Political Ramblings

[hemet dennis]

Officially, it is the job of the Supreme Court and lesser courts to rule on the constitutionality of laws. Soldiers are expected to know what constitutes an unlawful order, which includes things like torture and treatment of prisoners. That being said, a soldier better be darn sure that s/he knows what they are doing when they resist an order. I think that part of swearing in for the military and many elected officials include supporting the Constitution.

You get into trouble when the local sheriff says that he believes that it is unconstitutional for black people to vote, or for people to wear pro-whatever t-shirts to the anti-whatever political rally. It gets tricky when the local sheriff realizes that people as hateful as Westboro Baptist Church has the same rights for assembly as do any other group. It also gets tricky when multiple jurisdictions have different ideas of what is constitutional. In the recent Affordable Care Act/ObamaCare court cases, different lower courts ruled various parts of the law both constitutional and un-constitutional. The final say comes from the Supreme Court. Once they have ruled, only another challenge can change the law.

There are entire legal specialties called "contitutional law".

Just remember you can be charged and imprisoned for following/enforcing an order/law that is found to be unlawful.
"I was just following orders" is not a defense. So everyone has to decide if what they do is lawful or not.
So the Sheriff can use his judgment enforcing any order/law.

 

[rebelcowboysnb]

Officially, it is the job of the Supreme Court and lesser courts to rule on the constitutionality of laws. Soldiers are expected to know what constitutes an unlawful order, which includes things like torture and treatment of prisoners. That being said, a soldier better be darn sure that s/he knows what they are doing when they resist an order. I think that part of swearing in for the military and many elected officials include supporting the Constitution.

You get into trouble when the local sheriff says that he believes that it is unconstitutional for black people to vote, or for people to wear pro-whatever t-shirts to the anti-whatever political rally. It gets tricky when the local sheriff realizes that people as hateful as Westboro Baptist Church has the same rights for assembly as do any other group. It also gets tricky when multiple jurisdictions have different ideas of what is constitutional. In the recent Affordable Care Act/ObamaCare court cases, different lower courts ruled various parts of the law both constitutional and un-constitutional. The final say comes from the Supreme Court. Once they have ruled, only another challenge can change the law.

There are entire legal specialties called "contitutional law".

Until the courts have made a ruling it is the job of the sheriff to interpret the law on the street. He has to watch what happens in the courts though. He has to adhere to current case law. He also has to go threw the lower courts to do some things. But the main thing is as long has he is withing current case law, his interpretation of new laws it unless the courts step in with a desist order or the courts make a ruling interpreting that law.

 

[Capvin]

Just remember you can be charged and imprisoned for following/enforcing an order/law that is found to be unlawful.
"I was just following orders" is not a defense. So everyone has to decide if what they do is lawful or not.

You are only correct in theory and your oversimplified statement reveals that you have never been in the military, especially not during combat operations. If you were you would understand that the theory is not so simple to put a finger on and even harder to enforce. I not only was in the military during Viet Nam but was attached to JAG and tried very many cases in the Philippines, on board carriers, and in Da Nang and unless the offense is as clear cut as the Mai Lai massacre you can forget everything you said as a reality. When that 2nd Lt tells a combat military person to do something it is not something you think about, you just do it and no one is thinking, "hey is this constitutional." The first question that the poor jerk would be asked in his Court Martial for disobeying a direct order would be, are you a constitutional scholar?" The second question they would ask is, " how do you like your bread and water?" As for the sheriff, I will leave you to your dreams on that one and just imagine that you have a picture of Bull Conner in your den.

 

[chickened]

Does anyone really think Congress will pass an assault weapons or high capacity clip ban or any legislation? This kneejerk reaction to a current event will lose it's savor very shortly. These kneejerk reactions usually never stop crime but use a lot of precious time that could better be used for something effectual.

People should demand more of our elected than a new and improved "shining on" feel good, throw more money and research fix. Cops in schools is not unreasonable either.

 

[duckluck]

Does anyone really think Congress will pass an assault weapons or high capacity clip ban or any legislation? This kneejerk reaction to a current event will lose it's savor very shortly. These kneejerk reactions usually never stop crime but use a lot of precious time that could better be used for something effectual.

People should demand more of our elected than a new and improved "shining on" feel good, throw more money and research fix. Cops in schools is not unreasonable either.

I hope they don't pass it, and I think it's just yet another diversion from the real issue, our economy.

 

[duckluck]

You are only correct in theory and your oversimplified statement reveals that you have never been in the military, especially not during combat operations. If you were you would understand that the theory is not so simple to put a finger on and even harder to enforce. I not only was in the military during Viet Nam but was attached to JAG and tried very many cases in the Philippines, on board carriers, and in Da Nang and unless the offense is as clear cut as the Mai Lai massacre you can forget everything you said as a reality. When that 2nd Lt tells a combat military person to do something it is not something you think about, you just do it and no one is thinking, "hey is this constitutional." The first question that the poor jerk would be asked in his Court Martial for disobeying a direct order would be, are you a constitutional scholar?" The second question they would ask is, " how do you like your bread and water?" As for the sheriff, I will leave you to your dreams on that one and just imagine that you have a picture of Bull Conner in your den.

Any sheriff that doesn't enforce a known law will not be sheriff for long, so it would hardly matter whether he thinks the law is constitutional or not...he'll be fired.

 

[hemet dennis]

Quote: Well your powers of perception is lacking. I was in the Navy and closer to being shot at then you ever were. And your complete lack of understanding combat conditions shows. But I guess you know all about combat conditions from a book. Your trying to equate what the sheriff is doing to a combat condition is kind of lame. But even in a combat zone if an officer tells a soldier to take some prisoners over behind some trees and shoot them. No soldier would be prosecuted for disobeying that direct order and you don't need to be a constitutional scholar to know that.
Do you think the Sheriff was in a combat zone when he decided he wasn't going to enforce a law ? I bet you have a picture of Roosevelt signing the executive order to round up all the Japs and put them in camps over your bed.

 

[hemet dennis]

Quote:
Do you really think he would be fired by the voters of that county ?

 

[rebelcowboysnb]

Quote:
Do you really think he would be fired by the voters of that county ?

I would not bet on it. There is a Ga sheriff that was just elected while awaiting trial for 37(?) felony's...

 

[hemet dennis]

Quote:
Do you really think he would be fired by the voters of that county ?

I would not bet on it. There is a Ga sheriff that was just elected while awaiting trial for 37(?) felony's...

There's a better chance that he would be fired for enforcing the law.