think William Wallace

the Constitutional Sheriff, in contrast to the fake sheriff—a fresh rebuttal

Dear Friends,

I just sent the following email across to the state. It’s long, but worth it, I think.

I’ve put a lot of time into it. God bless.

---

Subject: Sheriff Wagner says he's not a constitutional sheriff...so what was the point of his oath?

Dear Friends, County Sheriffs and other Members of local and state government—

Lancaster County (Nebraska) 28-year veteran Sheriff Terry Wagner wrote a paper in September of 2021 entitled Sheriff Wagner opines on Constitutional Sheriffs. In that paper, he denies being a Constitutional Sheriff and provides his reasons for doing so. (Click on the colored text to see his paper.)

The following is a fresh systematic rebuttal of that paper:

Part 1
Wagner writes:
A number of people have called and emailed me with the question of ‘am I a Constitutional Sheriff’? When I was first asked that question I thought it meant, ‘is the Office of the Sheriff in Nebraska established in our constitution’? I can tell you it is not. Nor, is the Office of Sheriff mentioned in the U.S. Constitution. The excerpts below show the Nebraska Constitution gives the authority to establish sheriff’s offices to the Legislature. As a matter of fact, different bills have been introduced over the years to eliminate elected county officers, but have failed.
Nebraska State Constitution Article IX-4: 

"The Legislature shall provide by law for the election of such county and township officers as may be necessary and for the consolidation of county offices for two or more counties; Provided, that each of the counties affected may disapprove such consolidation by a majority vote in each of such counties."

Rebuttal:
Wagner argues that the office of sheriff is not established in our Constitution. He is right, but not in the way he thinks.

The office of county sheriff didn't need to be established by our Constitution, or the U.S. Constitution, or our State Legislature, because the office of county sheriff in this country predated all three, and was established by common law. 

Consider Nebraska's own history:

Nebraska's first Constitution was adopted in 1866.
Nebraska's statehood was declared in 1867.  

However...

"In 1861, Louis J. Loder was appointed the first sheriff and county clerk of the county [Lancaster]. The first elected sheriff of the county was William Pemberton in 1863." (from Wagner's own Lancaster County website.) 
Omaha elected their first sheriff in 1856.  

The office of sheriff isn't a recent invention but rather a convention...an established way of doing things. The office of sheriff has been the established way of providing law enforcement for a very long time.

Law enforcement is a given in any community/county. People want someone to protect them from outsiders and themselves.

The People who lived in the Territory of Nebraska, before Nebraska became a state, didn't wait for a State to form and a Constitution to be written before they secured the services of a sheriff.

Wagner references Article IX-4. Contrary to his claim, Article IX-4 did not give authority to the Legislature to establish county sheriff offices. It only gave the Legislature responsibility for standardizing the election of county officers, as those officers may be needed, which the Legislature did, starting in what is currently Nebraska Revised Statute (NRS) 23-1701. (More on that statute in Part 2)

The office of sheriff had already been deemed "necessary." The election of other county officers "as may be necessary" depended/depends, at least in part, upon population size. The last part of Article IX-4 speaks to population size when it refers to "consolidation."

Part 2
Wagner writes:
To accomplish the requirements in the Constitution, the Legislature enacted Nebraska Revised Statute 32-520:

"A county sheriff shall be elected in each county at the statewide general election in 1990 and each four years thereafter. The term of the county sheriff shall be four years or until his or her successor is elected and qualified. The county sheriff shall meet the qualifications found in sections 23-1701 and 23-1701.01. The county sheriff shall be elected on the partisan ballot."

Rebuttal:
Again, "the requirements in the Constitution" in Article IX-4, didn't include delegating responsibility for establishing the office of sheriff. It only delegated responsibility for standardizing the election of county officers as they were needed.

The first part of 32-520 only standardizes the election of county sheriffs. 

Establishing the office of county sheriff and establishing a statewide standard for electing county sheriffs are two different things.  32-520 does the latter, not the former.

