Sheriffs Don’t Get to Decide What Laws Are Constitutional

Lewis County’s recent debate over becoming a “Second Amendment sanctuary” highlights a recurring problem across the country: local officials pretending they get to decide which laws are valid. They don’t. That’s not how our constitutional system works.

Sheriff Rob Snaza has been pressing the county commission to adopt the sanctuary label, saying it would be mostly symbolic. But his statement that he would enforce state or federal gun restrictions “on a case-by-case basis” goes beyond symbolism. It cuts directly against his oath of office. Law enforcement officers swear to uphold the U.S. Constitution, the state constitution, and the laws. They don’t get to pick and choose which ones they feel like applying.

That’s not discretion — that’s nullification. And nullification has no legal basis at the county level.

The Constitution’s Supremacy Clause (Article VI) makes clear: federal law is the supreme law of the land. States also have authority to pass laws under their constitutions. Local governments — counties, cities, sheriffs — exist under that framework. They cannot declare laws void. If a law is alleged to be unconstitutional, only the courts have the power to make that determination.

Commissioner Sean Swope has signaled support for the sanctuary label, calling it protection against a “snowball” of restrictions. Commissioner Lindsey Pollock, though pro-gun herself, prefers a broader resolution reaffirming the Constitution. Commissioner Gary Stamper worries a sanctuary declaration could embolden reckless behavior. All of them, however, are talking around the same constitutional reality: this debate is political theater.

Law enforcement does have limited discretion — a deputy can give a warning instead of a ticket, a prosecutor can prioritize some cases over others. But refusing to enforce entire categories of laws is something else entirely. That’s a sheriff attempting to override the legislative and judicial branches. It undermines equal protection, because residents are no longer living under the same rules.

Courts have made this clear time and again. In Printz v. United States (1997), the Supreme Court said sheriffs can’t be forced to carry out federal programs. But that decision has been twisted. It didn’t give sheriffs the power to nullify laws they don’t like. When local governments have tried this “sanctuary” strategy — whether on guns, immigration, or anything else — courts have consistently held that the laws still apply.

The Lewis County discussion may be framed as symbolic, but when an elected sheriff says he’ll enforce laws “case-by-case,” that’s not symbolism. That’s a violation of his oath. The people of Lewis County — and every county — deserve better than politicians playing constitutional roulette.

In America, the courts decide constitutionality. Sheriffs enforce the law. Commissioners debate policy. That separation of roles is the safeguard of our democracy. Anything else is unconstitutional.