*Note: The following is a letter I sent to Professor Jared Goldstein, Professor of Law and Associate Dean for Academic Affairs at Roger Williams University School of Law. I emailed this letter on February 23, 2019 and have, to this day, not received a reply. It is only when I received no reply that I decided to make this email public for two purposes:
1. To encourage others, who may read or hear error or false assertions given by someone society entrusts with the responsibility of the title of “professor” or “expert”, to write to that person and offer correction and or discussion. Often, when people contact me with their comments or concerns, the discussions we have are very beneficial to both parties. It is essential in the preservation of Liberty and Truth that we do not stand silent in the face of error.
2. To offer encouragement to Professor Goldstein to actually read my email and consider the facts presented and perhaps alter his perspective and therefore aid in the education of truth to the students of Roger Williams School of Law and thereby the future of America.
I hope the general reader will find not only education, but inspiration to take a public stand. “‘Tis not in numbers but in unity that our great strength lies…” says Thomas Paine and Americans must be united in Truth and Liberty.
Dear Prof Goldstein,
I am a former prosecutor and 1st Amendment Attorney, graduate of the University of Florida College of Law. I read your quote in the NPR article about the authority of the Sheriff to refuse to enforce laws that deny the rights of citizens. I am deeply disturbed by your implication that those we elect to be the guardians of our Rights must slavishly enforce laws that operate to contrary to their elected purpose. The Sheriff is not an agent of the government, he is an elected representative of the people with and obligation to the people and their Rights first and to the government and laws second. Why would you return the office of the Sheriff back to pre-Magna Carta times when the Sheriff was merely an agent of the king?
You see it is not about “refusing laws they do not like” as you submit. That is disengenuously simplistic. It is a duty to protect and defend the rights of the people whether the attack comes from a criminal or an out of control government or its agent.
You allude to the claim that you represent a higher moral ground when suggesting Sheriffs must simply enforce the laws put before them. That is not a higher moral ground but a tyranny that has been denied through the ages. I’m sure I do not need to remind you of the common defense offered at Nuremburg.
Contrary to your assertion, a Sheriff who is mindful of defending Rights instead of enforcing laws would have refused to arrest Americans in the cafes of Birmingham. Yet your premise gives permission to the officers who committed the atrocities against those people, in the name of the law. Can you just imagine the pride Americans could offer in their history if just one Sheriff had said, “Mrs. Parks this law is wrong and violates your Rights so I refuse to enforce it. You sit wherever you want and I will escort you home.”
I ask you to reconsider your opinion and consider some history and facts regarding the Rights of the people and the proper role and duty of those elected to defend them. I humbly submit to you the following treatise on this issue.
I respectfully wait for your reply,
KrisAnne Hall, JD