Abbott to seek laws to remove sheriff

[AustinN4]

Game on!

**************************************************************

Abbott to seek laws to remove sheriff after ICE detainer policy announcement
KVUE 8:09 AM. CST January 25, 2017
http://www.kvue.com/news/local/abbo...er-ice-detainer-policy-announcement/392425254

"TRAVIS COUNTY - Days after Travis County Sheriff Sally Hernandez released a video detailing her policy concerning U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) detainers in local jails, Gov. Greg Abbott said Wednesday he will seek new laws that would remove her from office, KVUE's and the Austin American-Statesman's Tony Plohetski reports."

 

[Younggun]

This could be a bad thing. I'd rather voters be in charge of removing their sheriff. Not a politician. Lots a ways this could be bad.


What if a sheriff refuses to enforce a magazine capacity ban?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Vaquero]

Yep.
Could backfire in the future.

I'm more for local control.

 

[AustinN4]

This could be a bad thing. I'd rather voters be in charge of removing their sheriff. Not a politician. Lots a ways this could be bad.

I agree. If she ran on not cooperating with ICE in her campaign and the voters wanted her anyway, I don't think Abbott stands a chance and any such law if passed would not stand up to any challenge in the courts.

But if she didn't make this part of her campaign, and simply sprang it on the voters, it could get interesting. And I didn't pay enough attention during the election to know as I wasn't going to vote for her in any event.

Unfortunately, I believe a majority of Travis County voters would side with her.

Greg, we miss you!

 

[Moonpie]

No need to remove her.
Just remove all funding coming from state and Feds.
Change will happen ricky-tick.

 

[BRD@66]

Would this be kinda akin to a POTUS seeking to remove a state governor?

 

[Savage20]

i didn't even think a governor could do this? i guess that's why he's trying to create a law... making more laws is never a good thing. sheriff should have jurisdiction over their county, and the citizens of that county over their sheriff.

 

[AustinN4]

Would this be kinda akin to a POTUS seeking to remove a state governor?

i didn't even think a governor could do this? i guess that's why he's trying to create a law... making more laws is never a good thing. sheriff should have jurisdiction over their county, and the citizens of that county over their sheriff.

Yep, he is grandstanding!

 

[Savage20]

grandsitting?

 

[Dash Riprock]

Interesting.

I haven't kept up with this all that closely although I am aware that there have been some threats to cut state funding to counties and cities that refuse to enforce immigration laws. I don't really have a problem with that.

Recall a few years ago when our illustrious District Attorney was caught driving at three - THREE - times the legal limit. She refused to step down and there was no procedure in law to remove her. When Perry rightly line item vetoed state funding for that part of her office that deals with state matters, the Democrats actually found a way to indict HIM.

I can see issues with a governor being given the power to remove a duly elected sheriff, but I can also see a need for some kind of process to remove these people from office in certain extreme circumstances. I don't know what that process might be but I'm open to discussion.

 

[Tcruse]

This is really close to what Perry got in trouble over. There is a need to address such officials, maybe a way to force a re-call election.

 

[TheDan]

This could be a bad thing. I'd rather voters be in charge of removing their sheriff. Not a politician. Lots a ways this could be bad.

What if a sheriff refuses to enforce a magazine capacity ban?

Yep.
Could backfire in the future.

I'm more for local control.

This, times eleventy billion... The is a prime example of executive power creep.

 

[AustinN4]

grandsitting?

LOL

 

[TAZ]

Horrible horrible idea. Cut her department funding, cut the county funding. Or maybe bring her up on obstruction of justice charges. Aren't there already laws to deal with people who break the law.

 

[diesel1959]

Yeah, I think this could backfire badly. The power of the purse--both federal and state--should be the means used. The other thing that can be done is for the county commisioners (if so-inclined) can shrink down the sheriff's manpower and roles. The only role that a Texas Sheriff MUST do is to house the county's prisoners. An example of such "warfare" happened decades ago in Harris County and the HCSO was eviscerated badly, with the result that the eight Harris County Constable Offices were seeing huge increases in manpower, budget, and roles & missions. It's one of the reasons that to this day, the Harris County Constable Offices are so large and tasked to do many of the things that in other counties, would be done by the Sheriff's Office.

Sheriff's are responsible to the voters in their county, NOT to the Governor of the State. Abbott is misguided on this. I'm also pretty certain that the Travis County Commisioner's Court would be in sympathy with their Sheriff rather than Gov. Abbott. It's frustrating, but there it is.

 

[AustinN4]

I'm also pretty certain that the Travis County Commisioner's Court would be in sympathy with their Sheriff rather than Gov. Abbott. It's frustrating, but there it is.

UIAM, there is only 1 R Commish out of 5, so you are correct on both counts.

 

[zincwarrior]

i didn't even think a governor could do this? i guess that's why he's trying to create a law... making more laws is never a good thing. sheriff should have jurisdiction over their county, and the citizens of that county over their sheriff.

There is wisdom here.

 

[majormadmax]

From Abbott's Facebook page...

We are working on laws that will ban sanctuary cities, remove any office holder who promotes sanctuary cities, and impose criminal and financial penalties.

And may I add Article 1, Section 22 of the Texas Constitution...

Sec. 22. TREASON. Treason against the State shall consist only in levying war against it, or adhering to its enemies, giving them aid and comfort; and no person shall be convicted of treason except on the testimony of two witnesses to the same overt act, or on confession in open court.

 

[peeps]

While I agree with the local support aspect, this is one tangled mess. Would the fed government shut down funding to the whole state due to one or two holdout cities? The state level govt would be screaming their heads off at the local sherrifs for nothing.

What federal funding does Texas receive that we couldn't live without?

Would the compliant counties lose support for Abbott should the hold out cities cause a loss of funding for them because he is powerless to do anything?? Would a Democrat then be able to take governor office? Cluster_F

Treason, much better option, ha

 

[Younggun]

I doubt the people voting and supporting a sanctuary sheriff voted for Abbot anyways.

And yes, the Feds will cut funding of a state governor refuses to cooperate.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk