Constitutional Sheriffs Key To Preserving Legislation, Order, & Liberty – The Washington Customary
As the Chief Law Enforcement Officers (CLEOs) of their counties, sheriffs wear many hats in the unique American system of government. They enforce state law, yes. But they do much more than that. They uphold law and order, they protect the God-given rights of citizens, and they play a key role in the justice system that puts bad guys behind bars so the rest of society can continue to function in relative peace and safety. But today they are under attack for a variety of reasons.
America finds itself in a unique era. Multiple federal agencies have been accused by all sides of the political spectrum of weaponizing their power against law-abiding citizens. State-level “woke” politicians are eroding the very office of the elected sheriff. And political agendas trampling the Bill of Rights under the guise of “public safety” or “emergency powers” are advancing quickly.
Many political leaders across the country regard sheriffs as mere enforcement instruments. And yet, a growing cadre of America’s chief law enforcement officers is standing tall as the ultimate guardians of constitutional order. Meet the “constitutional sheriffs” — elected executives who publicly stand with the oath they took to the U.S. Constitution and the constitution of their states, and who refuse to become cogs in a centralized machine.
Get Daily Emails
The modern iteration of the constitutional sheriff movement began when Graham County, Arizona, Sheriff Richard Mack refused to help the federal government enforce its “Brady Handgun Violence Prevention Act.” The legislation, signed into law by Bill Clinton in 1993, sought to conscript county sheriffs nationwide into enforcing what Mack and many other lawmen viewed as an unconstitutional overreach violating the Second Amendment. Mack said no.
The issue eventually went all the way to the U.S. Supreme Court in Mack v. United States, later renamed Printz v. United States after another one of the sheriffs who also joined the case as a plaintiff. Mack was fully vindicated. In fact, the high court agreed with him in its landmark ruling that relevant portions of the federal legislation purporting to require sheriffs to help enforce gun control were unconstitutional.
But perhaps even more importantly, the SCOTUS majority articulated what has come to be known as the “Anti-Commandeering Doctrine.” It holds that the federal government may not compel state officers — and especially sheriffs, described in the ruling as “Chief Law Enforcement Officers” (CLEOs) of their counties — to help enforce any federal statutes. The decision also recognized that the Constitution’s Tenth Amendment protecting state authority and limiting federal jurisdiction means what it says. The implications are enormous.
Thus, the modern constitutional sheriffs’ movement was born, with Mack creating the Constitutional Sheriffs and Peace Officers Association (CSPOA). Of course, in a very real sense, all sheriffs in America are and always have been constitutional sheriffs. They are elected to a key constitutional office, and swear to uphold the state and federal constitutions. But there is a difference. The movement Mack and others like him are part of insists that sheriffs’ primary duty is to the constitutions they swore to uphold and the constituents and citizens whose rights are protected therein.
“A constitutional sheriff, to put it succinctly, is a sheriff who takes his oath seriously to uphold and defend the U.S. Constitution,” Mack told the Law Enforcement Intelligence Brief. “Furthermore, he will put the Constitution first in the execution of his job, and thereby, protect the civil rights of all people within his county. A constitutional sheriff will protect the people of his county from all enemies, both foreign and domestic, no exceptions. The importance of such is the guarantee this provides for individual liberty.”
Contrary to the claims of certain far-left organizations seeking to sway and co-opt law enforcement, this is not rebellion or even “anti-government,” says Mack. Instead, it is restoration. And in the face of escalating threats — from rogue federal bureaucracies to election irregularities to United Nations-backed disarmament schemes — the constitutional sheriff movement offers proven strategies, real-world successes, and a path forward for every law enforcement executive to seriously consider. That is exactly why supporters of the movement say radical lawmakers in some states are putting sheriffs in the crosshairs.
What Is the Constitutional Sheriff Movement?
The constitutional sheriff movement is a nationwide alliance of elected sheriffs and peace officers committed to the principle that the county sheriff is the supreme law enforcement authority within his or her jurisdiction. Rooted in English common law, the structure of America’s constitutional republic, and the explicit oath every sheriff takes to support and defend the Constitution of the United States, the movement rejects the modern notion of sheriffs as mere extensions of federal or state bureaucracies.
Instead, constitutional sheriffs affirm that their primary role is to protect that Constitution and the God-given rights it enshrines. That is true even if it means interposing — lawfully standing between the people and any unconstitutional act, whether it originates from Washington, D.C., the state capital, or even misguided local politicians. When federal agents overstep, when governors issue illegal mandates that violate the First or Second Amendments, or when political operatives corrupt election integrity, the sheriff has not just the authority to say no, but the duty to do so, Mack says.
The movement crystallized through Sheriff Mack’s leadership in the aftermath of the historic Supreme Court ruling in favor of sheriffs and their constitutional authority. In 2011, he sought to formalize the movement, creating CSPOA to educate, train, and mobilize sheriffs who take their oaths seriously. Today, hundreds of sheriffs — at least 10 percent of them nationwide, according to various media reports — align with CSPOA principles and consider themselves “constitutional sheriffs.”
