Summary

“Constitutional sheriffs” are a group of law enforcement officials who believe they hold supreme authority in their counties and can disregard state and federal law.

These sheriffs have become prominent figures in the election denial movement, and some have taken actions that critics view as dangerous, such as attempting to seize voting machine, assembling armed posses to patrol near polling stations, and refusing to enforce any law they view to be unconstitutional.

The Constitutional Sheriffs and Peace Officers Association, led by Richard Mack, has bolstered the movement, attracting sheriffs nationwide and featuring prominent election denial figures like Mike Lindell and Michael Flynn at their events

    • FordBeeblebrox@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 day ago

      I’d say worse, the SovCit people are ridiculous idiots but mostly just try to get out paying debts or traffic laws, these “sheriffs” are actively attempting to thwart democracy and should be hurled into the nearest prison for at least the next election cycle to think about what they did.

      • ArbiterXero@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        1 day ago

        They’re all trying to do an end-run around democracy and society, it’s just a different level of power they believe they have.

        Sov cits want it for themselves

        These sheriffs want it for elections.

        More dangerous, sure, but the same basic principle of “I can manipulatively read and misunderstand the rules so that they don’t apply to me”

        • pinkystew@reddthat.com
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          edit-2
          19 hours ago

          Nope, these sheriffs do not “want it for elections”, they want it for themselves. We’re on the same side here and I’m sorry to be antagonistic but I don’t agree with you excusing their behavior as principled in any way unless you also do it for sovereign citizens, because it is exactly the same thing: “the rules only apply to me when it’s convenient.”

          • ArbiterXero@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            17 hours ago

            Yes, I think you misunderstood what I meant, I think we’re saying the same thing.

            They both are “manipulatively reading the rules” to make the rules seem say something that gives them more power than they have and zero responsibility to their neighbour, city, state or country

            Same basic principle of “things mean what I want them to mean”

        • vaultdweller013@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          1 day ago

          Also both the constitutional sherriffs and sovcits grew out of the militia movement of the 80s and 90s. They are basically the same movement just different aspects of it.