‘Constitutionalists’ manifest how deeply extremist authoritarianism has infected law enforcement at all levels
David Neiwert at The Spyhop:
Keith Swank is the new sheriff of Pierce County, Washington state’s second-largest. Besides believing that God told him to run for office, he also calls himself a “constitutional sheriff.”
So it was perfectly in character for Swank, testifying about a bill in the state Legislature to bar most law enforcement from using masks, to register his defiance of state authorities. “Just for the record, my deputies don’t wear masks,” Swank told the legislators. “But once you pass this law that they can’t, I will not only allow them, but I will encourage them to do so, just to see what you do. “I don’t recognize your authority to impose these controls over me.” [...]
People like Swank call themselves “constitutionalists.” It’s a benign-sounding label that journalists often just skip right over. But “constitutionalists” are devoted to the founding documents in the same way that the insurrectionist “Patriot” militiamen are “patriotic” rather than the seditionists they actually are.
In reality, being a “constitutional sheriff” means that Keith Swank is a far-right extremist with ties to insurrectionists (especially Stewart Rhodes of the Oath Keepers), white nationalists, Christian nationalists, and election denialists. Nice work, voters. These “constitutionalists” believe conspiracist far-right theories that the sheriff of each county is the supreme law of the land, capable of overruling federal and state laws as well as the judiciary itself in determining which laws are “constitutional.”
The underlying claim is that county sheriffs have superior status by virtue of being elected—even though in fact the U.S. Constitution makes no mention of local sheriffs or their powers at any point. This status, they believe, enables sheriffs and their deputies to ignore all federal or state laws they choose, and to only force local laws of their choosing. They are also free to ignore court rulings if they choose.
In reality, the Constitution’s Supremacy Clause (Article VI, Clause 2) stipulates that the federal Constitution and its laws are the “supreme Law of the Land”. It ensures that federal law takes precedence over conflicting state and local laws. But so-called “constitutionalists” claim that the Constitution’s power doesn’t extend to local law enforcement—a claim that has failed every time it has been tested in the courts. The wellspring of these ideas is the Constitutional Sheriffs and Peace Officers Association, ex-Arizona sheriff Richard Mack’s nationwide organization that promotes these groundless theories, which extremists like Cliven and Ammon Bundy have leveraged to create armed standoffs with federal officers.
CSPOA first gained traction nationally when it became a loud faction of the Tea Party movement, especially through its close association with Rhodes and the Oath Keepers, who themselves loudly promoted “constitutionalist” political theories and talking points. Mack appeared at over 70 Tea Party events, telling audiences that they could save America by electing sheriffs aligned with their ideology. The core of Mack’s ideology is drawn from the work of W. Cleon Skousen, a leading light of the radical right in the 1960s and ‘70s, famous for his red-baiting books and speeches.
[...] Their political alignment with Trump’s ICE secret-police force is nearly absolute, both in terms of their desire to resist losing the ability of officers to mask as well as their agreement with MAGA’s Nativist immigration agenda. Songer complained to the Puyallup audience that Washington attorney general Nick Brown had placed him under investigation for violating a state law barring local cooperation with ICE. Songer claimed such laws were “unconstitutional.” “I will call ICE anytime I feel like calling ICE,” Songer declared, openly defying state laws. Songer added that if Trump’s “border czar” Tom Homan came to the state, “he could ride shotgun and we’ll go out and pick up some illegals.”
This kind of defiance of the normative power structure in American democracy is a major feature of the MAGA assault on our institutions, and its underlying attitude of utter disrespect has infected law-enforcement operations across the nation, from federal agencies like ICE to the sheriff’s departments in multiple locales, both rural and—is in Swank’s case—urban precincts. Rather than flee the associations with radical extremists and flaming bigots, they embrace them defiantly and dare anyone to hold them accountable. Remember when policer officers were exposed as members of the Oath Keepers after Jan. 6—and then unblinkingly doubled down and insisted that there was nothing wrong with belonging to an organization whose leader faced trial for (and was later convicted of) seditious conspiracy. CSPOA-affiliated Sheriff Mark Lamb of Pinal County, Arizona, said that he “appreciate[s] those guys standing up for the rule of law, the Constitution and freedom.” He also defended the Jan. 6 insurrectionists. “Just because somebody was there doesn’t necessarily mean they’re guilty,” he said, adding: “I guarantee you [the rioters] are very loving, Christian people. They just happen to support President Trump a lot.” All of these officers are revealing their own extremism in part because they don’t see “patriot” beliefs as extremist—even though such essential tenets as the view that sheriffs are the supreme law of the land with power superseding federal and state authorities, as well as the notion that the Second Amendment nullifies any and all gun regulation, are readily debunked nonsense whose only believers are right-wing extremists.
The far-right “constitutional sheriffs” movement has taken over a disturbing amount of county sheriffs’ offices and local police departments.
