Who decides what is unconstitutional, unjust, and evil?

An Associated Press article posted on Daily Kos discusses the current state of the constitutional sheriff movement. I haven’t discussed them in a while. The story begins with comments by Dar Leaf, who says, “The sheriff is supposed to be protecting the public from evil.” Also, he says sheriffs have a duty to “protect their citizens from the overreach of an out-of-control federal government” and to refuse to enforce any law they determine to be unconstitutional or unjust. And unjust laws are laws of tyranny. My first reaction on reading that was who decides what is unconstitutional, unjust, and evil? What I consider “evil” – such as guns so prevalent that schools must to active shooter drills, that masks to prevent the spread of COVID are targeted as an abomination, and claiming the nasty guy won the 2020 election – is quite different from what Sheriff Leaf considers as “evil.” The other half of what’s wrong with what Leaf said is deciding constitutionality of a law is not their job. Mary McCord, executive director of the Institute for Constitutional Advocacy and Protection at Georgetown University said:

They have no authority, not under their state constitutions or implementing statutes to decide what’s constitutional and what’s not constitutional. That’s what courts have the authority to do, not sheriffs.

The more recent developments are the Constitutional Sheriffs and Peace Officers Association has been holding training sessions, rallies, and meeting with law enforcement groups and political figures in 30 states. They are also getting supporters onto state boards in charge of law enforcement training standards. That gives their “training” an aura of approval. One more problem with CSPOA – the group, according to McCord,

is now essentially part of a broader movement in the United States to think it’s OK to use political violence if we disagree with some sort of government policy.

These sheriffs will gladly draw comparisons between themselves and civil rights protesters of the 1950s and ‘60s. They say they are also defying unjust laws. But there’s a big difference. The civil rights leaders, using the concept of non violent civil disobedience, were willing to take the consequences of disobeying an unjust law. These sheriffs are using violence to enforce what they believe the law should be. Kos of Kos discussed a CBS poll, specifically the question: Do you feel what they tell you is true? The story is about the answers from nasty guy voters. First a bit of background. Cults work hard to block their members from anyone that might pull them back to reality. This “disconnection” is described as removing obstacles to growth within the cult. Now to the results of the poll. 71% say that what the nasty guy tells them is true. 42% say what their religious leaders tell them is true. As much as I don’t like the direction conservative religions are going to have 42% nasty guy voters not trust religious leaders is scary. But that explains why so many of them now believe the commandment of Jesus to turn the other cheek is “weak,” as I mention a few days ago. Only 56% saying they feel conservative media is telling them the truth might be surprising, but the nasty guy has been bashing Fox News quite a bit lately. 63% of them feel their friends and family are telling them the truth, and that 36% don’t. Yeah, that’s action of a cult. Now back to the 71% who believe the nasty guy is telling the truth. That means 29%

of Trump voters don’t feel that Trump himself tells them the truth. That is, a significant portion of Trump’s own voters think he’s full of s---, and they still support him!

A couple more thoughts from the article. First, when Hurricane Michael devastated the Florida panhandle in 2019 nasty guy supporters weren’t upset the government had failed them. They expected that. They were upset he had failed them. Second, the only purpose of government they see is whether it is hurting the people they hate: immigrants, minorities, Democrats, city people, women, and college students. One is quoted as being upset with him because, “He’s not hurting the people he needs to be hurting.” Mark Sumner of Kos reported that the nasty guy is raking in lots of bucks for his “legal defense fund” – $250 million as of June 2022. Now that his actions and leadership has led to the indictment of 18 co-defendants none of that money is going to help them. Some of them are now complaining that the MAGA people, on whose behalf they sacrificed their career and perhaps freedom, are also not helping with defense funds. Which means they’re much more likely to cut a deal with the prosecutor to share what they know of the nasty guy in hopes of a reduced sentence. I now have twice as many posts mentioning the nasty guy (440) as I do mentioning President Obama (219) and more than four times as many posts that mention Biden (98), though he’ll be around for a while. Ah, for the time when the president was boring.