U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Current Events
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 05-20-2014, 04:37 PM
 
Location: NM-CR
325 posts, read 398,402 times
Reputation: 220

Advertisements

In case you forgot - Mr Holder and most US attorneys are APPOINTED to serve at the leisure of the President.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 05-20-2014, 05:49 PM
 
473 posts, read 613,315 times
Reputation: 397
Did you actually read the politicalvelcraft article?

Under "How it really went down"...

"This Court has never issued an order which would serve to limit the lawful activities and duties of federal law enforcement officers and other federal employees in the District of Wyoming.
Furthermore, this Court has never made the comments attributed to it which purports to advise state officers they can prohibit federal law enforcement officers or agents from entering a Wyoming County. Those alleged quotations are utterly false.
Any person who interferes with federal officers in performance of their duties subjects themselves to the risk of criminal prosecution."
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-20-2014, 05:51 PM
 
473 posts, read 613,315 times
Reputation: 397
Also...

"While this is a significant precedent for local governments protecting their citizens from heavy-handed bureaucrats, Internet reports calling it a “court decision” and quoting the sheriff saying he can detain federal officials in custody are wrong, Mattis said."
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-21-2014, 08:40 PM
 
31,385 posts, read 31,138,372 times
Reputation: 14878
Quote:
Originally Posted by MattieJensen View Post
WRONGO!!!

November 09, 2011

"The US District Court ruled in favor of the sheriffs. In fact, they stated, Wyoming is a sovereign state and the duly elected sheriff of a county is the highest law enforcement official within a county and has law enforcement powers exceeding that of any other state or federal official.” Go back and re-read this quote.
The court confirms and asserts that “the duly elected sheriff of a county is the highest law enforcement official within a county and has law enforcement powers EXCEEDING that of any other state OR federal official. And you thought the 10th Amendment was dead and buried — not in Wyoming, not yet."
You mean this Federal judge?


.
This was a civil case arising out of an alleged entry into an apartment by law enforcement officials in June of 1993. The Plaintiffs, who were staying in the apartment, alleged that the officials violated their civil rights. They filed an action against the United States, unnamed INS agents, Big Horn County, the County Sheriff, and unnamed Sheriff's deputies.

The complaint was filed in the Federal District Court for the District of Wyoming in May, 1996. The federal defendants were primarily represented by attorneys with the Constitutional Torts Branch of the Civil Division of the Department of Justice.

The County defendants were represented by non-federal attorneys. The case was settled following a settlement conference in 1997. The court did not rule on Plaintiffs' claims or any other legal issues in the case. After the settlement conference, Big Horn County Sheriff, David M. Mattis, issued a "Policy." In the "Policy," the Sheriff purports to impose conditions upon federal law enforcement operations in the County.

We have learned that it has been reported, erroneously, that the court made a legal ruling in the Castaneda case regarding the authority of federal law enforcement officials to conduct operations in the County. There was no such ruling or decision. Instead, the court simply granted a motion, submitted jointly by all the parties, to dismiss the case because the parties had settled.

This Court has never issued an order which would serve to limit the lawful activities and duties of federal law enforcement officers and other federal employees in the District of Wyoming.

Furthermore, this Court has never made the comments attributed to it which purports to advise state officers they can prohibit federal law enforcement officers or agents from entering a Wyoming County. Those alleged quotations are utterly false.

Any person who interferes with federal officers in performance of their duties subjects themselves to the risk of criminal prosecution.


William F. Downes
Chief Judge, District of Wyoming
http://www.wyd.uscourts.gov/pdfforms/96cv99.pdf

You were saying?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-21-2014, 08:45 PM
 
31,385 posts, read 31,138,372 times
Reputation: 14878
Gee, if those county sheriff's are so powerful... why are they forced to comply with the orders of Federal judges?

Civil Rights Division Special Litigation Section Cases Page
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Current Events
Similar Threads
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2018, Advameg, Inc.

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top