The second part of 32-520 only standardizes the qualifications for the person who wishes to fill the office of sheriff. It is not creating or establishing the office itself. 

The office of county sheriff was established long before 32-520.

Again, the office predated our Constitution. And it is obvious that it had a law enforcement function.

With regard to the reference in 32-520 to 23-1701:
23-1701 doesn't create the office of sheriff. It presupposes it, and simply affirms and standardizes the common law and common sense basic duties thereof, lest any sheriff shrinks from the dangerous duties thereof:
In 23-1701.03, titled "Sheriff; general powers and duties," we read the following self-evident affirmation:

"The sheriff shall exercise the powers and perform the duties conferred and imposed upon him or her by other statutes and by the common law."

In 23-1701.02, titled "Arrests; keeping the peace; duties," we find the basic responsibility of the county sheriff, per common law and common sense: 

"It shall be the duty of every sheriff to apprehend . . . all felons and disturbers and violators of the criminal laws of this state, to suppress all riots, affrays, and unlawful assemblies which may come to his or her knowledge, and generally to keep the peace in his or her proper city." (Wagner shrank from his duty when rioters showed up in Lincoln in 2020 to wreak havoc upon our community to the tune of $20,000,000.) 

Part 3
Wagner writes:
All elected officials at the county level take the oath of office codified in N.R.S. 11-101.01:

I, .........., do solemnly swear that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States and the Constitution of the State of Nebraska, against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; that I take this obligation freely, without any mental reservation or for purpose of evasion; and that I will faithfully and impartially perform the duties of the office of .......... according to law, and to the best of my ability....

I am sworn to support and defend the Constitution of the United States, and the laws and constitution of the state of Nebraska, not to interpret it. I take that oath of Office very seriously. 

Rebuttal:
"Not to interpret it"?

How then does Wagner take his oath "very seriously"? 

What then does "I take that oath of Office very seriously" even mean?

How can Wagner claim to "support and defend the Constitution of the United States and the Constitution of the State of Nebraska, against all enemies, foreign and domestic...[and] bear true faith and allegiance to the same," when at the same time, he claims he can't "interpret it"—i.e., know and understand what those Constitutions say and mean?

What does he think he's swearing to if not to what these Constitutions say and mean?? 

He's speaking out of both sides of his mouth.

What these documents say and mean isn't hard to understand at all—not as they pertain to the job of sheriff.

Wagner's statement that he can't interpret our Constitutions as they pertain to his job is absurd. It's a complete cop-out. In essence, it's a denial of his oath.

There's another important point to be made here, but I'll wait for Part 4.

Part 4
Wagner writes:
When I googled “constitutional sheriffs” the definition given means they enforce constitutional law over all else –it has nothing to do with the establishment of the Office of Sheriff in the Constitution or Statute. "constitutional sheriffs" believe that sheriffs are the highest governmental authority and that they have the power and duty to defy or disregard laws they deem unconstitutional. Those last three words should concern all of us. “they deem unconstitutional”. Nowhere are Sheriffs given the legal authority to interpret the Constitution.

Rebuttal:
Utter nonsense.

I repeat, what does Wagner think the point of taking his oath was then, if not to "interpret"/understand and then defend our Constitutions?? 

It goes without saying that if you swear to "support and defend" a document, you must know and understand what that document contains and means.

The part of the document that applies to Wagner's law enforcement and rights-protecting-responsibilities is very simple:

"We, the people" assert, in the Preamble and Article I-1 that we "are by nature free and independent, and have certain inherent and inalienable rights."
We, the people assert that the responsibility of the government we elect is to protect that freedom and independence, and those rights, from all enemies, foreign and domestic. 

What does Wagner think We the People hired him for? ...to protect our government from US...i.e., from We the People?? 

If so, he has it all backward.

If so, he's in the wrong business, and he's been in the wrong business for a very long time.

NO. His job, in large part, is to protect the freedom and rights of WE THE PEOPLE from government infringement and overreach. 
Quoting:

"...and such rights shall not be denied by the state or any subdivision thereof." (Article I-1)

How is this so hard for Wagner to understand?

