I guess I’m not surprised that you find sympathy for the constitutional sheriff proposition, since I’ve seen you write about your position on the 10th amendment before in this forum.
I’m out with my kid and my dog, so responses in this post will be a little off the cuff and without the article right in front of me.
The sheriff who is reported to have said “I am fucking God in this county” is not defending the Constitution against federal encroachment, he is on a power trip. Especially when his denial of that quote is based on an assertion that as a Christian he would never compare himself to God, rather than the substantive response which should be no one individual member of government holds absolute power.
any sheriff that thinks it is solely up to him or her to decide whether something is constitutional or not is ignoring the basic concept of separation of powers. The Authority to determine the parameters of what is constitutional and what is not is something that is left to the judiciary, and/or Congress, not to a member of the executive branch. It doesn’t matter whether or not that sheriff is doing what his constituents want him to do.
Lastly, for this post at least, most civil asset forfeiture abuses seem to be committed by local law-enforcement – people like the sheriff and sheriffs deputies. Is your primary complaint in the original article you posted that it was the feds who took this action? Would you be OK with a civil asset forfeiture of someone from out of town driving through a county where a sheriff effected the seizure, and the local constituents wanted him to do so ?
I’m out with my kid and my dog, so responses in this post will be a little off the cuff and without the article right in front of me.
The sheriff who is reported to have said “I am fucking God in this county” is not defending the Constitution against federal encroachment, he is on a power trip. Especially when his denial of that quote is based on an assertion that as a Christian he would never compare himself to God, rather than the substantive response which should be no one individual member of government holds absolute power.
any sheriff that thinks it is solely up to him or her to decide whether something is constitutional or not is ignoring the basic concept of separation of powers. The Authority to determine the parameters of what is constitutional and what is not is something that is left to the judiciary, and/or Congress, not to a member of the executive branch. It doesn’t matter whether or not that sheriff is doing what his constituents want him to do.
Lastly, for this post at least, most civil asset forfeiture abuses seem to be committed by local law-enforcement – people like the sheriff and sheriffs deputies. Is your primary complaint in the original article you posted that it was the feds who took this action? Would you be OK with a civil asset forfeiture of someone from out of town driving through a county where a sheriff effected the seizure, and the local constituents wanted him to do so ?