S DEPARTMENT POLICY
10/01/97 -- Wyoming sheriff tells feds to stay out
I can't tell you how much it irritates me to find this stuff out 2 years after the fact! Damn media!
My thoughts exactly AuntB.
Gotta go work on my chainsaw now. I'll check back later.
Best bass boat built in early 70's!
POLICE POWER PINKOS WHIPPED BY WYOMING SHERIFFS BUMP
bump
How about Clarity? Has he weighed in on this yet? (still reading through the thread) Be good to get a lawyers opinion on how this might go on appeal, for surely it will be appealed.
Gonzo:
Thank your for your optimism about getting to the bottom of the Waco matter. I hope you are right. I do not believe the difficulty of doing so while Clinton is in office absolves George Bush from his duty (see prior post quoting the federalist paper) to do everything in his power as soon as he was elected. The effectiveness of the state/federal constitutional balance of powers working to protect citizens lives and liberties depnds on all parties fulfilling their duty at the time the abuses occur. If we concede that this protection must necessarily and always depend on the public "voting the rascals out" before justice can be served, then I am afraid the battle is lost before it is even begun.
Thanks, I have read the links. I guess that I was amazed because I didn't hear about it when it happened. I was living in neighboring Montana at the time and thought that I was pretty much up on these kind of goings on. Makes me wonder what else I have missed. As in... was this just an isolated instance that I missed, or are we just scratching the surface and there are volumes more I don't know about?
I was in Cody, Wyo. on vacation about that time and never heard anything...there is probably volumes out there, we HAVE to find it.
" Have you ever heard of Sheriff Richard Mack, I think he was from Arizona..successfully sued the Feds over Brady!"
Here is the Supreme Court case--- Printz, Sheriff/Coroner, Ravalli County, Montana v. U.S.
Printz and Mack filed separate actions challenging the constitutionality of being forced to do interim background checks. In each cased the district court ruled unconstitutional. The (infamous) 9th Circuit Court of Appeals reversed, ruling constitutional. The Supreme Court reversed the 9th Circuit Court.
Supreme Court (Scalia) said---"....The Federal Government may neither issue directives requiring the States to address particular problems, nor command the State's officers, or those of their political subdivisions, to administer or enforce a federal regulatory program. It matters not whether policymaking is involved, and no case by case weighing of the burdens or benefits is necessary; such commands are fundamentally incompatible with our constitutional system of dual sovereignty. Accordingly, the judgement of the Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit is reversed."
Of course, Stevens, Souter, Ginsburg, and Breyer dissented.
This is a long case with a good dicussion of states' rights.
Going to be interesting how this shakes out!
Coincidence? I don't know, but I just ran across that same item in the Federalist Papers yesterday. At any rate, I told the talk show host in questionr to check in with Free Republic to find this thread, so guess you've told him yourself. Thanks. Now we're all ooking forward to an on-air interviewr with Sheriff Mattis. The station has already guested Sheriff Mack of Arizona several times. Another great patriot!
Bumping it back to the top.
Ouachita, the second link in your post is fascinating, did you look over much of it? What info, and state by state on all the same stuff...even the Jarbidge Rebellion is on there. I want to find out more about the group that put it together.
gatex, you have to check out the second link in the post that this replies to. (geez, that sounds clear???duh.) I had the priveledge, about 6 years ago to make a 2nd amendment march with Sheriff Mack. The media definately did NOT want any part of him. He has an amazing demeanor.
Sheriff Matis' office said he'd been very busy on the phone today. I don't care how and I don't care who, but it's sure nice to see this one making the rounds. Roger Fredinburg has been contacted also, so expect to hear the Sheriff on his radio show soon. Two years ago, it seems everyone missed this story..I want EVERYONE to hear it this time. We need some legal opinions, but I've got a feeling this thing has legs. Sounds like an immigrant won a case against the Sheriff for NOT protecting him from the feds, hence the action by the Sheriff to ENSURE this never happens again..he's had NO GREIF from the feds since.
Thanks. Interesting link. Will read some more.
Best bass boat built in early 70's!
Yup! And some of them are still going strong.
Makes me wonder what else I have missed.
In the words of AuntB.... Damn Media!
Rowdee, YOUR Sheriff would have been voted in for life if I could have seen him put BABABABAbbit in his place. I have a special place in the darkest recesses of my heart for that ....whatever! I never heard that story before, either! I thought I knew about this stuff!
What part of Idaho are you in? St. Maries, nearly 4 yrs ago was the first time I heard about the coming Land Grab. No one would believe it then.
