Posted on 02/10/2015 6:43:07 AM PST by HomerBohn
The sheriff is the boss of his county. Period. There is no higher authority in law. Not State police, not feds, nobody.
Sheriffs is it.
If he leaves his county he’s toast. But he is the king of his county. Feds do not rule his county without his permission.
That’s how he can keep them out.
If he’s fair, he’s reelected.
Citation required. There are many - here is one:
http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/cgi-bin/getcase.pl?court=us&navby=case&vol=521&invol=898
Wages, salary, interest. Pretty much as it is defined in currrent tax law.
Dang! Makes me proud to say I grew up there. Carlsbad Senior High. ‘71.
Seems you've been studying a bit too.
mark for later
So the system would still be plagued by tax cheats who hide income.
And yet Sharpton, owing millions, goes about his merry way. Sowing lies and misery far and wide Along with ruining decent people’s lives.
Well, I think your sarcasm(I’m assuming) is lost through written words.
I agree. But on top of the “taxes” this paycheck....which are about 33-35% because half of my wage is taxed at 40%, they then took another 25% of the top of my take home pay. So it was quite a bit.
Your last paragraph is exemplary. See, I do not abhor the idea of taxes. I abhor the idea of being taxed to death, because of a corrupt, incompetent government cannot do their jobs correctly.
Maybe not Constitutionally, but in reality. Do you want to be the Federal agent that beats a local elected Sheriff to the ground and handcuffs him so the Feds can suck an old man dry for money? They have to be certain they are rock solid as opposed to just bludgeoning their way through the law
I agree but it sure looks like there will be no help from any Congress persons because I believe practically all, if not all, congress people somewhere in their background have had compromising deals. As of now I have written off the Issas, the Goudies, the McCains among them. I thought perhaps Sessions would be a ray of light but it appears he too has debts to pay off.
You have described about perfectly the nrst. The only difference is that nrst is designed to be revenue neutral the first year.
Bump.
Yes, as with any system of taxation at all. However a flat tax set at 9% would have the least of that, far less than the current system. “Paying under the table’ for reason of tax avoidance might not exist at all because the reduction of dollar income that goes with that would simply not be worth it That flat tax should be the entire income tax that goes to the FedGov, including Social Security. Social Security is an income tax and there is no longer even a pretence that it goes into a separate set aside fund. It is general tax revenue and benefits are paid out of generalrevenues.
Bookmark bump ^
It has already been noted in this thread that the US District Court of Wyoming has already basically stated that they never said or implied that a federal officer needs the sheriffs permission to conduct federal law enforcement. In fact, the court also stated that anyone who would impede federal law enforcement would be subject to prosecution.
There is no such thing as one size fits all when pertaining to the Office of Sheriff in this country. All fifty states have different laws when it comes to defining the power and duties of the office of sheriff although some responsibilities tend to stay the same such as enforcing the state laws and county ordinances, maintaining the jail and state law civil process. Some states do not even have the office of the sheriff.
You basically implied that the sheriff has no power if he leaves his county. Well in some states such as mine the sheriff can make arrests state wide although he is limited in authoritative operational jurisdiction in other counties. That is a perfect example of there is no one size fits all pertaining the sheriff because all fifty states have all different verbiage in their statutes or maybe Constitution regarding the sheriff.
He is not sole king of the county because there are county legislators which in my state are regarded as County Commissioners.
Depending on the state, the sheriff may be the highest STATE LAW enforcement officer. That is the major key there. He is not the highest FEDERAL LAW enforcement officer. Federal agents are the highest federal law enforcement officers in 100 percent of every county in this great nation of ours. When it comes to FEDERAL LAW the sheriff is legally trumped by federal agents in his county and he can in no wise legally impede federal agents from faithfully performing their federal duties in his county. That is how the rule of law works. If the sheriff could rule his county as he or she sees fit then he could also interpret state laws as he or she sees fit. Fortunately, that is not the case. The notion that a sheriff is the king of his county is a wannabe basically myth that has no basis in the rule of law of this country.
Thanks for engaging also. I enjoy a good debate.
The sheriff has supreme local authority except in specific cases where the supremacy clause of the Constitution grants that authority to the federal agent.
The feds can’t just come in and run over the sheriff except as noted above.
That’s why the feds stood down.
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.