Amid reports of harassment outside ballot drop boxes and threats to election workers, experts are sounding the alarm about a growing coalition of far-right "constitutional sheriffs" who are preparing to insert themselves into upcoming elections.
The "constitutional sheriffs" movement, which has ties to the Oath Keepers and other fringe antigovernment movements, believes that sheriffs are the ultimate law enforcement authority in their counties. State and federal gun laws have been refused to enforce by self-appointed constitutional sheriffs.
Key figures in the movement have joined with election deniers as part of a new campaign that seeks to lend law enforcement credibility to the false notion that voter fraud is rampant in the U.S.
Two major constitutional sheriffs groups, the Constitutional Sheriffs and Peace Officers Association and Protect America Now, have aligned themselves with True the Vote, a conservative vote-monitoring group whose widely discredited claims about voter fraud in the 2020 election were the basis for the film " 2000 Mule."
The campaign wants sheriffs to use a variety of questionable tactics, including surveilling polling stations and ballot drop boxes, to intervene in the administration of elections.
At a recent conference in Pittsburgh, the co- founder of the Global Project Against Hate and Extremism said that she was concerned about that.
Since her days at the Southern Poverty Law Center she has followed the constitutional sheriffs movement. The recent effort by constitutional sheriffs groups to insert themselves in election-related issues is what she's most concerned about.
The second-ever Eradicate Hate Global Summit conference was held last month and drew a wide variety of experts, academics and advocates. The prevalence of violent extremism in law enforcement and the military was one of the topics discussed by conference attendees.
The panel on constitutional sheriffs struck a particularly urgent tone.
More than 200 of over 500 people who responded to a recent survey of the country's roughly 3,000 sheriffs found that a substantial minority.
More than 300 sheriffs, who make up roughly one-tenth of the country's sheriffs, said they are willing to testify against a state or federal law that they think is unjust or unconstitutional.
Mark Pitcavage, a senior research fellow at the Anti-Defamation League's Center on Extremism, said that it is a growing movement that has an increasing number of actors in it.
Pitcavage explained how, in just over a decade, Mack has turned the association into an "unusually successful extremist group" but, through relentless outreach, speaking engagements and law enforcement trainings, has created "a constitutional sheriff's ecoosphere or movement" centered around his.
While opposition to state and federal gun control laws has always been a core issue for the constitutional sheriffs, it was the coronaviruses that gave Mack's movement a boost.
Protect America Now, a nonprofit coalition of sheriffs, is asking supporters to donate $17.76 a month in order to fight those who want to undermine our constitution. The Idaho Constitutional Sheriffs are one of several groups dedicated to electing constitutional sheriffs in every state.
According to Pitcavage, support for the constitutional sheriffs movement has gone beyond law enforcement circles, from groups that oppose vaccine mandates to local governments. Three Nevada counties have paid $2,500 to become lifetime members of the Constitutional Sheriffs and Peace Officers Association.
Pitcavage said that governmental entities are members of extremists.
Pitcavage and his fellow panelists were alarmed by the recent alliance between leaders of the constitutional sheriffs movement and True the Vote, the Texas group behind some of the most popular, yet widely discredited claims regarding voter fraud.
In June, Protect America Now leader Mark Lamb, who serves as sheriff of Pinal County, Ariz., and True the Vote's Catherine Engelbrecht, announced that their groups had joined forces to create ProtectAmerica. Vote.
As part of this joint effort, the groups promised to launch a "national election integrity hotline" to connect citizens with tips to sheriffs, run ads on the radio, TV and online in states to "educate voters," and raise money for grants to outfit sheriffs with videosurve
At an event hosted by the Constitutional Sheriffs and Peace Officers Organization in Las Vegas, Mack said election issues were now his group's top priority. The event featured speeches from a number of sheriffs who claim to be investigating the 2020 election, as well as speeches from other prominent election deniers such as MyPillow CEO Mike Lindell.
Mack and Lamb didn't reply to many questions. A spokesman for True the Vote didn't respond to a request for comment.
The news of the alliance between the sheriffs' movement and True the Vote set off alarm bells for Mary McCord, a former Justice Department official who now runs the Institute for Constitutional Advocacy and Protection at Georgetown Law Center.
"Now it's to the point where we are actually seeing examples of sheriffs asking questions of election officials," he said.
The Johnson County, Kan., Sheriff was reported to have appeared at the constitutional sheriffs event in Las Vegas.
State and local officials have reassured the public that there's no evidence to support the claims of fraud made by some sheriffs.
Some local officials were alarmed by the sudden interest in voting procedures by Hayden. In a July 7 memo, the Johnson County's chief legal counsel outlined some of the concerns she had about the election. Trent wrote that during the July 5 meeting, the sheriff requested that local law enforcement participate in the current election procedures, as well as questioning the integrity of the elections.
Trent said that a proposal was made to have his staff pick up ballots from drop boxes in vehicles and to have a sheriff's deputy in the room, in response to a question about the placement of ballot drop boxes at public libraries.
Trent was concerned that the requests gave the appearance that the sheriff's office was trying to interfere with the election.
At the time, he insisted that his office has no intention of asserting ourselves into any election, but that they had simply made suggestions in response to a request from the Board of County Commissioners.
There were no additional details or answers to any questions from Yahoo News.
In response to requests for comment from Trent and the Board of County Commissioners, Theresa Freed, assistant director of public affairs for the Johnson County government, told Yahoo News in an email that "county staff has been instructed that there's an ongoing criminal investigation and cannot disclose information related to the
The Secretary of State's office disputed the "unfounded claims" on which the investigation is based, noting that "to date, not a single instance of election fraud from the 2020 General Election has been prosecuted in any court in the 105 counties."
The fact sheet for state and local election officials was released by the Georgetown and States United Democracy Center, a nonpartisan organization that promotes free and fair elections.
The guidance states that sheriffs don't have the authority to oversee the administration of elections, and encourages local election officials who receive requests for information from sheriffs to consult with them.
Sheriffs who overstep their roles may not only violate the law, but also may give the impression of attempting to interfere in an election or preventing duly authorized election officials from fulfilling their responsibilities.
According to the Brennan Center for Justice, many states have laws prohibiting law enforcement officials from "policing polling centers because of the possibility that their presence will intimidate and deter voters."
Mack dismissed concerns about sheriffs or other uniformed officers intimidating voters as nonsense.
"To have a uniformed officer, or private security guard in uniform, they're all there to do one thing and that is to provide a safe and peaceful environment for people to come and vote," Mack said.
Mack said that sheriffs should verify how the votes are counted.
Minnite said that the presence of a uniformed officer with a gun could be seen as threatening to voters. Unless state or local law allows for it, law enforcement officials who show up to patrol voting sites will be coming very close to violating federal law about intimidating voters.
Reports of voter intimidation at ballot boxes in Arizona show that people are compelled to act, but it's not clear what Sheriffs will do on Election Day. One of several reported voter intimidation incidents in the state occurred in October when a group of "CAMo clad people" took a photo of a voter and his license plate as he dropped off his mail-in ballot.
The sheriff of the region that includes Phoenix increased security around the drop boxes after the reported encounter.
In an interview with Yahoo News, Penzone said that while he believes sheriffs do have a responsibility to investigate a crime that effectively impacts the vote within our community, they also have an obligation to make sure that the investigation is based on facts and evidence.
Penzone said that if a sheriff fails to find evidence to support the belief that there was fraud in the election, then they are doing a disservice to the people that they are sworn to protect.
Penzone said he wasn't aware of any plans by sheriffs or law enforcement agents to watch polling stations. He said that he had observed that sheriffs were taking a more dominant role in partisan events that undermined confidence and provoked aggression.
Unlike police chiefs and commissioners, who are usually appointed by the mayor or city council, most county sheriffs are voted into office and have to campaign for reelection every few years.
Penzone, a Democrat and former Phoenix police sergeant who defeated Joe Arpaio in the 2016 election, insists that law enforcement officials, including elected sheriffs, should be nonpartisan.
Being an elected official in law enforcement is a responsibility. We're supposed to be caretakers of the oath of office, not people who take it, and then use it for their own ideology.
All Rights Reserved © 2024