I've not had the chance to really look the 2nd link over yet. But from what I've seen, it is a very interesting site.
Ain't the internet great?
"Ain't the internet great?"
And I only got hooked into in a couple years ago, except occasional "library visits". It was a lot harder carrying all those stacks of books home, for darn sure! ..and writing letters for documents, blah, blah, yep, the internet is great .... how do we suffer from information overload and still know so LITTLE?
A bump for Ruf!
Bump!
BUMP....
Is this guy still the Sheriff?
Yes, he is still the Sheriff.
Sheriff Mattis was on a talk show right after the court closed the case out. It was on one of those middle of the night deals that hardly anyone ever hears. Don't remember whose show but could've been on KOA out of Denver. Been trying to track it down ever since. Have called his office a few times and got the same response as you did. I hear tell he's a very private person.
I'm gonna send a copy of this to Omar the Tent Maker (Maricopa County Sheriff Joe Arpayo). Would love to be a fly on the wall when he reads it.
Good to know you are close enough to hear KOA. Maybe Rosen knows something about this interview even if it was late (not his show). Gotta find a way to see what Stone (Jeffco Sheriff) thinks about this.
Searched today's "Sacramento Bee" newspaper cover to cover for this landmark historic court decision.
Wouldn't you know it? Couldn't find the story anywhere. Sure, they had plenty of room for the flu outbreak back east, a lenient sentence for an 11-year-old gang murderer and the local girl's high-school swim team.
Bias in the media? Naaaaaah! Couldn't be!
(Now just imgine if the a federal court just determined that Federal Agents had jurisdiction over the local boys. Now THAT would have been plastered all over the front page of the Bee and heralded as a huge step in the fight against crime!) Nope, no bias in the media here...
Is it any Freeping wonder I have nearly blacklisted all mainstream print and TV news sources and get my news EXCLUSIVELY from the internet?
ABC, CBS, NBS the Times and the Post have all lost my patronage for good! Unless or until my internet sources indicate that they have toned down the propaganda.
bump
"Have you seen this?"
Yup...always figgered to eventually be retirin' to Montana, but Wyoming may be worth visitin' to see if maybe I ain't bein' a little hasty.
My utmost FReegards to all you non-Coastal Westerners...MUD
Salmon--Lemhi County.
This is really weird...I don't take any big newspapers (Yuck!)...our little local weekly is all...and they pick up on this sort of thing!
The New American magazine (publication supported by John Birch Ssociety would have done a big one on this...they're very constitutionally minded and when victories come...they report them......and I know if I had ever seen or heard anything about this, I would have kept it in my mind.....usually keep a copy of this stuff (before internet) in files in 2 desk drawers.
I don't think it's phony....just somehow "conveniently" passed over by media types...maybe law review magazines...maybe????
Outside of C'Lane, some parts of Boise and maybe Pocy ... it ought to get a lot of support. I believe many folks in I.F. would support it.
I'll talk it uo down here. NO doubt that Lemhi aqnd Custer Counties would go for it, GEM county here would to as would almost all of the rural counties.
BUMP
Good News: Freedom from the Fed
Bad News: The seeds of civil war.
I was thinking the same thing. Is it verified? I will tell Dahl when I talk to him next week. I'll save this in my favorites.
For those of you interested in the Shovel Brigade on July 4th to rebuild the Jarbidge South Canyon Road - See this: REOPEN JARBIDGE ROAD AFTER FEDS CLOSED AND DESTROYED
Bump Glad you saw this.
Never been to Wyoming, but their sheriffs are a-ok in my book! The Constitution is obviously alive and well there.
This'll put a smile on your face, m'lady.
You've got mail.
If if was on KOA ... and I'm pretty sure it was ... it would have been on the Rick Barber show (overnights) Barber's not on anymore, but if they archive, Rosen might be able to track it down. If you're close, its worth a shot.
Been meaning to thank you for bringing this thread to my attention. BIG thread. Howse about somebody starting a thread two for those of us with 'little memory' to spare. And who says a computer can't get altzheimers?
I thought you'd like to see this one, in case you missed it.
Great idea to vacation in Wyoming (and Montana, too)....
I hope the Sheriff arrests Bubba for carrying Cuban cigars!
This sheriff will have a new title after this: sheriff-for-life.
Thanks for the heads-up, Rowdee. This article made my day!
The Wyoming sheriffs are demanding access to all BATF files to verify that the agency is not violating provisions of Wyoming law that prohibit the registration of firearms or the keeping of a registry of firearm owners. 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 state courts.