And the movement appears to be growing. In 2024, CSPOA hosted a major conference in Las Vegas dubbed “Resist the Temptation.” Featuring talks from experts, military leaders, and sheriffs from Virginia and Texas to Wisconsin and Washington and beyond, the conference offered practical solutions. Among the topics discussed: forming constitutional posses to help when the sheriff and his deputies are overwhelmed, investigating election fraud locally, resisting unconstitutional disarmament schemes, and protecting God-given rights against overreach.
This writer served as MC at the conference and gave a talk focusing on the historical and biblical basis for government, interposition, and resistance to tyranny by magistrates. Multiple lawmen, meanwhile, spoke on the importance of sheriffs and law enforcement in protecting and upholding America’s system of self-government based on notions of God-given, unalienable rights.
What Constitutional Sheriffs Believe
At the heart of the movement lies a clear, unwavering creed: the sheriff’s oath to the Constitution is paramount. In an exclusive interview with the Law Enforcement Intelligence Brief, Sheriff Richard Mack distilled the essence with precision and urgency. “The most peaceful and effective way to save America is county by county and state by state, one Constitutional Sheriff at a time,” he explained.
This belief system of sheriffs as guardians of liberty and rights flows directly from the Founders’ vision. Rights are not government-granted privileges to be regulated or legislated away; they are endowed by the Creator, as the Declaration of Independence affirms. The Tenth Amendment reserves to the states and the people all powers not explicitly delegated to the federal government. And the Constitution means what it says.
That has important implications for county sheriffs. Within the county, the elected sheriff — answerable to voters, not unelected agencies — stands as the ultimate executor of law enforcement and the primary interposer against tyranny. As such, Mack and fellow constitutional sheriffs reject blind obedience to statutes, executive orders, or agency rules that conflict with the supreme law. If a directive disarms citizens, shutters churches, or ignores due process, for example, it is no law at all. Enforcing it would violate the higher oath.
Historical examples of this abound, even recently, Mack noted. Sheriff Brad Rogers in Indiana, for instance, defended an Amish farmer from FDA overreach, refusing to allow federal bureaucrats to criminalize raw milk production on private property. Sheriff Mark Lamb of Arizona declined to enforce COVID-19 mandates he viewed as unconstitutional infringements on liberty, Mack said. Sheriff Dar Leaf in Michigan, meanwhile, has fought state-level corruption to investigate credible claims of election fraud, even as higher officials obstructed him.
What do law enforcement officers need to know about this issue? “They need to know the U.S. Constitution and enforce it,” Mack stated plainly.
What Constitutional Sheriffs Do
Belief without action is meaningless, of course. Constitutional sheriffs translate their oaths into decisive, lawful deeds that protect rights and restore order.
On the Second Amendment front, sheriffs have repeatedly drawn lines against federal gun control. During the Obama era, hundreds of sheriffs nationwide vowed resistance as policymakers flirted with executive action to restrict gun rights and even disarm citizens. “Anytime that they come against the Second Amendment… we here are not going to comply with that,” Kentucky Sheriff Denny Peyman declared at the time. “Federal agents will not be allowed to come in here and do that.”
Oregon Sheriff Tim Mueller sent a letter to Vice President Biden refusing enforcement of unconstitutional regulations, warning he would not permit federal officers to turn citizens into criminals. In Utah, 28 of 29 sheriffs signed a similar pledge, ready to “trade our lives for the preservation” of the Constitution and its protections for God-given rights, including the right of citizens to keep and bear arms.
During the COVID-19 lockdowns, many sheriffs shined while protecting the First Amendment. New Mexico’s Sheriff Glenn Hamilton told this writer how he deputized an entire church congregation in Sierra County to exempt them from Governor Michelle Lujan Grisham’s order shutting down churches as “non-essential.” Using an exception for law enforcement from the lockdowns, Hamilton refused to allow his constituents’ rights to be trampled.
Indeed, sheriffs all over the country were in the news for refusing to enforce state and local mandates they viewed as illegal or unconstitutional. Mayors, governors, and some media outlets complained loudly. But in the end, the sheriffs who refused to enforce illegal and unconstitutional decrees were vindicated for protecting the rights of the citizens in their counties.
Election integrity has emerged as a critical battleground, too. Michigan Sheriff Leaf told this writer about how he doggedly pursued investigations into 2020 irregularities despite state obstruction, calling for task forces to address what he described as potentially “the greatest fraud ever committed.” At CSPOA events and other conferences, sheriffs have strategized on securing polls, safeguarding equipment, and acting locally when higher authorities falter.
Practical tools include the constitutional posse. Washington’s Sheriff Bob Songer told this writer about a 150-member, highly trained posse of screened citizens he created. These are not vigilantes, he emphasized, but a lawful auxiliary for crime-fighting, search and rescue, and community defense. Formed after attending a CSPOA conference, Sheriff Songer said it saves taxpayer dollars and empowers locals under the sheriff’s constitutional authority.
Interposition against rogue federal agents is another hallmark. Texas Sheriff Scott Williams, at a CSPOA panel at Freedom Fest, described sending a deputy to accompany Secret Service agents questioning a citizen over social media comments about Biden and Pelosi. “It is my sole purpose in life to stand in the gap for my citizens,” Williams stated, underscoring sheriffs’ duty to protect the rights of constituents from wherever the concerns may arise.
