Try digitalPLUS for 10 days for only $0.99


News Opinion Op-Eds

The lawless sheriffs of Maryland

From Sheriff Joe Arpaio in Maricopa County, Ariz., to Garrett County Sheriff Robert Corley, a handful of law enforcement officials across the country have garnered national media attention by putting politics in front of law enforcement and ignoring certain laws they dislike.

While the vast majority of sheriffs nationwide serve honorably, enforcing the laws and putting their lives on the line for our safety, a small number of sheriffs have begun to claim that, in their opinion, validly enacted state and federal laws are unconstitutional. These sheriffs have ordered their subordinate law enforcement officers to ignore the law of the land and enforce only the provisions the sheriff personally feels are constitutional. By stating he will selectively enforce the Maryland Firearms Safety Act of 2013, Sheriff Corley ignores the oath he took to uphold the U.S. Constitution, the Maryland Constitution and the laws of the state of Maryland — while putting us all in danger of proliferation of violent crime.

Recently, Sheriff Arpaio became a national laughingstock when U.S. District Court Judge G. Murray Snow struck down the sheriff's unconstitutional decision to selectively enforce federal immigration laws, stating that Sheriff Arpaio had been arresting immigrants at the expense of fighting crime. While there is little doubt that Sheriff Corley will eventually be reined in by the Maryland Judiciary, the risk of elevating politics over crime prevention cannot be ignored while we await the judicial process to play out.

In the wake of the Newtown, Conn., school massacre, which claimed the lives of 20 innocent children and six innocent staff members, Gov. Martin O'Malley introduced the Firearms Safety Act to protect people like those schoolchildren and teachers from the scourge of mass murder by way of assault rifles, extended magazine clips and the dangerously mentally ill.

Is the legislation perfect? No. And will it require adjustments over time, extending the appropriate rights to law-abiding citizens? Yes. Nevertheless, the sheriffs of Garrett, Carroll and Cecil counties, who have all stated they will ignore the law, selectively enforce this lifesaving legislation at their peril and at the peril of the citizens they took an oath to protect.

Citizens cannot choose which laws to ignore and which to follow. The freedom we enjoy as Americans depends on predictable adherence to the rule of law. Likewise, sheriffs and county officials take an oath to uphold our laws; they do not have the right to pick and choose which laws they like most, and they certainly do not have the right to put our children and other vulnerable populations in danger of being murdered for fleeting political gain or public attention.

In a country dependent on the rule of law to protect civil rights and public safety, the nationwide trend of selective law enforcement and legislative nullification, which has unfortunately migrated to our state, is dangerous and distressing. We elect sheriffs, county commissioners or councils and county executives to protect us and to enforce our laws. We count on them to keep us safe, protect our rights and treat us fairly. Ignoring the law is a slap in the face to the citizenry and to democracy, and these individuals should be held accountable for their irresponsible and illegal decisions.

After years of ignoring the law, Sheriff Arpaio got his comeuppance in Arizona; how long will it take for the sheriffs of Garrett, Carroll and Cecil counties? Let us hope it does not take years, and that action is swift and decisive. Lives are at stake.

Jon Cardin, an attorney, represents Baltimore County in the Maryland House of Delegates. His email is

Copyright © 2015, The Baltimore Sun
Related Content
  • What gun rights and marriage equality (should) have in common

    What gun rights and marriage equality (should) have in common

    In the article, "A unique Maryland marriage sits at center of Supreme Court case considering gay nuptials" (March 13), Carrie Evans, executive director of Equality Maryland, is quoted as saying the following:

  • Maryland's gun law is working

    Maryland's gun law is working

    The gun lobby's lawsuit against Maryland's life-saving Firearm Safety Act described in Saturday's front page article does not challenge the constitutionality of the key provision of the act — requiring handgun purchasers to first obtain a fingerprint based background check and license from the...

  • Guns and the 'permanent darkness'

    Guns and the 'permanent darkness'

    By overwhelming margins, polls show Americans support universal background checks for those seeking to purchase a firearm to help keep guns out of the hands of criminals and those who are dangerously mentally ill. Clearly, the last thing you want is for some paranoid personality, ranting and raving...

  • NRA's paranoia is catching

    NRA's paranoia is catching

    The Sun's editorial reflecting on the National Rifle Association convention in Nashville is an important statement on how the NRA has devalued our lives and our society ("Guns and the 'permanent darkness,'" April 16).

  • NRA selectively interprets 2nd Amendment

    NRA selectively interprets 2nd Amendment

    As sure as nine people have been butchered by yet another gun-wielding maniac, there will be an outcry for more laws controlling the sale and registration of firearms, and the NRA will again claim they are heroically upholding the Second Amendment rights of every American citizen by opposing such...

  • Hogan, guns and the attorneys general

    Hogan, guns and the attorneys general

    During the recent gubernatorial campaign, The Sun and several thoughtful citizens were perplexed about the discrepancy between the National Rifle Association's notorious A- rating for Larry Hogan and the candidate's repeated promise that he won't overturn Maryland's gun law if elected. In fact,...