Hooooooooo-raaaaaaaaay! I'd love to plant a big kiss on every one o' them Wyoming County Sheriffs!
Hi Mudboy!
Hope we see you in Jarbidge for the 4th of July Campout!
HERE IS A BUMP FOR THE WYOMING SHERIFF.
bmp again.
I wonder if this will ripple across America or be struck down and watered down to eventually having no effect?
Being the computer failure that I am, may I ask, can any of you do a 2nd thread on this one?
Thought you might like the flag!
Next time I'm going through Wyoming and this county, I plan to make a stop at the local Sheriff's office just to shake hands, tell them how proud I am of them to be able to shake the hand of real MEN.....as to that "kiss"...I'd try that, too! LOL
FINALLY SOMEONE WITH COJONES IS WEARING THE BADGE...
AMEN. Finally some good news around here. Still, as has been pointed out, just like the bad news around here (Filegate, Chinagate, Rapegate...) it is either ignored by the mainstream media or misrepresented. Has anyone seen this covered by any mainstream news outlets?
There is nothing the mainstream media and the fascist/communist state hates more than our Constitution. Thank God there is still an occasional court that will uphold some of its basic principles.
I haven't researched, but is anyone aware of the hunting, fishing & skiing, if any, in Bighorn county, Republic of Wyoming?
I'd love to plant a big kiss on every one o' them Wyoming County Sheriffs!
Would you believe me if I told you I am a Wyoming County Sheriff who commutes from Silicon Valley? ;)
"Hope we see you in Jarbidge for the 4th of July Campout!"
My my, GrandmaC, that do sound like fun...I'll see what I can do.
FReegards...MUD
Next time I'm going through Wyoming and this county, I plan to make a stop at the local Sheriff's office just to shake hands, tell them how proud I am of them to be able to shake the hand of real MEN.....as to that "kiss"...I'd try that, too! LOL
I'm gonna be out in Montana in early May. I'll swing south on my way home, meet you in Wyoming, and we'll plant double ones on them Constitution-lovin' sheriffs (I'll even let you go first....) ;o)
These are the guys I want on my side.
First you gotta show me your badge, Dave. *smile*
Any day, m'lady. Any day, ;)
If this is true, then the sheriff should be able to close down IRS offices that are located on county property?
I'd love to become a deputy for that very reason. I've always wanted to handcuff and shackle those bastards. Give them a dose of their own medicine. Maybe even rough them up a little... No, make that a LOT !!
You've got mail. (*return smile*)
Thanks for the kind words, SVG. Have a good day....
I haven't researched, but is anyone aware of the hunting, fishing & skiing, if any, in Bighorn county, Republic of Wyoming?
Yes! Before my wife and I moved here to West Virginia, her and I lived in Sheridan,Wyoming and the Big Horn Mountains are beautiful and the hunting there is teriffic! I, mostly am a fisherman and the fishing is great as well! The fishing laws are being changed a lot by the government and environmentalist people alot, but that goes with the increase of out of staters who go there to get good fishing and hunting. The skiing is great as well!
Wyoming is a very conservative state and the children for education ranks amongst the top ten for Wyoming! Its a beautiful state, with real mountains compared to the Appalacians here in West Virginia!
BIG BUMP FOR MY STATE OF WYOMING!
We are looking for a location which could end up being Bighorn County. Any suggestions; privacy, acreages, access, etc and under a mill? Thanks for your time. By the way, a "GOOD" government school in WY is still 1,000 times worse than parental education, IMHO. Blessings
Has anyone been able to verify this? I suspect it is either a hoax or an exaggeration of the actual court decision.
A search on LEXIS finds no case called "Castaneda v United States" (or any variant of that name) in federal court in Wyoming at anytime after 1997. So my suspicions that this is all a hoax are strengthened.
A search on LEXIS finds no case called "Castaneda v United States" (or any variant of that name) in federal court in Wyoming at anytime after 1995. So my suspicions that this is all a hoax are strengthened.
Sorry for the double post. The "1995" date is the correct one.
Hi! Go all the way through this thread. There are plenty of ref's for you to check. According to Sheriff Mattis's office...it's for real...and he's not the only sheriff who has told the feds to ...shove off!
B.
I've checked all the links. All I get is different websites quoting Sheriff Mattus saying that, as a result of this case, he has to give permission to any federal law enforcement officials to enter his county. None of the links gives the actual text of the federal court's decision, and a LEXIS search I did finds no such case at all in federal court. So unless someone posts the court's decision, I'm still very dubious.
I've searched for two days now (on and off) using findlaw and lawcrawler and cannot find this case. Do you have any more information?
