Free Republic
Browse · Search
Bloggers & Personal
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Fact CheckóCNN's Blitzer: Sheriffs Can't Defy Executive Orders
Breitbart's Big Journalism ^ | February 1, 2013 | Ken Klukowski

Posted on 02/01/2013 11:53:11 PM PST by 2ndDivisionVet

Discussing gun control, CNN's Wolf Blitzer on Friday told a Utah sheriff that if Barack Obama issues an executive order, that order is the law and the sheriff must obey. However, jurisprudence on this topic reveals exactly the opposite.

As the head of the executive branch of the federal government, a president can issue executive orders only to employees of the federal government—and only regarding implementing federal laws or programs. A governor can likewise issue executive orders to employees of his state government regarding the laws or programs of that state.

Every sheriff is a county officer, elected by the voters of that county...

(Excerpt) Read more at breitbart.com ...


TOPICS: Conspiracy; Government; Politics
KEYWORDS: banglist; cnn; gunconfiscation; guncontrol; leo; obama; secondamendment; utah
Watch them federalize all police forces.
1 posted on 02/01/2013 11:53:25 PM PST by 2ndDivisionVet
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: 2ndDivisionVet
"Sheriffs Can't Defy Executive Orders"

Sure they can. So can ordinary people. Hence the existance of the word "Defy" and "Defiance".

2 posted on 02/02/2013 12:12:26 AM PST by Casie (Chuck Norris 2016)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: 2ndDivisionVet

Was Wolf a Contestant on Jeopardy again?

I’ll take Executive Orders for a $1000 Alex...


3 posted on 02/02/2013 12:15:15 AM PST by Kickass Conservative (I only Fear a Government that doesn't Fear me.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Casie

If you are a federal official of any type...even a forest ranger...than you have to obey Presidential executive orders.

If you are a state official...even a state forestry official, then you have to obey the governor’s executive orders.

Beyond that, the two shall never meet. A state official of any type...is not bound by the President’s executive orders...end of the story.

When you look at your local sheriff or city police chief...he’s bound by law (city, county, state, or federal), and that is the limit. Executive orders...are a totally different ballgame, and it’s obvious that news people are the last people on the Earth that you want to get advice from.

What makes the current picture a bit comical is that the President is now telling various federal agencies not to obey the law, and they are carrying out this directive. Why bother even meeting and passing any laws at the federal level...at Congress or the Senate....if they can’t be obeyed?


4 posted on 02/02/2013 12:32:41 AM PST by pepsionice
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: 2ndDivisionVet
Wolf Blitzer on Friday told a Utah sheriff that if Barack Obama issues an executive order, that order is the law and the sheriff must obey.

Obey King Obama, insists the Wolf.

5 posted on 02/02/2013 12:36:06 AM PST by Ezekiel (The Obama-nation began with the Inauguration of Desolation.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: 2ndDivisionVet

Wolf was getting his wet dream confused with reality again. It happens a lot with him.


6 posted on 02/02/2013 12:44:58 AM PST by ArmstedFragg (hoaxy dopey changey)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: 2ndDivisionVet

Geeze, when did journalists become so ignorant? I knew most of them were not the brightest bulbs on the tree, but this blatant ignorance is almost embarrassing.


7 posted on 02/02/2013 12:46:41 AM PST by McGavin999
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: 2ndDivisionVet

Maybe it is time for a whole bunch of jury nullification, in reference to gun control.


8 posted on 02/02/2013 12:58:17 AM PST by Mark17 (California, where English is a foreign language)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: pepsionice
Cool. Good info.

My view is simply Blitzer is an idiot. The word "defy" means to challenge, to confront, to resist, or disregard. Making a statement claiming a sheriff or anyone else can't defy something is asinine. Its like saying, "I order you to follow orders!" My response would of course be, "Good luck with that." Sure people may be fired or even arrested but no person HAS to follow an executive order.

I should photoshop a picture a Blitzer going around beeping and repeating, "Resistance is futile. Resistance is futile."

No, my little obama-bot blitzer, resistance is not futile at all. Its fun and makes ya feel good. All the cool kids are doing it.

9 posted on 02/02/2013 1:40:10 AM PST by Casie (Chuck Norris 2016)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: 2ndDivisionVet

Wolf is getting older and a little... confused.
Like CNN, it’s time for Wolf to fade away with some dignity.


