Meet the Far-Right Constitutional Sheriffs Ready to Assert Control if Trump Loses

October 24, 2024:

Tim Marchman: This is rooted as you write in white supremacist beliefs. Can you unpack that a little bit?

David Gilbert: It is, and you can trace it back from the late-1960, early-1970s to a movement called Posse Comitatus, which was founded some say by a guy called William Potter Gale. He was at the time a minister in this militant anti-Semitic white nationalist quasi-religion, kind of known as Christian Identity. He believed that the sheriffs were these protectors of the citizens and that they had the power to call up militias and that they should be enshrined in law as the ultimate power law enforcement anywhere in the country. We’ve seen across the years that these far-right or Constitutional Sheriffs, no matter what they’ve done in terms of the extreme actions they’ve taken, if they have a base of supporters in their locality or in their county who believe in what they’re doing, they will be voted back into office for decades at a time.

Tim Marchman: The mandate of the public is pretty powerful, but some of these sheriffs are citing a higher source of authority. They say their power derives from God, which seems pretty unconstitutional given the separation of church and state in America. How do they respond to that?

David Gilbert: Well, they respond by saying that the separation of church and state is not something that really exists. They say that, that again is a misreading of the Constitution, and the entire Constitutional Sheriff’s movement is deeply infused with Christian nationalist beliefs and ideology. Most of the Constitutional Sheriffs who I’ve spoken to over the last six months or so are eager for the US to return to being a nation rooted in Christianity, where Christianity is at the center of all aspects of life, be that law enforcement or education or government or culture. They believe that in that society because they believe they got their power from God, that they will be the most powerful law enforcement individuals across the country.

Tim Marchman: Under this constitutional order as they understand it, is there a role for constitutional governors or constitutional mayors, or are these powers unique to sheriffs?

David Gilbert: They seem to believe that these powers are unique to sheriffs. In all the time I’ve been covering this, I’ve never heard any of them speak about other figures, whether in government or law enforcement that would hold similar powers to a sheriff. Again, that comes back to the idea that this is somehow enshrined in the Constitution. As we said, it’s not, but in their belief system, in their ideology, they can trace the sheriff. It’s one of the oldest law enforcement offices in the world. It goes right back to the UK where the sheriff did the bidding of the local magistrates and collected taxes and stuff like that. It’s obviously been exported from England to the US and it has persisted since the beginning of the US nation. They believe that, that is key to giving them the power that no one else in the US has because at a local level, they’re there to protect their citizens, and the citizens are the ones who elect them, and therefore, that is their duty. Even if other positions like a governor is elected by the people, they don’t seem to believe that, that position should have the similar kind of constitutional protections.

Source link

tags

Abkhazia Afghanistan Africa Albania Algeria Andorra Angola Antigua and Barbuda Argentina Armenia Australia Austria Azerbaijan Bahamas Bahrain Bangladesh Barbados Belarus Belgium Belize Benin Bolivia Bosnia and Herzegovina Botswana Brazil Bulgaria Burkina Faso Burundi Cambodia Cameroon Canada Cape Verde Central African Republic Chad Chile China Colombia Comoros Costa Rica Croatia Cuba Curacao Cyprus Czech Republic Denmark Djibouti Dominica Dominican Republic East Timor Ecuador Egypt El Salvador Equatorial Guinea Eritrea Estonia Ethiopia Fiji Finland France French Polynesia Gabon Gambia Georgia Germany Ghana Greece Grenada Guam Guatemala Guinea Guyana Haiti Honduras Hong Kong Hungary Iceland India Indonesia Iran Iraq Ireland Israel Italy Jamaica Japan Jordan Kazakhstan Kenya Kiribati Kosovo Kuwait Kyrgyzstan Laos Latvia Lebanon Lesotho Liberia Libya Liechtenstein Lithuania Luxembourg Macau Madagascar Malawi Malaysia Maldives Mali Malta Mauritania Mauritius Mexico Moldova Monaco Mongolia Montenegro Morocco Mozambique Myanmar Namibia Nepal Netherlands New Zealand Nicaragua Niger Nigeria North Korea North Macedonia Northern Cyprus Norway Oman Pakistan Palestine Panama Papua New Guinea Paraguay Peru Philippines Poland Portugal Puerto Rico Qatar Republic of the Congo Romania Russia Rwanda Saint Lucia Samoa San Marino Saudi Arabia Senegal Serbia Sierra Leone Singapore Slovakia Slovenia Solomon Islands Somalia South Korea South Sudan Spain Sri Lanka Sudan Sweden Switzerland Syria Taiwan Tajikistan Tanzania Thailand Togo Tonga Trinidad and Tobago Tunisia Turkey Turkmenistan Uganda UK Ukraine United Arab Emirates Uruguay USA Uzbekistan Vatican City Venezuela Vietnam Western Sahara Yemen Zambia Zimbabwe