There should be full documentation if this is a real case.
If we are talking about the case by the illegal immigrant, it was settled before trial I believe. Call his office.The number is 307-568-2324. There is another case on this, where the Sherriff got the ruling by a district judge as to his legal standing.
Everything I read said the opposite of "he has to give his permission to the feds". Check it out and let me know what you think. I would like to see the documents, also. And will when I get the chance.
This is the best news I've read in a long time.
If it's true.
I would assume it to be a Federal District case. Sheriff Mattis vs. the USA, BATF, or whatever. The case, Casteneda vs. US must have been the case where the illegal sued Mattis,and the Feds. I don't have lexus, whatever it is, so can't get documents. We need a new thread on this, can you do that?? Ruf, who started the thread is on vacation. I'm going to check out some local Wyoming papers.
I'll keep looking. If this is true it is great. I'm just worried that it is a prank or one of those half truths that float around.
Let us know what you find and we will do the same.
Here is THREAD II: http://www.FreeRepublic.com/forum/a38863a83208e.htm
Since US District Court decisions have no value as a precident, most are not published. This may explain why you cannot find the cite. It is also why if you are ever involved in litigation and the other party cites a US District case, their argument is likely to be weak. That, plus attorneys have been know to even cite parts of the losing argument in a case, thinking the other side won't read the case they referred to. It has happened to me 2-3 times, and I nailed him to the wall. Just too bad the judge didn't seem to care since the other party's attorney is his buddy.
What is going to be intresting is how the feds attempt to get even. They are not going to take this sitting down. Their POWER BASE is at stake. We all need to watch this one very carefully and give all the support we can. Wouldn't it be nice if ALL the Sherrifs across the country took a the same view. Yes indeed it is SUPPORT YOUR LOCAL SHERRIF TIME !!!!!
_______________________________________________________________________________
Message: 5
Date: Sun, 16 Jan 2000 18:13:36 -0500 (EST)
From: True Patriot
Check out post #243, which I also recieved in my personal mail. What the heck is going on????
WE live in interesting times...
Before I discount this story I ask this question,"Who the hell is Michael69"
He can say any thing he wants,where is his proof that the story is false.
"What the heck is going on????"
Heck, I used to think I knew, but in the Age Of Clinton, I'm not so sure anymore.
FReegards...MUD
What county is Sheriff Mack from? Is he still Sheriff? And what do you think the chances are for the people to retain him as Sheriff?
"He was adament that he would work hand in glove with the feds because thats what he thinks a sheriff is 'supposed to do"
You should inform the guy that he has already been abused... He has been given false information with the intent of him unknowingly spreading the false information... OR, the guy is acting intentionally dishonest with the intent of sanctioning the federal government to harm citizens of that county.
Michael, I still want an answer. You gave a long detailed analysis...WHO is responsible for this "hoax"? Did you do any investigation other than just tearing apart this story?
Well, there is a real sheriff by that name. However, I searched several different data sites that have Federal court decisions and doucments and could find nothing on the case. I searched name and number. Now, I may be poor at searching, but I question the validity of the post. I question the wording in quotes attributed to the Court. I would vote "bogus" with all I know at this moment. I will entertain new information, but I think this smells more each day.
Now that the Feds and the States are in "bed" together -- colluding corruption -- take it a step lower to the County Sheriff. The closer the power resides to the people the more individual and property rights will be protected.
A lot of people want to forget there was a constitution that started this whole business. The radical centralized power promoters among them never envisioned more that one for federal official for every 40 state officials. They certainly all opposed a standing army, let alone standing private armies like the BATF. They all supported or participated in local militias with elected officers who were then endorsed by the state governments.
Three cheers for Wyoning and the Sheriffs.
Power to Protect Individual and Property Rights Launches Support For Sheriffs' Grass Roots Movement.
It seems to me that a Sheriff that supports the NRST (national retail sales tax) which includes abolishing the IRS would have recourse to protect the citizens of the county under his jurisdiction. The power to protect the people from IRS abuse. Unpaid taxes are debt and should not be considered a criminal offense.
Due to the close proximity to the people that elect a Sheriff, it puts greater pressure on a Sheriff to act in harmony with the people -- to act with moral integrity and honest ethics. In short, to protect the individual and their property -- protect and uphold individual rights.
Whereas the national media may be (is) corrupt, local media need not tow the federal government corrupt baggage. If not that, then each county could become a grass roots movement to uphold the power of the Sheriff over the federal government.
From there it becomes clear that state governors, senators and representatives would need to support the constitutional power of the Sheriff's office in order to keep their job or win the respective office.