10 posted on 02/02/2013 1:44:19 AM PST by Lancey Howard
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Mark17
Maybe it is time for a whole bunch of jury nullification, in reference to gun control.

I agree 100%, and that idea needs to be discussed in the open often enough that it's at the top of every patriotic American's mind. Just as the judge could do nothing (beyond hoping OJ would some day find the real killer) when the jury acquitted OJ Simpson of murder charges despite overwhelming evidence, a judge in a Second Amendment case can do nothing if the jury acquits on an unjust law despite the facts. The judge can give jury instructions, but the jury can ignore those instructions.

At least for now, the socialists can't convict without 12 out of 12 votes for conviction. Even in may cities, the odds are pretty good of getting at least one free American on the jury. As far as I'm concerned, there is no moral obligation to deal honestly with kidnappers, rapists, terrorists, pirates, or others who put our lives, our freedom, and our safety in danger. Those who enforce immoral and unconstitutional laws are in the same category - we have no moral obligation to deal honestly with them. In a Second Amendment case, I will show no interest in firearms during questioning, nor will I show any predispositions either way. Once on the jury, I will follow my military oath to "support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same." That oath had no expiration date.

11 posted on 02/02/2013 2:23:27 AM PST by Pollster1
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: 2ndDivisionVet

Doesn’t the exec order become a law in ninety days? The process is vague, but we are just days away from this on gun control.


12 posted on 02/02/2013 2:27:47 AM PST by momincombatboots (Back to West by G-d Virginia.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: momincombatboots
I thought that too - but the Free Legal Dictionary says:

Similarly, the courts generally reject claims against private defendants for violations of executive orders. For example, in Cohen v. Illinois Institute of Technology, 524 F.2d 818 (7th Cir. 1975), 425 U.S. 943, 96 S. Ct. 1683, 48 L. Ed. 2d 187 (1976), the appellate court denied a professor's claim against a university to recover damages for Sex Discrimination in violation of Executive Order No. 11,246, stating that the executive order could not give rise to an independent private cause of action.

13 posted on 02/02/2013 3:33:45 AM PST by Ken522
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: Lancey Howard

Too late - for both.


14 posted on 02/02/2013 3:39:12 AM PST by Bob
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: 2ndDivisionVet
Just like Zer0 and H0lder, we are all empowered to just obey the laws/rulz we want to and to ignore/flaunt the others.

The Rule of Law is dead.

15 posted on 02/02/2013 3:39:55 AM PST by Paladin2
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: 2ndDivisionVet

Didn’t know Obama appointed Blitzer to the Supreme Court ... They used to run their stuff before a battery of lawyers before they ran their mouth off judging by the defication and lies NBC, ABC, CBS and CNN are issuing they don’t do that any more ...NBC is soon going to learn better big time very soon..


16 posted on 02/02/2013 3:46:33 AM PST by mosesdapoet ("It's a sin to tell a lie", in telling others that , got me that nickname ......)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: momincombatboots
Doesn’t the exec order become a law in ninety days?

If that were the case, why would we need a "Congress"?

We could just have the President issue Royal Decrees.

17 posted on 02/02/2013 3:47:52 AM PST by DuncanWaring (The Lord uses the good ones; the bad ones use the Lord.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: momincombatboots
Doesn’t the exec order become a law in ninety days?

No. Executive orders are administrative instructions to executive branch agencies, such as, "Do not leave the toilet seat up in your agency office."

Congress legislates.

The executive branch executes.

The judicial branch judges.

Theoretically.

18 posted on 02/02/2013 3:50:24 AM PST by meadsjn
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: meadsjn

And federal employees are only subject to executive orders in the context of employment. They can be fired for disobeying those orders, but they can’t be arrested for leaving the toilet seat up.


19 posted on 02/02/2013 4:00:04 AM PST by BykrBayb (Somewhere, my flower is there. ~ √ě)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: pepsionice
When you work for USPS, a US gub'mnt agency, according to law no Executive Order applies to you except if the law for which it is providing guidance mentions the USPS in the list of federal agencies governed by the law.

