Officials pass resolution stating federal acts that violate Iron County citizens’ rights are ‘invalid in this county’

This is an archived article and the information in the article may be outdated. Please look at the time stamp on the story to see when it was last updated.

PAROWAN, Utah - Iron County commissioners say they’re not going to tolerate the federal government over reaching in their county. Friday, they approved a resolution with some strong words for those government agencies.

Two commissioners attended by phone the special emergency meeting. Commissioner Dave Miller said it’s a problem they’ve seen in county dealings over and over, and it’s reached a point where they can no longer stay silent.

“We can’t even function in our daily lives without getting some kind of permit, some kind of special permission,” Miller said. “Some kind of fear of breaking federal law.”

The resolution points to problems with prairie dogs, mismanagement of forest land and failure to control wild horses as some of the ways federal government is putting undue strain on the county.

“We don’t have a problem with prairie dogs,” Miller said. “We have a problem with the process that’s been managing these prairie dogs, and have literally been impacting individuals lives, communities.”

The resolution says, in effect, any federal act, law rule or regulation that violates the rights of Iron County citizens is “invalid in this county, shall not be recognized by this county, is specifically rejected by this county, and shall be considered null and void and of no effect.”

It goes on to say any state and criminal law enforcement will be the jurisdiction of local law enforcement and “any attempt by federal agencies to administer police powers or attempt to enforce law within Iron County, outside the authority granted by the federal constitution and state law is invalid.”

Commissioners are taking it one step further, next week they’re headed to Washington DC to talk directly to agency directors and congressmen about alleged federal over reach. They say their main goal is cooperation, but if they don’t get cooperation, they’re willing to take things into their own hands.

“That’s not their job,” said Iron County Sheriff Mark Gower of federal agents enforcing state law. “Their job is proprietary in nature, their job is to enforce maybe federal laws on federal land, and not assimilate our laws.”

Gower said local agency representatives are generally cooperative, but in many ways those representatives have their hands tied when it comes to federal policy. the county is looking for broad change. Residents said it’s overdue.

“[The federal government] [doesn’t] know the issues,” Resident Rusty Aiken said. “Our local commissioners know what needs to be done, they’ve got their hands involved, and see the problems.”

Fox 13 reached out to local BLM and the US Forest Service representatives for comment, but one was not immediately available.

Read the full report as a PDF by clicking here: Iron County Constitutional Jurisdiction Resolution

7 comments

  • Cartman

    Seems like they shouldn’t have to say it.

    Actually, the U.S. Constitution says that anything the Fed does that is outside its constitutionally authorized authority is not legal.

  • ItDoesntMatter

    Citizens of Iron County are expected to obey the law. So I don’t understand why law enforcement is upset at the way the Federal Government is performing their job. It is their higher command and they should be respectful and stop whining.

    • Cartman

      Federal laws do not have any authority if they are beyond the scope and limitations of the Constitution. And the Constitution belongs to We the People. All Iron County is saying is that they will not enforce illegitimate “laws.” A perfectly reasonable statement. They’re saying they will not to the bidding of people who seek to destroy freedom.

      A bunch of radical political fringe types got together and signed a document, once, with a similar message. It was called the Declaration of Independence. Most of their countrymen thought they were “kooks”, at best.

      Contrary to the propaganda you’ve been fed, Federal authority is NOT always “supreme.” Two important parts of the Constitution explain it. First is the “Supremacy Clause”, which is often touted as “proving” that the Fed is always right, but actually it says nothing of the sort. It says that Federal authority trumps State authority when Federal laws are enacted “in pursuit” of the aims of the Constitution. (Read it.)

      That’s why the Supremacy Clause does NOT contradict the Tenth Amendment of the Bill of Rights, which states that all powers and authority not specifically granted to the Federal government by the Constitution, or forbidden to the States by the Constitution, are reserved “for the States or for the People.”