About grass roots: think Internet and think local brick & mortar business. Think about the people being fed up with bloated, intrusive, oppressive BIG government. Think about how to protect the people -- protect individuals and their property from being over taxed and abused. Think about the people having more money by supporting their local Sheriff versus having less money when supporting federal government.
Perhaps the major failing of reeling in an out of control government is that the people feel (and think) it is out of their control. As if to say, "what can I do about it?" Actually they are right. At least on a federal level. And to much the same, on a state level.
Return power and control to the people via their elected Sheriff.
Also, corruption and cover-ups, in deed and degree, are less likely to occur in smaller populations. And when corruption does occur, spotting it and rectifying it can be much swifter.
Another positive is that Sheriffs do their jobs, for the most part, with higher moral standard and abide by a more honest integrity.
"You should inform the guy (candidate for Sheriff) that he has already been abused."
What I told him (on air) is that if he wants to run for an elected position he should first learn the duties of that office. I gave him the names of Sheriff Mattis, former Sheriff Richard Mack of Graham County, Arizona and defeated constitutionalist candidate for Maricopa County Sheriff, Jack McLamb as possible sources he might contact to review the facts.
Seems there may be a couple of agents provocateurs hanging around hereabouts.
At least there is one person on this thread who realizes that district court cases usually aren't published, esp. if the courts label it "not to be published or cited" which they certainly would in a case like this. - I'm sick and tired of all the hotheads on this forum who do not realize that the post was deliberately altered to make it look like a fake, and yet nobody questioned not a SINGLE BLOODY THING! If you want to see the original post go to - http://www.egroups.com/group/p-d-f/43.html? - and you'll see that Castaneda was the Sheriff who filed the suit along with Mattis and numberous other sheriffs. The original article was quoting Wyoming newspaper articles that are archived on the DOWJONES News Retrieval service. - If you want the name of the judge, call the courthouse yourself! I've got better things to do, like drumming up support for Hillary.
Even if a US District case was published,it still has no value as a precedent. The only people bound by a US District Court decision are the parties involved in that particular case. If one of those parties appeals and the Circuit Court of Appeals issues a written opinion, that becomes the law in all districts withing that circuit, but not in a district in another circuit. This is not difficult to figure out.
I saw this on William Cooper's web site here.
He has some rather interesting articles.
bump
bump
http://www.sierratimes.com/arjj072500.htm
Bump
bttt...
BTTT
BIG BUMP
You tell 'em Sheriff! Send those city boys packin'. (The citizens of Wyoming are! LOL)
Yep! Remember that ChEney is from Wyoming!
Dave Mattis for President!!!!!
BUMP
HUGE BUMP
I am not sure about this. I hope it is true, but I don't know. If it sounds to good to be true....?
But then you have the UNITED NATIONS. The treaties which the socialist lefties have signed will put sheriffs in their place. UNless we "take it back". Are you ready?
Even if a US District case was published,it still has no value as a precedent.
Not even close to true, nor is your claim about Appeals Court decisions. Every decision in any court, until overturned by a higher court becomes part of the case law on the subject. Another court, or party feeling differently is free to argue otherwise, and rule differently, and it can be appealed and if different appelate districts hold differently and it matters then the Supreme Court may decide to hear it and settle the issue. But it is precedent and disctrict court rulings are cited as precedent fairly frequently. It lets the judge know that others have seen the decision the same way you are hoping he will rule.
Wyoming kicks a** bump.
A decision that is published in a Federal Supplement is not binding on any other US District Court. the arguments found in them may be cited, but they are not binding. There is a huge difference in the legal effect. a decision in one Circuit is not binding on another circuit unless adopted by the USSC. A denial of Cert. by the USSC may be an indication that it enjoys possible support by the USSC, but is not conclusive until actually addressed in a USSC opinion.
Please show me the UCC. in the Constitution. Art 1 Section 8, Clause 17. Clearly shows the jurisdiction of the Federal Gov. and all alphabet agencies. Don
My comment was not addressing the consitution, it was merely correcting another posters misinterpretation of the precidential value of a US District Court decision, which if not affirmed by the Court of Appeals in its circuit, is only binding on the parties to that particular case.
HUGE BUMP
BUMP!
LARGE BUMP
BUMP AGAIN
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
[
Top
|
Latest Posts
|
Latest Articles
|
Self Search
|
Add Bookmark
|
Post
|
Abuse
|
Help!
]
FreeRepublic , LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794 Forum Version 2.0a Copyright © 1999 Free Republic, LLC |