What that means is, that in general, an EO has not heretofor been considered part of the law, but rather is subordinate to the law in all respects. EOs have always been limited to the empty space between two or more provisions of law that appear to be in conflict, and without which neither or all could be administered.

An example was Post Office Department employee annual and sick leave rules versus those applicable in the rest off the federal government. There were laws establishing the fact all employees earned leave, but no law had been passed regarding the carriage of post offfice leave to a federal job, or vice versa. Rather, Civil Service Commission rules provided that you couldn't bring post office leave with you into the federal government agencies, but post office rules allowed federal government agency employees to bring leave but not seniority into the post oice ~ but both rules were different yet for sick leave and annual leave ~ and even today they are diferent.

I worked for the fellow at the Post Office Department who got Truman to write one EO to fix part of the conflict. He later on prevailed on IKE to write another EO to fix another part, and finally won a Civil Service case to fix even more of the problem. There were several other steps he took to get the two rules into some degree of consistency, e.g. when former railway post office guys went to the federal government, and then back to the post office (a different agency) did they get to keep seniority?

Fellow had a nice scrap book on all of these weighty matters but I think I've pretty well covered the extent of authority of an EO and what it's used for. These things aren't even federal regulations that require publication in the Federal Register ~ although most Presidential staffs do arrange for that to be done anyway!

Obama and his crowd, for the most part, were never in federal government jobs where the EO process had any relevance ~ most of them seem to be the dregs from public interest law firms, or the non-profit world. These aren't real jobs that have to deal with real public policy or processes. They came up with this idea of EOs being something a President could issue to make things happen out of thin air.

There's another item out there of more modern etiology. The Presidential Signing Statement has recently received notice simply because Democrats didn't like what George Bush was saying in them. All these statements had provided in the past was some of the President's thoughts on the topic covered in the law ~ and maybe a few items that'd be more appropriate in an EO ~ but by putting them in the PSS they'd get published with the signed or unsigned bill in the federal register.

As students of history recall one day the Merovingians Empire woke up to the fact they had a completely new regime created by a "Mayor of the Palace". This phenomenon was NOT new, though, and is a recurring theme in human history ~ an assistant to the stable master becomes the king, or a minor regulatory matter becomes the cause of war, etc. It is a rational fear on the part of educated men that the Executive Order or the Presidential Signing Document becomes the sole source off guidance for the federal bureaucracy and the military, and the law itself becomes something ignored as a matter of course.

We are, of course, well on our way. Harry Reid has substituted the back of his hand, where he writes notes, for the United States budget or example. This makes Obama's use of EOs seem far less peculiar to the uninformed.

20 posted on 02/02/2013 4:07:31 AM PST by muawiyah
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: McGavin999

With journalists, blatant ignorance is not the order. Propaganda is! Tell the liberal lie every time they open their mouths and that is all the low information crowd knows.

ergo,the lie is now the truth.


21 posted on 02/02/2013 4:32:54 AM PST by Big Mack (I didn't claw my way to the top of the food chain to eat VEGETABLES!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: 2ndDivisionVet

I thought this was settled at the Neuremburg trials.

An Executive Order from Hitler (Obama) that was an illegal order could not be used to excuse the Holocaust.

I was ordered to murder those people could not ne used as an excuse.

An Executive order from Obama cannot supercede the Constitution.

I know he is doing it, and I know the Supreme Court under Roberts is allowing it, but it is up to us to stop it, hence the 2nd. Amendment.


22 posted on 02/02/2013 4:59:25 AM PST by Venturer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: 2ndDivisionVet

Der Deutchzkrautlander ist vrong!


23 posted on 02/02/2013 5:02:51 AM PST by righttackle44 (Take scalps. Leave the bodies as a warning.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: McGavin999
“Geeze, when did journalists become so ignorant?”

Actually, they have always been ignorant. That's why they asked questions, to learn and to pass on what they learned.

Now days, they are stupid. Like the politicians they cover, they think they know it all and just ask questions to reinforce their “knowledge”.

Ignorant is just a lack of knowledge, You can still learn.
Stupid is terminal.

24 posted on 02/02/2013 5:04:54 AM PST by Tupelo (Hunkered down & loading up)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: 2ndDivisionVet

Fact Check: Government officials have a duty to defy an unlawful order.

That was pretty much established at Nuremberg.


