No, they don't. Local police officers and sheriffs do not answer to him. They answer to local officials and the courts. the courts said they are to enforce their order, and they said they would, directly, to the state law enforcement coming. Not wanting to have a civil war over it, they backed off, as they should have. Saying that Jeb, because you or someone else says so, should go beyond that and order officers to shoot other officers to save one woman is unreasonable.
People act like Jeb could stop all of this. He couldn't. He didn't even have the backing of the state senate. It would have a been a disaster.
Stop acting like this is some kind of computer game where you can just order people around. There are laws to follow and even if you want to overrule a court, you have to have more people with you than just you and some state police. When the legislature, the people themselves (who would have disapproved of a firefight over Terri), and the courts are all against you, its time to back down.
You are wrong, they do not answer to the courts (for crying out loud, the executive branch is ruled by the *executive*, not the judiciary!), and they are not independent. Are you really meaning to tell me that states are a confederation of counties? What local constitution do county police officers enforce, may I ask? How does a county go about petitioning for membership to a state?
Your assertion is absurd. The American constitution reserves powers to the federal government and to the states ONLY. Read it. There is no power reserved for counties, or cities, or any other subdivisions. States excercise absolute authority over their localities and the people of those localities except where prohibited by federal law, which supercedes state law.
There is one executive branch in the state of Florida and Jeb Bush is chief. Please point me out to the article of the U.S. or Florida consitution that would provide for another, indepedent executive. I'm waiting.
"Saying that Jeb, because you or someone else says so, should go beyond that and order officers to shoot other officers to save one woman is unreasonable."
Yay, for strawmen arguments! Do kindly direct me to where I said anything of the like.
As I have established, the officers in question are under Jeb's authority. If they refuse to respond to executive orders, they should be decommissioned as officers. I don't see where shooting them comes in.
"People act like Jeb could stop all of this. He couldn't. He didn't even have the backing of the state senate. It would have a been a disaster."
Disaster or not, all I'm saying is that it is within his executive capacity.
"Stop acting like this is some kind of computer game where you can just order people around. "
I have news for you, it's Jeb's *job* to order people around, and if you refuse to recognize the extent of his executive powers than you are simply being willfully ignorant of reality.
"There are laws to follow and even if you want to overrule a court, you have to have more people with you than just you and some state police. When the legislature, the people themselves (who would have disapproved of a firefight over Terri), and the courts are all against you, its time to back down."
First of all, you don't back down from what you think is right, regardless of whether the entire rest of the world is against. Second of all, when I have I *once* argued that Jeb *should* act in defiance of the courts? All I've argued is the simple fact that he has the power as governor to intervene.