Education is foundational. Sheriff Cutter Clinton, a popular constitutional sheriff from Texas, emphasizes teaching the Constitution to children, ensuring future generations understand their rights and the sheriff’s role in safeguarding them. While children learn constitutional basics, lawmen can and should learn about common law, the Printz precedent, and even irregular warfare preparedness amid the Biden-era border crisis.
These actions remain firmly within constitutional bounds: no anarchy, only ordered liberty enforced county by county.
What They Have Accomplished
These actions have not remained theoretical — they have produced real change. Indeed, the constitutional sheriff movement’s track record includes numerous tangible victories in preserving freedom and checking power. The Printz decision itself remains a key win, preventing federal commandeering while both inspiring and legitimizing resistance to illegal usurpations of power nationwide. Mack’s CSPOA has trained hundreds of sheriffs, creating a network that now comprises about 10 percent of America’s sheriffs — and growing rapidly.
During COVID, sheriffs like Hamilton kept churches operating and businesses viable in their counties, exposing the arbitrariness of mandates and contributing to their eventual rollback. Gun control vows under Obama—and similar stands since—have deterred enforcement of extreme measures, even at the state level in places such as New York. Surveys of officers and deputies show overwhelming support for armed self-defense and reluctance to enforce draconian restrictions against fellow Americans. Even the threat of non-compliance by sheriffs has been a powerful check on arbitrary and unconstitutional power.
Broader cultural shifts are evident. Citizens increasingly view constitutional sheriffs as allies against both street criminals and bureaucratic tyrants. The “key to local control” model — requiring federal consent for county actions — has influenced legislation in multiple states. Even media hysteria, with outlets like The Guardian and NBC labeling CSPOA events “dangerous” before they began, underscores the movement’s impact: when notoriously anti-law enforcement news outlets lose it over sheriffs offering solutions on elections, immigration, and rights, it signals real threats to the status quo are involved.
The Threat to Sheriffs:
As the constitutional sheriffs’ movement has gained traction, certain policymakers have noticed the threat to their power — and they are not happy. “There’s a growing movement in woke blue states to destroy the office of the sheriff and to limit his role in defending the Constitution,” Mack warned. “This is very dangerous as it is an affront against the people — We The People — in selecting our own sheriffs. Corrupt politicians dislike sheriffs because they are independent and do not mindlessly follow orders.”
Exhibit A was Connecticut. In that state, the office of sheriff existed going all the way back to colonial times. But in the late 1990s, Democratic politicians exploited some scandals to push for a constitutional amendment eliminating the office altogether. Effective December 1, 2000, all eight sheriffs were stripped of their power, leaving only state police and local departments with appointed leaders to handle law enforcement.
Now, politicians in Washington State are moving against sheriffs. With legislation that would impose more “standards” for sheriffs and allow the state to remove them, Democrat lawmakers would make themselves rather than county voters the ultimate arbiters. Republicans, some Democrats, and the Washington Association of Sheriffs and Police Chiefs all opposed the bill, but it passed anyway.
This is really a “political attack on county sheriffs,” explained Washington Representative Jim Walsh, a Republican. “It’s bad policy, built on fearmongering and disinformation about what sheriffs do.” Sheriff Keith Swank of Pierce County said the legislation was a scheme by Democrats to use the Criminal Justice Training Commission to decertify sheriffs they dislike and have them removed from office.
A Call to Law Enforcement Executives
To every sheriff and police chief reading this: the constitutional sheriff movement invites you to rediscover your rightful role. Study the Constitution you swore to uphold. Know its text, history, and original meaning. Understand the God-given rights that the Founders sought to protect by enshrining them in that unique document. And when the next federal directive, state mandate, or “emergency” order arrives that infringes on those rights — ask the Mack question: Does this align with my oath? When Mack and others stood against the Brady bill and the full weight of federal power, they won, because they stood on the Constitution.
Mack also encourages sheriffs to form relationships with their citizens. Train deputies well. Consider creating a constitutional posse to help as needed. Stand in the gap. If you encounter resistance to the sheriff’s independent authority, recognize it for what it is: an assault on the people’s right to elect their own guardians. And if somebody is unconstitutionally or lawlessly coming after your citizens and their rights — whether it be a criminal or a rogue bureaucrat — interpose on their behalf to ensure justice.
As Mack and other constitutional sheriffs have shown through their battles, a few determined sheriffs can shift the balance. Hundreds already have. America’s survival as a republic of ordered liberty depends on law enforcement leaders who remember that America is supposed to be governed by laws, not men — and that the “Supreme Law of the Land” is the one ratified by We the People known as the U.S. Constitution.
The question is straightforward: Will you be a constitutional sheriff? Ask yourself—and encourage every colleague to do the same. The Republic needs more good sheriffs willing to stand by their oath and do the right thing, every time. It needs you.
Originally published at The Law Enforcement Intelligence Brief
Article posted with permission from Alex Newman