25 posted on 02/02/2013 5:05:20 AM PST by Skepolitic
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Tupelo

Next candidates for national offices need to totally discredit and ignore the media. Tell the low informed: “you cannot rely on them”, “reject them”, “they are deceiving you” and “you need to think and feel these issues for yourself, not elitists in DC”.


26 posted on 02/02/2013 5:14:00 AM PST by ReaganGeneration2
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: 2ndDivisionVet
My God these elite media people are stupid. I'm just an under educated, under informed Fox News watcher (to the MSM) but even I know that a President cannot legally command anyone outside the Executive Branch, whether they are in a governmental position or not.

As an example, he cannot demand that I turn down my thermostat by two degrees (nor can he legally send someone to tell me that). He cannot command a local police officer to shoot someone that displeases him, although I'm sure he and his liberal running dogs think he can and wish that he would.

27 posted on 02/02/2013 5:34:32 AM PST by Hardastarboard (The Liberal ruling class hates me. The feeling is mutual.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: 2ndDivisionVet
Discussing gun control, CNN's Wolf Blitzer on Friday told a Utah sheriff that if Barack Obama issues an executive order, that order is the law and the sheriff must obey. However, jurisprudence on this topic reveals exactly the opposite.

I think Wolf, like our Kenyan president, view Executive orders as King's Edicts. Opposing the order means opposing the King. I'm surprised Wolf didn't say the Sheriff was liable for the death penalty.

28 posted on 02/02/2013 5:35:01 AM PST by Hacksaw
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: 2ndDivisionVet

Where is CNN’s legal Jeffery Tuna when you need him?


29 posted on 02/02/2013 5:38:13 AM PST by Hattie
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: 2ndDivisionVet

Wolfie doesn’t seem to understand that the oaths are to the Constitution first and then to those put over you. If an order/law is illegal/unconstitutional, then it is everyone’s DUTY to disobey.


30 posted on 02/02/2013 5:50:00 AM PST by trebb (Allies no longer trust us. Enemies no longer fear us.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: righttackle44

Despite his Luftwaffe-ace sounding name, Wolf Blitzer is in fact Jewish.

Telling that local sheriff that a POTUS’ word is law amounts to cheerleading for FASCISM. And the world knows what happened to the Jews because someone “was only following orders” from the head of state.

He needs to get his Constitutional facts straight & learn a little more history.


31 posted on 02/02/2013 5:54:56 AM PST by elcid1970 ("The Second Amendment is more important than Islam.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: trebb

As the French could have told you some German people are hereditarily neo-nazis and totalitarians. Wolf is simply in the wrong country in the wrong century. Don’t listen to him.


32 posted on 02/02/2013 5:56:19 AM PST by muawiyah
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: 2ndDivisionVet

Discussing gun control, CNN's Wolf Blitzer on Friday told a Utah sheriff that if Barack Obama issues an executive order, that order is the law and the sheriff must obey.

Maybe Wolf should try a game show more aligned to his intellect - like one of those Japanese game shows!


33 posted on 02/02/2013 6:05:29 AM PST by COBOL2Java (Fighting Obama without Boehner & McConnell is like going deer hunting without your accordion)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: McGavin999

“Geeze, when did journalists become so ignorant? I knew most of them were not the brightest bulbs on the tree, but this blatant ignorance is almost embarrassing.”

I admire the way the Brits refer to “journalists” like the Wolfboy with the more accurate term “News Readers.”

No intelligence required to be a News Reader.


34 posted on 02/02/2013 6:31:14 AM PST by paterfamilias
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: Paladin2; Mark17

Let em say what they want...this B.S. is going to be ignored even more than the Volstead act was.


35 posted on 02/02/2013 7:28:16 AM PST by 45semi (A police state is always preceded by a nanny state...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: Hattie

“Where is CNN’s legal Jeffery Tuna when you need him?”

CNN’s “Tuna” was last seen slathered with mayo - and don’t ask further unless your gag reflex is under strict control.


36 posted on 02/02/2013 7:35:54 AM PST by GladesGuru (In a society predicated upon freedom, it is necessary to examine principles."..)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: Casie

Yep, States can defy EO’s with nullification and local Sheriff’s answer to their county constituents. I think in the very near future we are going to see a whole lot of nullifyin goin on.