This is all that is meant by "a constitutional sheriff"—i.e., protecting the God-given, inherent and inalienable rights of the People. against all enemies.

Here is the irony in Wagner's claim (that "important point" I mentioned above): He says he can't interpret the Constitution, but when he quoted Article IX-4 above, he was assuming he knew what it meant. 

In other words, he has blatantly contradicted himself. Such a blatant contradiction of oneself is not a sign of clear thinking. 

It is completely beside the point that he misinterpreted the meaning of Article IX-4. 

The point is, he assumed an interpretation, when he said he had no legal authority to do so.

There is a remedy for such confusion of thought, and that is to take some basic logic classes.

But Wagner could have simply avoided the confusion and stuck with the Preamble and Article I-1 of our Constitution. They make it very clear what his duties are; 

Preamble and Article I-1 of the Constitution OF We, the people of Nebraska:

We, the people, grateful to Almighty God for our freedom, do ordain and establish the following declaration of rights and frame of government, as the Constitution of the State of Nebraska. 

All persons are by nature free and independent, and have certain inherent and inalienable rights; among these are life, liberty, the pursuit of happiness, and the right to keep and bear arms for security or defense of self, family, home, and others, and for lawful common defense . . . and such rights shall not be denied or infringed by the state or any subdivision thereof. To secure these rights, and the protection of property, governments are instituted among people, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed.

There really is no question about whether Wagner has it backward or not. Not when we take into consideration that he protected Lincoln's criminal Mayor and her property-destroying rioters in 2020—as well as the tyrannical, rights-denying-and-business-destroying Lancaster County "Health" Department over the last three years—over and against the freedom, rights and property of law-abiding-We-the-People citizens. 

When we take those facts into consideration, we know he has it all backward. We know it.

Not only did he not protect our freedom and rights from infringement and denial, he allowed his office to be used to enforce the tyrannical, freedom-and-rights-denying tyranny of Baird, Lopez...and Ricketts.

Wagner needs to know that if he won't defend our freedom and rights, We the People will do it ourselves. 

Think William Wallace. 

Think "A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a FREE state..."

One would think Wagner would rather have the People on his side, but that can only happen when he is on our side and performing his constitutional duties per his oath.

Here are the facts.
As sheriff, Wagner was presumably elected by We the People of the whole County to serve in a county-wide law enforcement capacity, to protect the freedom and rights of all citizens of the county, against infringement and denial of our freedom and rights by rioters, criminals and any tyrannical political subdivision, of either the county or state.

That's right. Wagner's job is to protect us from "all enemies," including those outside the county and state.
 "...and these rights shall not be denied by the state or any subdivision thereof" is very clear.

(I'll address the federal overreach issue momentarily.)

All of the above is basic law-enforcement stuff. Do unto others as you would have them do unto you. Protect the rights of others the same way you would want your own rights protected, were the roles reversed.

By the way, I said Wagner was "presumably elected" because we have no ability to verify his "election."   

Part 5
Wagner writes:
I also find it interesting the Constitutional Sheriffs and Police Officers Association (CSPOA) pick and choose which issues they feel are unconstitutional. Immigration, Gun Control and federally controlled land within a state have been the CSPOA targeted areas in the past. Now, Directed Health Measures; mask mandates and vaccine mandates are the latest issues deemed unconstitutional by the group. The fact is, in Nebraska, Health Departments are codified in Statute. Directed Health Measures and the penalties for violating them are also in Statute. If you don’t like how the COVID-19 pandemic is being handled, there are a number of ways to make your displeasure known. Not the least of which is asking your State Senator to introduce a bill to change the Statutes governing Health Departments.

Rebuttal:
What?? 

Wagner finds it interesting that constitutional sheriffs "pick and choose which issues they feel are unconstitutional"??

Ummm...NO. That is as far from the truth as you can get.