      TWICE the Constitution makes it clear, in plain English, that if it’s not Constitutionally authorized then it isn’t a legitimate “law.”

      • dfryer36

        However, the question of whether a law is unconstitutional or not is not left to the Iron County commissioners to determine. It is left to the Supreme Court after having been heard by a federal court and an appeals court. They are the ones who have the power to determine what is and is not constitutional. If you feel your Constitutional rights have been violated you have the right to petition the government for the redress of grievances. Nullification is not, and never was, a Constitutional principle. You keep saying read the Constitution; well I suggest that you do the same. The Tenth Amendment says nothing about ” powers and authority not specifically granted to the Federal government by the Constitution…” It says, in it’s entirety “The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.” That word specifically makes a big difference. When the Tenth Amendment was written and accepted there was a recognition on the part of the founders that there were certain powers implied by the specifically granted powers to the federal government. James Madison stated during the debate ” it is impossible to confine a government to the exercise of express powers, there must necessarily be admitted powers by implication, unless the constitution is to descend to recount every minutiae.” By adding the word specifically to the Tenth Amendment you are not supporting the Constitution or being faithful to it. Instead you are trying to change the meaning of it in such a way as to render it impotent. And even if the word specifically were in the Tenth Amendment, I point to Article I Section 8 which contains this specific power: “The Congress shall have Power…To make all Laws which shall be necessary and proper for carrying into Execution the foregoing Powers, and all other Powers vested by this Constitution in the Government of the United States, or in any Department or Officer thereof.”

      • Mike Trapp

        We all have the intelligence and the privelege as citizens of a free nation, to determine the terms of the Constitutional contract. DFRYER36 is incorrect in assuming those powers belong only to the federal government. The Constitution is a contract between the people of the states and the federal government. It is not the prerogative of the federal government to assume the sole power of interpretation of the Constitution, and indeed, the limited and enumerated powers of the federal government are right there, in plain sight, for all to read. Article 1, Section 8, delineates them in their entirety, and the Tenth Amendment further specifies that all powers NOT delegated to the federal government remain under the power of the states and the people. There are only about 21 powers the general government does have, and they cannot be delegated to federal agencies, they must be determined by Congress, and Congress alone. Agencies are ” rulemakers ” and are not elected representatives of the people or the states. They have no authority to bypass Congres, and Congress cannot delegate authority to them. Iron County is right, the power to rule must be with the consent of the governed.

      • Mike Trapp

        James Madison also stated in Federalist 45:
        “The powers delegated by the proposed Constitution to the federal government, are few and defined. Those which are to remain in the State governments are numerous and indefinite. The former will be exercised principally on external objects, as war, peace, negotiation, and foreign commerce; with which last the power of taxation will, for the most part, be connected. The powers reserved to the several States will extend to all the objects which, in the ordinary course of affairs, concern the lives, liberties, and properties of the people, and the internal order, improvement, and prosperity of the State”

        So I’m glad to see DRFRYER36 agreeing with Madison. However, we do have to remember how inconsistent Madison was over his career, and the he was a FEDERALIST, which at the time was a central government advocate and that this sentiment contrasted with those of the anti-Federalists, most notably Thomas Jefferson. At any rate, There is simply no basis in logic for one party to a contract to retain the sole power of interpretation of that contract, as the Marshall court attempts to do with Marbury V. Madison.

  • dfryer36

    This is great and all, but how about doing something to improve the economy of Iron County which is one of the worst in the state. The majority of Iron County’s citizens live below the federal poverty level and yet instead of dealing those problems our elected officials are passing meaningless resolutions that do nothing to help the people here and that they know they will never be able to enforce because of the Supremacy Clause. of the Constitution. So basically they would rather do meaningless B.S. then address the actual problems that are impacting those of us who live in Iron County.

Comments are closed.

Notice: you are using an outdated browser. Microsoft does not recommend using IE as your default browser. Some features on this website, like video and images, might not work properly. For the best experience, please upgrade your browser.