Chenoweth Proposal Loses Sheriffs’ Backing Congresswoman Wants Federal Agents To Get Permission For Arrests, Warrants

The Idaho Sheriffs Association has declined to support U.S. Rep. Helen Chenoweth’s latest proposal requiring federal agents to get county sheriffs’ written permission before executing arrest or search and seizure warrants in their jurisdictions.

The action caught the Idaho Republican by surprise since association President Chip Roos of Bonner County told her more than two months ago that the sheriffs had dropped their questions of 1995 and now supported the measure.

Lewis County Sheriff Don Fortney, the association’s secretary, said about 25 sheriffs were unanimous in declining to support the proposal during the group’s meeting in Coeur d’Alene last week.

“Basically, we didn’t figure the bill as written was necessary,” Fortney said. “We agreed with the concept of increased cooperation with the federal agencies, but for us to question a warrant signed by a judge really wasn’t our place.”

Even Owyhee County Sheriff Tim Nettleton, who has been at odds with Bureau of Land Management law enforcement agents in his county, said Chenoweth’s proposal needs work.

“There are several scenarios under that wording that make it unworkable,” he said.

Besides, Nettleton said, the BLM’s law enforcement agent in Owyhee County now keeps in close contact with the sheriff’s office about what he is doing and how he is doing it.

Chenoweth said on Tuesday, however, that the opposition was not as strong as Fortney indicated and that the questions raised were based on a misunderstanding of her proposal.

When first proposed a year ago, one New York Democratic congressman called it “an absolutely looney concept,” and a California Democrat was outraged by Chenoweth’s contention that the actions of Nazi war criminals tried at Nuremberg underscored the wisdom of her approach.

“That’s the kind of irrational statements that just cannot be tolerated by public officials,” Congressman George Miller said at the time.

Under the measure, federal law enforcement agents would be required to provide the county sheriff the name of the person targeted by their action, a clear statement of the probable cause and the location, date and time the action will take place.

The sheriff could refuse to give written permission as long as the denial would not be illegal or taken for financial or other improper gain by the sheriff. Permission would be sought from the state’s attorney general if the arrest or search warrant targeted a county official.

Written permission would not be required in some instances, such as when federal agents witness a crime or immediate action is needed to protect a person or property from imminent harm.

“According to the reports I got from the sheriffs, there were not 25 but there were 14 to 15 sheriffs in a meeting,” Chenoweth told KIDO radio in Boise.

“The point is that the FBI or any federal agency should go to the sheriff first before engaging in any kind of activity that would result in physical activity like search and seizure or arrest,” she said. “That means you go work with the county sheriff first and then go to the judge for a warrant. They simply just didn’t understand that detail.”

Fortney reconfirmed that 25 of the 44 sheriffs attended the meeting but acknowledged he did not count the actual number who participated in the discussion of Chenoweth’s bill.

“I don’t know where she got the 14, but I’m not going to necessarily argue with her,” he said.

But he said her explanation to resolve concerns over warrants was unworkable primarily because federal arrest or search warrants can be generated by information gathered in other states let alone other counties. In especially time-sensitive situations such as the inquiries involving the Unabomber or the freemen, he said, her requirement could actually hamstring law enforcement efforts.

He said sheriffs also are not privy to all the information a judge would have to base a warrant on and do not want to be put in the position of second-guessing the judiciary.

In addition, he agreed with Nettleton that cooperation between local and federal authorities has been good in recent years.

Fortney said it would be ludicrous “to make it federal law that they have to approach us before they go to a federal judge.”