Constitutional sheriffs don't arbitrarily "pick and choose" which issues they feel are unconstitutional. 

Constitutional sheriffs defend those rights and freedoms that are being violated, and do so at the time they are being violated, or as soon as humanly possible.

Constitutional sheriffs know what our God-given inherent and inalienable rights are, per our Constitutions, which are the supreme law of the Land.

They know what these supreme laws say and mean, in terms of the rights and freedoms of the People, because they actually read and study them (and the history behind them), because they know that it is their duty to competently support and defend them.

Constitutional sheriffs are the sheriffs who actually take that oath seriously (not sheriffs like Wagner).

All Wagner is doing by what he wrote above is admitting he doesn't have the heart, mind, spirit and body to do the job he was elected to do. 

It's very sad.

Part 6
Wagner writes:
It would appear the patriot and the sovereign citizen movements have ideological similarities with the CSPOA and are prompting citizens to ‘vet their Sheriff’ to determine if they are a Constitutional Sheriff according to the guidelines of the CSPOA? So the bottom line is, since Sheriffs don’t have the legal authority to judge a law as unconstitutional, that must mean I am not a Constitutional Sheriff, nor are there any Constitutional Sheriffs in Nebraska. Terry T. Wagner Lancaster County Sheriff

Rebuttal:
Utterly ridiculous. More nonsense. Wagner is just wimping out. Again, he's not up to the job. It's too dangerous for him. 

His oath to "support and defend the Constitution of the United States and the Constitution of the State of Nebraska, against all enemies, foreign and domestic" and to "bear true faith and allegiance to the same" presupposes that he knows what our Constitutions say and what they mean, at least as far as they pertain to his supreme-law-and-rights-enforcing job.

Our Constitutions are Wagner's Employee Handbook from We the People. And if he hasn't read it, and he doesn't know what it means, and he doesn't care to find out, then he is in violation of his oath and there should be consequences. Serious consequences.

A constitutional sheriff is nothing more nor less than a sheriff who faithfully (and courageously) fulfills his/her oath, which is to "support and defend the Constitution of the United States and the Constitution of the State of Nebraska, against all enemies, foreign and domestic..."

Who are the "domestic" enemies our Constitution must be defended against? 

Anyone stateside who is hostile to our Constitution and the "inherent and inalienable rights" it was designed to protect. This includes people (enemies) in both the public and private sector, i.e., both inside and outside of government.

Our Declaration of Independence makes it very plain that government itself can become destructive of the very ends/interests it was instituted to serve/protect, namely our "unalienable rights":

"...all Men are created equal...they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights...among these are Life, Liberty, and the Pursuit of Happiness...to secure these Rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just Powers from the Consent of the Governed, --That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government..."
Declaration of Independence, 1776

Our Constitution also makes it very plain that government itself can be the problem, in Article I-1:
Statement of rights.

"All persons are by nature free and independent, and have certain inherent and inalienable rights; among these are life, liberty, the pursuit of happiness, and the right to keep and bear arms for security or defense of self, family, home, and others...and such rights shall not be denied or infringed by the state or any subdivision thereof. To secure these rights, and the protection of property, governments are instituted among people, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed.

Clearly, our Constitution recognizes that "the state or any subdivision thereof" may become destructive of the "inherent and inalienable rights" of We the People.

Clearly, bad actors in the "state or any subdivision thereof" who seek to deny or infringe upon the inherent and inalienable rights of We the People are included in the "domestic" enemies that the sheriff took an oath to defend our Constitution and our rights against.

IMPORTANT NOTE: It is the sheriff him/herself and his/her office that DEFENDS the Constitution, by defending our rights. He/she doesn't leave it to some high-priced lawyer or corrupt judge, who won't allow a jury and/or won't defend our rights in a timely manner.

Part 7
Closing
It appears that Wagner didn't know what he signed up for. He is ignorant of our history, our form of government, our basic rights and his job responsibilities. 

Governments are instituted for the explicit purpose of securing our rights, especially sheriffs.

Our sheriffs are elected by the People for the purpose of law enforcement. 

As such, they are members of the executive branch of government. 

Being elected by the People, county-wide, makes them the highest executive/law enforcement officer in the county. (Not some dumb, tyrannical city mayor like Baird.) The sheriff's jurisdiction is the entire county.

Now then, the reason our frame of government is set up this way (with the sheriff as the highest elected officer) is so that We the People can hold our local and immediate chief law enforcement officer accountable for doing the job we hired him/her to do, which is to protect county sovereignty, local self-governance and local freedom.

It is beside the point that We the People are not currently, on the whole, doing our job of being Watchful citizens.

It would be dangerous to all oath-breakers to assume that this lack of Watchfulness will continue to the degree it has.
There is a revival of Citizen Responsibility and Watchfulness going on.
We the People hold the ultimate police power (see Article I-26).
Decentralization of government is critical to self-governance.
Decentralization of elections is critical to self-government.
Elected officers have an obligation to the People, first and foremost, over other divisions of government.

Accountability is coming.

The last thing I'll say, before providing a list of examples of county sheriffs doing exactly what I describe above, is this: 

Every branch and/or level of government, including the executive and legislative branches, is considered either "the state" or a "subdivision" thereof. 

The God-given, inherent and inalienable rights of the People come first and cannot be denied or infringed by any act of the executive, or of the legislature, or the courts, or any political subdivision of the state. 

Our Rights were enumerated first in our Constitution for a reason. 

Our Constitution was written BY the People, FOR the People. 

We the People are the sovereigns.

Preamble
Preamble. We, the people, grateful to Almighty God for our freedom, do ordain and establish the following declaration of rights and frame of government, as the Constitution of the State of Nebraska.
https://nebraskalegislature.gov/laws/articles.php?article=Preamble

Here's the list of examples of sheriffs doing their job. Constitutional sheriffs are loved by the People they serve. Oath-breaking sheriffs are despised by the People for not doing their job, and for taking big paychecks home from taxpayers on top of it.

Indiana Sheriff Defies FDA
https://www.goshennews.com/news/middlebury-dairy-farmer-sheriff-stand-up-to-fda/article_b07a8430-9897-5504-9820-d943d60149f6.html
https://www.goshennews.com/news/local_news/ask-the-sheriff-sheriff-revisits-defending-raw-milk-provider/article_525bb00b-37f7-5d5b-beed-8aa0272935af.html

New Mexico Sheriff Defies Governor
https://www.pbs.org/newshour/politics/bernalillo-county-sheriff-in-new-mexico-rejects-governors-gun-ban-calling-it-unconstitutional
https://sonsoflibertymedia.com/this-is-how-americans-respond-sheriffs-the-people-say-no-to-tyrannical-governors-attack-on-2nd-amendment-impeachment-removal-on-the-horizon/
https://defytyrants.com/sheriffs-defy-governor-over-gun-ban/

Illinois Sheriffs Defy Governor
https://www.foxnews.com/us/dozens-llinois-sheriffs-offices-vow-defy-governors-assault-weapons-ban
https://sonsoflibertymedia.com/revolt-of-the-sheriffs-in-illinois/
https://defytyrants.com/revolt-of-the-sheriffs-in-illinois/

Missouri Sheriff Defies FBI
https://defytyrants.com/sheriff-defies-fbi-interposition-for-all-gun-owners-in-his-jurisdiction/

Wisconsin Sheriffs Defy Governor
https://defytyrants.com/sheriffs-line-up-to-defy-governor-in-wisconsin/

Washington Sheriff Defies Governor over Stay at Home Order
https://defytyrants.com/washington-sheriff-defies-governor-and-stay-at-home-order/

Illinois County Defies Governor
https://defytyrants.com/illinois-lesser-magistrates-1-tyrants-0/

Arizona Sheriff sets up Citizen Posse
https://sonsoflibertymedia.com/americas-sheriff-mark-lamb-joins-bradlee-dean-live/

Robert J. Borer