37 posted on 02/02/2013 7:51:47 AM PST by Georgia Girl 2 (The only purpose of a pistol is to fight your way back to the rifle you should never have dropped.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: 2ndDivisionVet

The whole notion of federalism and devolving power away from the federal government is totally lost on liberals like Blitzer. It doesn’t even occur to them.


38 posted on 02/02/2013 8:19:46 AM PST by Yardstick
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: 2ndDivisionVet

thanks


39 posted on 02/02/2013 9:12:55 AM PST by phockthis (http://www.supremelaw.org/fedzone11/index.htm ...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: 2ndDivisionVet

Obama defies court orders claiming who is going to force him to obey, so, why can’t a Sheriff claim the same thing? Besides, screw with our Sheriffs and it won’t matter if we like him or not, we just hate the feds and would stand with him.


40 posted on 02/02/2013 9:34:23 AM PST by CodeToad (Liberals are bloodsucking ticks. We need to light the matchstick to burn them off.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: momincombatboots

“Doesn’t the exec order become a law in ninety days?”

Nope. An Executive Order carries NO additional legal weight of any kind.

An Executive Order is simply something he writes down, but all of his orders, verbal or written, are Executive Orders. The President can simply verbally state what he wants his staff to do.

Also, he ONLY commands his staff and ONLY within the confines of the law as passed by the Congress.


41 posted on 02/02/2013 9:39:42 AM PST by CodeToad (Liberals are bloodsucking ticks. We need to light the matchstick to burn them off.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: Skepolitic
Skepolitic said: "Government officials have a duty to defy an unlawful order."

I think the Nuremberg experience goes even further. Lawful or not, government officials have a duty to defy orders which are inherently evil. Passing a law in Germany to authorize killing of Jews did not in any way justify obedience to such laws.

The movie Judgement at Nuremberg depicts the trials of some of the court judges. They were convicted of having OBEYED unjust laws.

42 posted on 02/02/2013 10:15:36 AM PST by William Tell
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: 2ndDivisionVet

Media writing the rules again


43 posted on 02/02/2013 10:42:00 AM PST by The Mayor ("If you can't make them see the light, let them feel the heat" ¬ó Ronald Reagan)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: pepsionice
"If you are a federal official of any type...even a forest ranger...than you have to obey Presidential executive orders."

Technically speaking it's more restrictive than that. The President is the head of the executive branch. His orders pertain to the executive branch only i.e. the cabinet departments and their underling agencies, bureaus, etc.

EOs have (or should have) no bearing on Legislators, their staffs, Federal Judges and their clerks, etc.

Granted the overwhelming majority of fedgov employees are in the executive department, and certainly not to private citizens.

44 posted on 02/02/2013 10:49:55 AM PST by Joe 6-pack (Que me amat, amet et canem meum)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: 2ndDivisionVet

Cnn’s finest proves just how ignorant and gullible they are no wonder all their reports sound the same.


45 posted on 02/02/2013 10:51:52 AM PST by Vaduz
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: CodeToad

So the Jap- Amercans who went to camps were... illegal, or a figment of hysterical history.
?


46 posted on 02/04/2013 1:57:11 PM PST by momincombatboots (Back to West by G-d Virginia.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 41 | View Replies]

To: CodeToad

So the Jap- Amercans who went to camps were... illegal, or a figment of hysterical history.
?


47 posted on 02/04/2013 1:57:15 PM PST by momincombatboots (Back to West by G-d Virginia.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 41 | View Replies]

To: momincombatboots

Non-sequitur. The federal government ran the program but in no way forced any Sheriff to comply. Any compliance was voluntary. Try again. This time, try to pick something you actually know something about.


48 posted on 02/04/2013 2:00:08 PM PST by CodeToad (Liberals are bloodsucking ticks. We need to light the matchstick to burn them off.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 46 | View Replies]

To: CodeToad

A Sheriff is also capable of deputizing and arming large segments of his county population. I, for one, would be happy to serve my county should the need arise.


49 posted on 02/04/2013 3:02:13 PM PST by ez (Laws only apply to little people. Criminals, politicians, and newsies are exempt.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 40 | View Replies]

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Bloggers & Personal
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson