Jessica Pishko, an investigative journalist focusing on constitutional sheriffs, reveals the alarming rise of self-proclaimed 'constitutional sheriffs' who reject oversight from any authority. These sheriffs, often linked to toxic masculinity and far-right movements, wield considerable power with minimal accountability. Pishko discusses their alarming practices, especially in immigration enforcement and their historical ties to racial injustice. Her insights challenge the implications of this unchecked power in American democracy and law enforcement.
The rise of 'constitutional sheriffs' highlights a troubling shift towards unchecked local authority that challenges federal jurisdiction over law enforcement.
Sheriffs play a significant role in immigration enforcement, linking local policing with federal policies, which raises concerns about systemic biases and accountability.
Deep dives
The Role and Power of Sheriffs
Sheriffs hold a unique position in law enforcement, functioning as both enforcers of the law and local political figures, particularly in rural counties. Unlike police chiefs, they are elected authorities who operate with a considerable degree of autonomy, making them difficult to remove from office. This power allows them to implement their own policies and enforce laws such as evictions and immigration control without significant oversight. Overall, sheriffs can manipulate their roles to align with personal beliefs, sometimes positioning themselves above federal and state authorities.
Constitutional Sheriffs and Their Ideology
The concept of the 'constitutional sheriff' has emerged as a movement advocating for sheriffs as the primary interpreters of the U.S. Constitution, claiming authority that surpasses state and federal jurisdictions. Proponents of this movement, who make up approximately 10% of sheriffs nationwide, assert that they are empowered to enforce what they perceive as the 'original Constitution,' primarily comprising the Bill of Rights. This notion undermines the established role of the Supreme Court as the final arbiter of constitutional interpretation, leading to tensions between an individual sheriff's judgments and federal laws. Notable examples, including former Sheriff Joe Arpaio, illustrate how far some sheriffs are willing to go in exercising this perceived authority.
Impact on Immigration Enforcement
Sheriffs have increasingly become key players in immigration enforcement due to evolving federal policies that link the criminal justice system with immigration control. Programs like 287G effectively deputize local sheriffs to act as immigration agents, expanding their reach significantly, especially under the Trump administration. This collaboration with federal authorities has allowed sheriffs to initiate deportation proceedings swiftly, without requiring a criminal conviction. Additionally, many sheriffs benefit financially from housing undocumented immigrants in county jails, thus intertwining immigration enforcement with local funding incentives.
Race and Historical Context of Sheriffs
The historical roots of sheriffs can be traced to pre- and post-Civil War America, where they often acted as enforcers of racial hierarchies and local power structures. This legacy influences contemporary issues, as a significant majority of sheriffs in the U.S. remain white men, perpetuating systemic biases within law enforcement. The role of sheriffs has often reflected societal attitudes towards race, with historical roles including the perpetuation of violence against marginalized groups, such as during the convict leasing era. Today, these practices and attitudes arguably persist, as sheriffs wield considerable power in determining law enforcement policies that may disproportionately affect communities of color.
Investigative journalist Jessica Pishko says that a growing group of "constitutional sheriffs" have become a flashpoint in the current politics of toxic masculinity, guns, white supremacy, and rural resentment. "Constitutional sheriffs would argue that there is no one who can tell them what to do," Pishko says. "Not the president, not the Supreme Court, not the governor, not the legislature. Sometimes constitutional sheriffs will call themselves something like a king." Her book is The Highest Law in the Land.
Also, Maureen Corrigan reviews Creation Lake, by Rachel Kushner.