Posted on 07/25/2002 9:12:59 AM PDT by CHUCKfromCAL
Critics worry about rights violations
By Owen S. Good, Rocky Mountain News, July 24, 2002
BOULDER - The city's police force will be strongly discouraged from cooperating with federal authorities who invoke the provisions of anti-terror legislation under a resolution passed by the City Council on Tuesday night.
The resolution changes law enforcement policy in Boulder very little, making it mostly a symbolic gesture, but one opponents of the USA PATRIOT Act consider necessary.They say the federal law, which greatly expands investigative powers to thwart terrorism, does so at the expense of individuals' constitutional rights.
"We see a lot of the PATRIOT Act that is a violation of the Constitution, and we want to be assured the Boulder Police Department does not cooperate with that," said Betty Ball of the Rocky Mountain Peace and Justice Center, part of a consortium that drafted the resolution. "We want to give courage to other cities and jurisdictions to pass similar resolutions."
Police Chief Mark Beckner endorsed the resolution, which was modified slightly with his input, Ball said.Beckner said it shouldn't create a stir in the force's relationship with the FBI, however.
"I don't have the opinion that the FBI operates outside the Constitution, either," Beckner said. "Were they to do that, obviously we wouldn't participate in it. But in my workings with the FBI locally, we've not had any problems."
Joe Pelle, commander of detectives, said the FBI has not asked for Boulder's cooperation in the investigation of anyone under the USA PATRIOT Act since it was passed Oct. 26.Six other American municipalities, beginning in January with Ann Arbor, Mich., have passed resolutions specifically condemning the USA PATRIOT Act. Most are university communities with a tradition of activism similar to Boulder's.
In unrelated business Tuesday night, the City Council was expected to approve agreements with Linda P. Cooke and Christine F. Andersen to serve as municipal judge and acting city manager, respectively.
Cook will be paid $85,000 a year, beginning Aug. 4; Andersen, currently the deputy city manager, would be paid $132,500 annually and be guaranteed her former position once a permanent manager is hired.
Andersen will replace Ron Secrist, who is stepping down in August to become president of the Boulder Community Hospital Foundation.
goodo@rockymountainnews.com or (303)442-8729
Because the federal government has usurped powers of law enforcement and taxation that Constitutionally belong to the states? Because the powers that are not explicitly granted to the federal government belong to the state or individuals, not vice-versa?
True, but it appears that Boulder wants to be independent when it comes to cooperating. Sort of like a 17 year old that thinks he’s an adult and can do whatever he wants now – even though he thinks he’ll do it while living in his parents home. You can try, I suppose, but it comes at a price.
In this case there should be no more federal funding for highways, schools, after-school programs, health care, parks, business development, maintenance of infrastructure, environmental clean up, agriculture, law enforcement or anything else. Not just for Boulder, but for the state of Colorado. Then the state can lean on the city and they will fall right in line.
It shouldn’t be a big deal because the Constitution doesn’t specify federal subsidies for healthcare, for instance, anyway. They like independence, they get it 100%, not half-assed independence where they refuse to cooperate while keeping their mouth on the teat... I know it won't happen but it should.
Does this mean we can relieve the federal government of the burden of federal taxation to support these unconstitutional activities?
They don't care about constitutional rights - it's a joke. They are emoting for Arab terrorists, who symbolize for them anti-Americanism, and thus need be protected.
Yes! But good luck doing it.
This type of thing irritates me to no end. We have a bunch of these type people around here that want to buck the system and show their independence but they have their hand out the entire time. Usually that hand ends up with some amount of my money in it somehow. They remind me quite a bit of a certain brother-in-law...
They make me cranky, among other things.
Up yours, buddy. Our State and its cities will make their own decisions, and if the feds want to withold funds, we'll stop sending our money to the feds in the first place.
I can understand the sentiment. I say that cooperation with law enforcement on this issue is something you can do enthusiastically or something you can do reluctantly but it is a courtesy that WILL be extended none the less.
Aside from witholding money I could also see a dandy new national park, or parks, roughly the size and shape of Colorado. It is important to protect such a beautiful wilderness area. I'm sure you understand.
And the primary reason I'd do it would not be because the folks in charge are doing something on principle, it's because they are being wise asses, IMO - just like the nuts in Portland, San Francisco, Berkeley, and other places too.
Don't worry too much though - that's what I'd do. Fortunately, or not - whatever, I'm not in a position to do it and the people that are haven't asked for my advice lately. Or ever, for that matter.
You've obviously never heard of Rocky Mountain National Park. I'd love to see the feds come to Colorado and raize the towns and cities; that would be just the thing to spark the kind of popular revolt against federal tyranny that this country has needed for the last seventy years or more...
Good for you! And while you are marshalling the troops, re-read your copy of the Constitution... especially the section that covers the City Council and their powers to act as the Judicial branch when they take a notion. I'll summarize it tomorrow.
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.