IP: Wyoming sheriffs impose severe limits on federal enforcers!

[shapj@us.ibm.com]

This is very off topic, for which I apologize, but it will be of interest
to most of the members of this list.

Jonathan S. Shapiro, Ph. D.
Research Staff Member
IBM T.J. Watson Research Center
Email: shapj@us.ibm.com
Phone: +1 914 784 7085  (Tieline: 863)
Fax: +1 914 784 6576


---------------------- Forwarded by Jonathan S Shapiro/Watson/IBM on
01/02/2000 04:07 PM ---------------------------

Dave Farber <farber@cis.upenn.edu>@admin.listbox.com on 01/02/2000 03:53:28
PM

Please respond to farber@cis.upenn.edu

Sent by:  owner-ip-sub-1@admin.listbox.com


To:   ip-sub-1@majordomo.pobox.com
cc:
Subject:  IP: Wyoming sheriffs impose severe limits on federal enforcers!




>Date: Sun, 2 Jan 2000 12:20:20 -0800
>To: Recipient List
Suppressed:;;;;Recipient.List.Suppressed:;@well.com;;;;;;;;
>From: Jim Warren <jwarren@well.com>
>
>A forward of a forward from a friend.  Source unknown; ACCURACY UNKNOWN
>(but it should be easy enough to check, since the U.S. District Court
>decision is cited).
>
>If true, it would seem to have some "interesting" potentials for *all*
>sorts of state control over federal enforcers and perhaps even federal
>surveillance operators -- IRS, DEA, NSA, FBI, BATF, Customs inspectors and
>collectors (Wyoming borders Canada), etc.
>
>--jim
>
> >     County sheriffs in Wyoming are insisting that all federal law
> enforcement
> >officers and personnel from federal regulatory agencies must clear all
their
> >activities in a Wyoming county with the Sheriff's Office.  Speaking at a
> press
> >conference following the recent US District Court decision (case No
2:96-cv-
> >099-J) Bighorn County Sheriff Dave Mattis stated that all federal
> >officials are
> >forbidden to enter his county without his prior approval.
> >
> >     "If a sheriff doesn't want the Feds in his county he has the con-
> >     stitutional power and right to keep them out or ask them to leave
> >     or retain them in custody."
> >
> >The court decision came about after Mattis & other members of the
Wyoming
> >Sheriffs' Association brought a suit against both the BATF and the IRS
> in the
> >Wyoming federal court district seeking restoration of the protections
> >enshrined
> >in the United States Constitution and the Wyoming Constitution.  The
> District
> >Court ruled in favor of the sheriffs, stating that,
> >
> >     "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."
> >
> >The Wyoming sheriffs are demanding access to all BATF files to verify
> >that the agency is not violating provisions of Wyoming law that prohibit
the
> >registration of firearms or the keeping of a registry of firearm
> owners.  The
> >sheriffs are also demanding that federal agencies immediately cease the
> >seizure
> >of private property and the impoundment of private bank accounts without
> >regard
> >to due process in state courts. Sheriff Mattis stated,
> >     "I am reacting to the actions of federal employees who have at-
> >     tempted to deprive citizens of my county of their privacy, their
> >     liberty, and their property without regard to constitutional
> >     safeguards. I hope that more sheriffs all across America will join
> >     us in protecting their citizens from the illegal activities of the
> >     IRS, EPA, BATF, FBI, or any other federal agency that is operating
> >     outside the confines of constitutional law. Employees of the IRS
> >     and the EPA are no longer welcome in Bighorn County unless they in-
> >     tend to operate in conformance to constitutional law."
> >
> >This case is evidence that the Tenth Amendment is not yet dead in the
> >United States.  It may also be interpreted to mean that political
> subdivisions
> >of a State are included within the meaning of the amendment, or that the
> >powers
> >exercised by a sheriff are an extension of those common law powers which
the
> >Tenth Amendment explicitly reserves to the People, if they are not
> granted to
> >the federal government and specifically prohibited to the States.
> >
> >
> >Case: Castaneda v. USA
> >Filed: 10th May 1996
> >Closed: 29th April 1997
> >
> >
> >Case No: 2:1996cv00099 Wyoming District Court, Casper
> >Nature of Suit: Civil Rights