Does law enforcement have the ability to determine what is an is not legal?

I know this seems like an odd question. But I'm thinking about organizations in the government that are not legislative...writing and enforcing laws. ATF would be an example. FDA? Department of Ag? I'm wondering if anyone has more information and places I can search? I'm more famliar with atf essentially writing and enforcing laws, but I'm wondering more about precedent and other agencies doing the same things. Not starting a gun control thread. Let me know what you think.

I know the traffic police sure do. Ditto for IRS. If you have a problem or a question about what they are saying, you can then take it up with a judge.

It happens when Congress purposely enacts laws which allow government agencies to promulgate and enforce their own rules and regulations. There's a whole branch of law called "administrative law" which deals with it.

It's a growing problem, one which almost no one is even aware of, let alone appreciates. Congress should be doing ALL legislating, not unaccountable Executive branch agencies. I even think a Constitutional amendment is in order.

ataraxia said:

I know the traffic police sure do. Ditto for IRS. If you have a problem or a question about what they are saying, you can then take it up with a judge.

Click to expand...

Traffic I disagree. They have specific laws that you can go and find. These are not written by "the police." These are written by legislators. Like running a stop sign or a rolling stop. Where the ATF...can decide what parts are illegal on a firearm (see sig brace). They are making the decision on what defines something. Not the legislator. Just using them as an example. Traffic cops can't decide what contintites running a red light. They can only decide how close you are and arrest you for you it (ticket)

blackjack50 said:

Traffic I disagree. They have specific laws that you can go and find. These are not written by "the police." These are written by legislators. Like running a stop sign or a rolling stop. Where the ATF...can decide what parts are illegal on a firearm (see sig brace). They are making the decision on what defines something. Not the legislator. Just using them as an example. Traffic cops can't decide what contintites running a red light. They can only decide how close you are and arrest you for you it (ticket)

Click to expand...

Oh I see. So this IS about gun control. I don't know much about the details of gun laws and their enforcement.

But let me ask you this: is this that different from how the IRS determines and judges whether you are evading taxes?

blackjack50 said:

I know this seems like an odd question. But I'm thinking about organizations in the government that are not legislative...writing and enforcing laws. ATF would be an example. FDA? Department of Ag? I'm wondering if anyone has more information and places I can search? I'm more famliar with atf essentially writing and enforcing laws, but I'm wondering more about precedent and other agencies doing the same things. Not starting a gun control thread. Let me know what you think.

Click to expand...

I know as an MP we enforced the law. If we saw a violation of the law we would issue a citation or even arrest and charge someone with breaking the law. But the determination of guilt is still done by the judicial system.

All these agencies are enforcing the law. The determination of what will become a law is whole other thing.

Law enforcement can’t determine what is illegal any more than citizens can. Law enforcement can only determine what is enforced. If you think about petty offences, police officers probably pass countless technically illegal things every day which they deem not worth the time to bother with and they also have flexibility to let people off with unofficial warnings in many circumstances. None of that makes the offences any less illegal. With more serious offences, the actual law enforcement element only makes arrests and reports their version of events. Prosecuting authorities (who might be part of the same organisation) then decide whether there is a case to be brought and the judiciary (sometimes with juries) ultimate decide whether the law has been broken and if so, the punishment to be levied.

None of those are determining what actually is illegal, thought they can obviously have significant practical impact, determining what offences are actively pursued and setting case precedents. Ultimately though, only legislators can actually determine what is and is not illegal and they can overrule the practice and precedents if they wish. And, of course, we can (in theory) vote out the legislators if we don’t like their rulings.

Dog catchers offer no due process.

blackjack50 said:

I know this seems like an odd question. But I'm thinking about organizations in the government that are not legislative...writing and enforcing laws. ATF would be an example. FDA? Department of Ag? I'm wondering if anyone has more information and places I can search? I'm more famliar with atf essentially writing and enforcing laws, but I'm wondering more about precedent and other agencies doing the same things. Not starting a gun control thread. Let me know what you think.

Click to expand...

In my experience with lobbying and being around law making in government... rarely if ever do the legislators themselves, write the law.

Usually the law is written by special interest groups or a government agency. They write the bill.. and get a legislator to "sponsor" the bill and submit it into committee. Then it goes through votes, amendment processes etc. EPA, USFS , BLM, IRS, ATF, all will write a bill or changes to a bill (an amendment) and get it introduced through a congressman.

If you had not recognized a violation of the law, the case never would have appeared in front of a court. Law enforcement agents do recognize violation of laws, but they do not adjudicate the outcome and devise punishment, except perhaps when issuing a traffic or parking summons, dependent on the local systems.

Besides, as former MP, I recognize the job often wasn't seeking violations of law, but protecting our men and women in uniform from themselves. A soldier in uniform spending time in a brig cannot perform the assignments for which that soldier is needed.

blackjack50 said:

I know this seems like an odd question. But I'm thinking about organizations in the government that are not legislative...writing and enforcing laws. ATF would be an example. FDA? Department of Ag? I'm wondering if anyone has more information and places I can search? I'm more famliar with atf essentially writing and enforcing laws, but I'm wondering more about precedent and other agencies doing the same things. Not starting a gun control thread. Let me know what you think.

Click to expand...

Yes, a very odd question. Anybody that can read and has access to the written law has the ability to determine what is legal or not legal. I once got a traffic ticket from a State Trooper, and he had a box full of the Florida Statutes in the trunk of his cruiser. He wrote the ticket, and I told him I would see him in court. He chickened out and did not show up in court. Citizen 1 Trooper 0. He meant well, but was not properly equipped.