Replies

Not trying to sound like a “negative nancy” here to use an old expression but in all technicality sheriffs have no authority over federal agents who are carrying out their federal duties. Sheriffs derive their authority and power from their respective state constitution and/or state statute. In fact, sheriffs in one state might might have more authority and power than a sheriff would have in another state. Since the sheriff is technically not a federal empowered official, he or she has no lawful purview or authority over a federal agent carrying out federal duties. A federal agent does have lawful authority to arrest a sheriff in a hypothetical situation if a sheriff interferes or tries to impede a federal agent faithfully carrying out their duties. I know that it might be an unpopular opinion amongst fellow conservatives but that is how the law actually works and not some claim that sheriffs magically have total authority in their jurisdiction even over the feds. The Supreme Court ruled that the feds cannot compel local authorities to enforce federal law. That does not change the fact that the feds have full Congressional authority to enforce federal law without interference.

I would argue that a federal agent acting outside the Enumerated Powers can lawfully be resisted by a local sheriff. In fact, the Bill of Rights makes this clear:

"The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people."

and

"The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people."

You are probably right, but history tells us that local authorities have stood up to federal authorities, usually when the fed is corrupt. I suspect federal Marshall are none too happy evicting tenants of a rental property and throwing them out on the street. This is probably why they did not arrest the Sherrif.

It is amazing to me the enormous power the IRS has when collecting debt. The reason is the result of giving the government the right to tax income. By doing so, personal income is no longer your property and not subject to due process. Scary when you think of taxes from this perspective.

Not trying to sound like a “negative nancy” here to use an old expression but in all technicality sheriffs have no authority over federal agents who are carrying out their federal duties.

Several things; the Constitution guarantees that:

No person shall […] be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law (amd 5),
In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury of the State and district wherein the crime shall have been committed (amd 6), and
Excessive bail shall not be required, nor excessive fines imposed (amd 8)

What the IRS/courts/marshals are doing flies in the face of all of those.

Sheriffs derive their authority and power from their respective state constitution and/or state statute.

And federal agents from the Constitution for the United States.
Not all federal laws are legitimate; only those which qualify under This Constitution, and the Laws of the United States which shall be made in Pursuance thereof;, the 9th and 10th amendments make it clear that most of the laws/agencies/rules/regulations are, in fact, illegitimate. (The War on Drugs is a stellar example: most of it is founded on re-imagining the commerce clause to mean that the federal government can dictate trade within a state and case law stemming from the repealed 18th amendment.)

In fact, sheriffs in one state might might have more authority and power than a sheriff would have in another state. Since the sheriff is technically not a federal empowered official, he or she has no lawful purview or authority over a federal agent carrying out federal duties. A federal agent does have lawful authority to arrest a sheriff in a hypothetical situation if a sheriff interferes or tries to impede a federal agent faithfully carrying out their duties.

Again: 5th, 6th, and 8th amendments.

” A federal agent does have lawful authority to arrest a sheriff in a hypothetical situation if a sheriff interferes or tries to impede a federal agent faithfully carrying out their duties. “

A federal agent has no more authority than a sheriff. A sheriff who sees a federal agent violating someone’s civil rights may indeed prevent that agent from his unlawful action. The sheriff may interfere all day long. And for extra fun, Federal agents do not have exemption from traffic laws.
Feds are accustomed to bending rules, and using intimidation. A sheriff may stop them and arrest them if he pleases.
The only time a Fed ever arrests a sheriff is if they are committing a crime, like dope, bribery, etc.
If you are right, tell us the last time the feds arrested a sheriff for simply impeding them?

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.