While law enforcement is supposed to do what their title describes,
enforce the law, some want to serve as lawmakers and
judges to determine whether they agree with the laws in the first place.
So the Constitutional Sheriffs and Peace Officers Association
is a sheriff's organization that believes that sheriffs have
the right to determine if a law or laws are unconstitutional and
then choose whether or not they enforce those laws.
Again, these are members of law enforcement.
These are not individuals who are legislating or governing the country.
They're not the ones who make the laws.
We didn't elect them, we pay them.
But they apparently don't want to do their jobs.
They want to be the ones who decide whether or not the laws are okay.
So one of their board members argues that
the sheriff is supposed to be protecting the public from evil.
When your government is evil or out of line,
that's what the sheriff is there for, protecting them from that.
No, Dar Leaf, that is not what law enforcement is for.
Law enforcement is supposed to enforce the law.
That's what law enforcement is supposed to do.
That's the whole point.
And I'm gonna back up for a second and just say this, law enforcement,
I believe, is an incredibly important part of a well functioning society.
But the question is, what is law enforcement made up of?
Who are the people within law enforcement?
If you have people who just refuse to enforce the law or
decide that they don't like laws and they're not gonna enforce it,
should they be allowed to serve as members of law enforcement?
I would venture to say no.
And the fact that they're publicly saying these things without
any consequences is concerning to say the least,
especially at a time when trust for law enforcement is at an all time low.
I hate that.
I wanna change that.
And the only way to change that is to create a system in which people feel that
law enforcement is actually protecting and serving.
That is not what's taking place here.
Further, the organization's founder, Arizona Sheriff Richard Mack,
argues that the safest way to actually achieve that is to have local law
enforcement understand that they have no obligation to enforce such laws.
Well, I live in Los Angeles, I've definitely experienced some of that.
They're not laws at all anyway.
If they're unjust laws, they are laws of tyranny.
As you can imagine, we're not talking about cops who wanna sit by and
watch, let's say, someone shoplift without any consequences.
No, no.
Some very specific things they don't want to enforce,
including gun control laws, little problematic,
during the Coronavirus pandemic they didn't want to enforce mask mandates and
other COVID related mandates and election fraud claims.
They don't want to deal with that either.
So the scariest part of this organization is that it's unfortunately growing.
In fact, it's implementing taxpayer funded trainings at sheriff's
departments around the country.
So over the last five years, the group has hosted trainings, rallies,
speeches and meetings in at least 30 states for law enforcement officers,
political figures, private organizations, and members of the public,
according to the Howard Center's seven-month probe, conducted
in collaboration with the Arizona Center for Investigative Reporting.
The group has held formal trainings on its constitutional curriculum for
law enforcement officers in at least 13 of those states.
In six states, the training was approved for officers continuing education credits.
This is insane.
The group also has supporters who sit on three state boards in charge of law
enforcement training standards.
How is this okay?
How is it okay for members of law enforcement to just not only publicly
say that, we're just gonna enforce the laws that we want to enforce?
And then also take taxpayer money to train other members of law
enforcement to believe this crap, to actually go along with this crap?
One former federal prosecutor described the group's trainings as
broader insurrectionist ideology.
So just how popular is this group and its ideals?
So, since 2018, the Howard Center investigation found at least 69
sheriffs nationwide have either been identified as members of the group or
publicly supported it, though at least one later disavowed the organization.
A 2021 survey of sheriffs by academic researchers working with
the nonprofit Marshall Project found that more than 200 of the estimated
500 sheriffs who responded agreed with the group's ideology.
And look, this is different from having discretion as a police officer or
as a sheriff's deputy, right?
So I'll give you an example.
I remember talking to a deputy about an elderly woman who was caught shoplifting.
And in this state, it wasn't the state of California,
it was a different state, if the store decides they wanna prosecute,
the police officers are supposed to detain them.
She decided, I'm not going to put this elderly woman in handcuffs,
that's ridiculous.
That kind of discretion is totally fine.
But that is not what we're talking about here.
In this case, we're literally talking about sheriff's deputies who just
decide they don't like certain laws, and
as members of law enforcement, they will not enforce those laws.
And it's unsurprising,
I'm getting a little bit of a right wing militia feel from some of these members,
and I'll provide a little bit of evidence for that in just a moment.
So the group does not release the names of its dues paying members, but
we do know the names and activities of the members on the board, okay?
So let's start with the co-founder, Sheriff Richard Mack.
Mack was an early board member of the Oath Keepers,
the group involved in the January 6th attack on the US Capitol.
Although he said he split with the group several years ago when it became
a militia, Mack still speaks at Oath keeper-affiliated rallies.
Wow, really working hard to gain the community's trust as a member of
law enforcement.
How is this okay?
Next up is Michael Peroutka, who is another sheriff's group board member and
former candidate for Maryland's attorney general.
So he was once affiliated with the League of the South,
which supports a free and independent Southern republic.
At a 2019 sheriff's training event, he said, there is a creator God.
Our rights come from him.
The purpose of civil government is to secure and defend God-given rights.
Well, it's a little unconstitutional.
Little unconstitutional.
I mean, it depends on what he means by God-given rights.
If he means the rights that are enshrined in our Constitution, totally fine.
There are religious people who think that the Constitution reflects
rights that were given to us by God.
But given his associations and
some of his other political beliefs, I would venture to say,
there's a little bit of an issue with how he sees the role of law enforcement.
And last, but certainly not least, board member and
Michigan police officer Dar Leaf, who we heard from a little earlier.
I can't believe these people are sheriff's deputies.
Leaf was investigated but not charged in connection with the Michigan attorney
general's investigation into the alleged illegal seizure and
breach of vote-counting machines in 2020.
He also appeared at an election-denier rally with two men later charged in
the conspiracy to kidnap Michigan's Democratic Governor, Gretchen Whitmer.
We need massive reforms in policing in this country.
And we need to do that at a time when police departments across
the country are dealing with severe deputy shortages.
This crap is not helping with any of that.
And the fact that it's just happening out in the open with absolutely no backlash,
with absolutely no consequences for people who literally do not want to do their
jobs, is a problem, to say the least.
And this has been going on for years now.
But thought you should all know that there are literally sheriff's deputies
who think they're the ones who get to decide which laws they enforce and
which laws they either ignore or refuse to enforce basically,
because they just don't agree with it.
They're allowing their personal political biases impact
their ability to do their jobs.
That's not all right.
It wouldn't be all right if a judge did that, and
it's certainly not all right when a member of law enforcement does it.