http://thePentagon.com/FullBookJacket > http://GunsSaveLives.org
|
Came across the lis-LEAF (Learning Electronically About Freedom)
postings today. An update of sorts on the Wyoming Sheriff.

=================

All,

Thanks to the prodding of an ICE subscriber, this afternoon I picked up
the phone and had a conversation with Sheriff Dave Mattis of Bighorn
County, Wyoming. He was quite accommodating and I very much appreciated
his willingness to discuss his “Guidelines for Federal Officials” with
me, as I am a couple of thousand miles removed from his “jurisdiction”.
At any rate, here is the update as related to me by Sheriff Mattis.

When he became Bighorn County Sheriff, he inherited an ongoing case
(Case: Castaneda v. USA, Filed: 10th May 1996, Closed: 29th April 1997,
Case No: 2:1996cv00099 Wyoming District Court, Casper) in which he
became named along with the United States and the INS. Pasted below are
two articles that have made the rounds via the Internet and various
email lists. This case was settled before it was actually tried. One
of the outcomes of Sheriff Mattis’ experience with this case was his
creating and implementing a set of “guidelines” for officials of federal
agencies operating in Bighorn County.

It is important to understand how language can distort or misrepresent
reality. I asked Sheriff Mattis about a couple of the quotations
attributed to him in the following articles. Keep in mind I was asking
him to recall things he is alleged to have said some 3 years ago.
First, he is alleged to have said, “If a sheriff doesn’t want the Feds
in his county he has the constitutional power and right to keep them out
or ask them to leave or retain them in custody.” He responded that he
does not remember making that particular statement. Second, he was
quoted as stating, ” “I am reacting to the actions of federal employees
who have attempted to deprive citizens of my county of their privacy,
their liberty, and their property without regard to constitutional
safeguards.” To this Sheriff Mattis responded that it “depended on the
setting.”

I asked Sheriff Mattis if his “Guidelines for Federal Officials” was a
matter of public record. He responded, “Well, yes and no,” and went on
to explain that he had issued copies to all of the Federal Agencies and
the U.S. Attorney operating in his county, as well as to numerous
sheriffs both in Wyoming and other states who had expressed interest in
what he was doing. According to Sheriff Mattis, the U.S. Attorney in
his county “doesn’t have a problem with it” (paraphrasing), and to date
there have been no problems as a result of federal agencies failing to
cooperate with the guidelines.

Sheriff Mattis seems to me to be a very thoughtful, responsible and
careful public servant. My impression is that he is very aware of the
sensitivity of certain issues surround the interaction of federal, state
and county jurisdictions. Sheriff Mattis has issued his guidelines with
the intent of ensuring that federal agencies will remain properly
accountable to local law and local law enforcement when interacting with
the people of Bighorn County.
It appears that Sheriff Mattis has done a considerable service to all
those concerned about an overreaching Federal gov’t in that he has both
set an example and opened considerable dialogue over the last 3 years
amongst quite a number of county sheriffs across the country.

It would be counterproductive, in my opinion, to read too much into
“guidelines” that Sheriff Mattis is as yet not comfortable making
available to the general public. It seems clear to me that there is
currently no wide consensus among any significant group of county
sheriffs as to the kinds of strict prohibitions or limitations of
certain activities that various patriot and tax movement groups would
like and are eager to presume exist somewhere.

Bottom line: something good is happening, but it is far too early to
know HOW good or where it is headed. At this point, I’d say about the
most productive thing people can do is to express concern to their own
county sheriffs that federal agencies should both feel and, in fact, BE
accountable to local law and local law enforcement in the conduct of
their “business” within the county. Ask your Sheriff to contact Sheriff
Dave Mattis in Bighorn County, Wyoming [(307) 568-2324], for a copy of
the his “Guidelines for Federal Officials” that appear to be working
well for him and “keeping the County Sheriff in the loop” so the rights
of people in the county are protected locally. Sheriff Mattis appears
to be quite willing to share his guidelines with other county sheriffs.

ICE
*****************************************
*****************************************
two articles follow:
*******************
*******************
http://www.ellett2000.org/sheriffs.html

Sheriffs Put Federal Officers On Notice 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 US District Court decision
(case No 2:1996-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
constitutional power and right to keep them out or ask them to leave or
retain them in custody.”

The court decision came about after Mattis and 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 attempted 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 intend to
operate in conformance to constitutional law.”

This case is evidence that the Tenth Amendment to the U.S.
Constitution 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
**********************************************
**********************************************
SHERIFFS PUT FEDS ON CHOKE CHAINS By V.N.S.
Edited for Publication by Sierra Times- Posted: 07.24.00 VNS – 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
constitutional 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 attempted 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 intend 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.
This begs the question, How well informed is the sheriff of your county?

–
Kevin L.
NE Orygunn
“Guns Save Lives” http://GunsSaveLives.com
Oregon Tyranny Response Team http://www.clatskanie.com/trtoregon/

————————–
GUNSSAVELIVES(TM) IS A PRIVATE, UNMODERATED LIST GOVERNED BY AN ACCEPTABLE USE POLICY AVAILABLE FROM [email protected] SUBSCRIPTION CONSTITUTES CONSENT TO RECEIVE SOME EMAIL THAT IS UNSOLICITED. THE OWNER TAKES NO RESPONSIBILTY FOR CONTENT. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED.
TO UNSUBSCRIBE, SEND EMAIL TO [email protected] WITH “UNSUBSCRIBE GSL” IN THE MESSAGE.