How so? Where do you find this doctrine?
Federal officers often act without the knowledge of a sheriff. So do state officers.
Sheriffs may be the highest law enforcement officer in their county. That does not give them a veto over other agencies, as far as I can see.
Please show me any legal document where they have such authority.
You can start here:
Printz v. United States, 521 U.S. 898 (1997)
Argued:
December 3, 1996
Decided:
June 27, 1997
Annotation
PRIMARY HOLDING
The federal government violated the Tenth Amendment when Congress required state and local officials to perform background checks on people buying guns.
Read More Mobile Navigation
Syllabus
OCTOBER TERM, 1996
Syllabus
PRINTZ, SHERIFF/CORONER, RAVALLI COUNTY, MONTANA v. UNITED STATES
CERTIORARI TO THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
No. 95-1478. Argued December 3, 1996-Decided June 27,1997*
Brady Handgun Violence Prevention Act provisions require the Attorney General to establish a national system for instantly checking prospective handgun purchasers’ backgrounds, note following 18 U. S. C. § 922, and command the “chief law enforcement officer” (CLEO) of each local jurisdiction to conduct such checks and perform related tasks on an interim basis until the national system becomes operative, § 922(s). Petitioners, the CLEOs for counties in Montana and Arizona, filed separate actions challenging the interim provisions’ constitutionality. In each case, the District Court held that the background-check provision was unconstitutional, but concluded that it was severable from the remainder of the Act, effectively leaving a voluntary background-check system in place. The Ninth Circuit reversed, finding none of the interim provisions unconstitutional.
Read More Mobile Navigation
Opinions
Opinions & Dissents
Hear Opinion Announcement - June 27, 1997