Sheriff Sentenced For Obeying His Oath Of Office
One of the few sheriffs in America who believe in standing up to defend our Southern boarder is Sheriff Joe Arpaio. I had the privilege of meeting him several years ago when he was honored by the Constitutional Sheriffs and Peace Officers Association. But since that time, he was savagely attacked by the Obama crime syndicate. In his county he instructed his deputies, when they pulled someone over for a traffic violation, to ascertain if they were in our country illegally.
In other words, he instructed them to follow the law: the immigration laws of the United States. For upholding his oath of office, the crime syndicate went after him with a vengeance. Ultimately an Obama-appointed judge commanded him to essentially disobey his oath of office and turn a blind eye to illegals in his county.
Now we need to ask, what is the rule of law in our land? Is it the edict handed down by some lawyer in a black robe? Are we under the rule of men? Or are we under the rule of law? Our Founders designed a form of government where no one was above the law, including judges. Well, that same Obama-appointed judge then slapped a contempt of court against Sheriff Arpaio for which there would be time spent in jail, probably six months or more. Contempt of Court for obeying his oath of office to obey the U.S. Constitution. That judge should have been impeached. November 2016 came and changed the lay of the land. And on August 25th of 2017, President Trump pardoned Sheriff Joe Arpaio. But this past Thursday,
“A federal judge … shot down former sheriff Joe Arpaio’s bid to sweep his … record clean… He had been found guilty of criminal contempt of a federal court order after a five-day bench trial earlier this year… After the pardon, the 85-year-old Arpaio petitioned the court to clear his record and prevent the ruling from being used in future litigation.
The case raised the novel question of how far a presidential pardon actually reaches.
In her ruling, U.S. District Judge Susan R. Bolton said the pardon only freed Arpaio from possible punishment.
“The power to pardon is an executive prerogative of mercy, not of judicial recordkeeping,’ Bolton wrote in the decision. ‘To vacate all rulings in this case would run afoul of this important distinction. The Court found Defendant guilty of criminal contempt.’” www.thewashingtonpost.com
The judge believes that a pardon doesn’t actually forgive the person accused. Contrast that Obama appointee with how God deals with our sins.
What does Justice look like? Should punishment be meted out only for purposes of deterring other criminals? Is there any value in retribution or restitution?
Learn more about your Constitution with Pastor David Whitney and the “Institute on the Constitution” and receive your free gift.
© 2017 David Whitney – All Rights Reserved
E-Mail David Whitney: [email protected]