Court Upholds Elected Sheriffs’ and Voters' Constitutional Rights
Yesterday, in an important ruling that reinforces the foundational principles of true democracy and voter sovereignty, Thurston County Superior Court Judge Christine Schaller granted a partial preliminary injunction against the WA Democrats’ SB 5974, the new Sheriff decertification law that lets Democrats override voters and chill protected speech.
The plaintiffs in the case are Sheriffs Nowels (Spokane County), Glenn Blakeslee (Pend Oreille County), Brad Manke (Stevens County), and Ray Maycumber (Ferry County). “We count this a big win,” said Nowels.
The partial injunction blocked the most problematic parts (eligibility barriers and removal via decertification for Sheriffs), recognizing these provisions likely violate the WA State Constitution. As the case proceeds, it signals a renewed commitment to protecting free speech, fair elections, and the distinct role of Sheriffs as directly accountable to their communities.
The decision does not prevent the law from eventually being implemented, but means the bulk of SB 5974 will not take effect until the lawsuit plays out and the measure's constitutionality is determined by the court.
Attorney Mark Lamb successfully challenged the law’s overreach, which sought to impose the new certification requirements, experience mandates, and decertification standards on elected Sheriffs—powers that could have allowed an unelected commission to override the will of voters.
Lamb said it was a “fantastic day for the Constitution” and the plaintiffs!
Judge Schaller, who got the case last week when it was moved from Pend Oreille County, detailed the constitutional issues she sees in the law, especially holding Sheriffs to a much higher bar than other elected officials and allowing a proposed appointed 21-member board to remove a Sheriff from office.
Section 9 of the legislation that concerns requirements for sheriffs, including being at least 25 years old, serving for five consecutive years in law enforcement, and other less significant parts of the bill, were also put on hold ahead of today’s deadline for going into effect.
“My clients swore an oath to defend the Constitution of the United States, and here we are today to defend the Constitution on their behalf,” Lamb told Judge Schaller.
The Spokane County Prosecutor’s Office strongly supported the constitutional challenge. They provided legal analysis and public statements arguing that SB 5974 violated voter sovereignty and other constitutional principles.
It is clear to many the law clearly violates the WA State Constitution Art I, Sec 1 “All political power is inherent in the people,” Art I, Sec 3: “No person shall be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law,” Art II, Sec 1 and related provisions on Elections/Recall: The bill adds decertification as a new cause for vacancy and circumvents the Constitutional Recall process (Art I, Sec 19 & 33) protect the right to free and equal elections and outline specific processes for removing elected officials, allowing removal without voter-initiated recall or impeachment-like proceedings. And Art XI, Sec 5 (County government; Sheriffs as Constitutional Officers): Sheriffs are elected county officers, elected by county voters.
And violates the U.S. Constitution, 14th Amendment (Due Process Clause): Removal via administrative decertification without sufficient procedural safeguards (e.g., no automatic court review before vacancy) deprives the duly elected officeholder of due process and overrides electoral will, Art IV, Sec 4 (Guarantee Clause), denies a Republican form of government by allowing unelected bureaucrats to nullify voter-elected officials, interfering with local democratic processes, and the 10th Amendment (Powers Reserved to States/People): Principles that protect the will of the people from state overreach.
The National Sheriffs’ Association and the Western States Sheriffs’ Association formally joined forces in opposition to the Democrat legislation, calling it “a direct attack on a constitutionally established office” and “an affront to the citizens who elect their Sheriffs.” The Supremacy Clause makes clear that the U.S. Constitution and federal law prevail. A Sheriff’s sworn duty is to uphold them — even when doing so is politically inconvenient. No appointed board should have the authority to override the will of voters in fulfilling that constitutional obligation.
This decision strengthens public trust in law enforcement and upholds the balance of powers envisioned by the state’s constitution. As the case proceeds, it signals a renewed commitment to protecting free speech, fair elections, and the distinct role of sheriffs as directly accountable to their communities.
Tomorrow, another lawsuit against the bill is scheduled for a hearing, but yesterday’s decision may mean that the suit will not proceed. In that case, Kitsap County Sheriff candidate Rick Kuss was suing. However, yesterday’s injunction may mean that a legal challenge is unnecessary.
This victory will encourage more principled candidates to step forward, and ultimately foster stronger, more responsive governance that prioritizes the rights and voices of Washingtonians.
The Sheriff belongs to the people of each county, not corrupt bureaucrats and unelected boards! The County Sheriff is vital for ALL enforcement, and is also tasked with investigating election crimes.
This is a preliminary ruling, not a final decision on constitutionality. The state AG’s office argued against the injunction and is expected to appeal the ruling.
For now, it is not just a win for Sheriffs—it’s a win for every citizen who values liberty and self-determination, and victory against the WA State Democrats. At last! Constitution and law-based decisions are being rendered by the courts.
FULL SUBSTACK ARTICLE HERE
Share This Post...
