Ok, so... the mayor can give suggestions as to what he/she deems acceptable/advisable, but nothing more. While the police can determine their own priorities and choose to follow/disobey each "suggestion"?
The police are bound by the law. While issues of political priority might be directed by the mayor, issues of law may not be.
If I am arresting a drunk for fighting, and the mayor says to let him go, I am not legally bound to follow that direction. However, if my Chief says to let him go, I could be disciplined for failing to follow the orders of my superior. The Mayor is not in that official hierarchy.
So, at this point, assuming that the current police force has taken control of the city - if they AG determines their actions as unjust/unconstitutional, he/she can take the police department to court and this would be the only way to fight a "rogue" police force?
Yes, the AG would have to act through the courts. If a law has been broken and there is probable cause to determine that a felony has been committed, the AG might direct the state police to make an arrest, but they would still have to go to court. The AG cannot simply order the state police in to take over the town.
And I doubt we have a police force in a small town taking "control" of the city. Perhaps encouraging some draconian measures - perhaps not entirely legal - but I doubt they have roadblocks at intersections and are conducting warrantless searches for fifth columnists.
Is it not pathetic that we must assume all politics are dictated by "the power of the purse"?! You are not wrong in saying it, but we should not be a plutocracy... That isn't what the US is (or should be) about...
We are a representative republic. But, power is often exercised by the power of the purse. How do you think the feds managed to get the states to tow the line with speed limits, BAC levels, etc.? They tie funding to their desires. The same can hold true with state and local governments.
In a county if the Board of Supervisors dislikes the actions of an elected Sheriff, they cannot fire him or her, but they can cut off funds to programs or to the department as a whole in order to exert some measure of control. Some might call all of this "checks and balances."
Does this mean the police department stands on its own, above all forms of government which are state-based? If the previous would make the mayor/AG above the law, where does that put the police? They obviously think more of themselves than "at the law"... Aside from making unanswered calls/messages to an AG, what alternatives are there for the average citizen?
The law involves the courts. The AG is part of that process, too. The police are expected to uphold the law and adhere to it. When they do not, they face the possibility of civil and/or criminal charges in addition to termination of employment.
If an officer breaks the law he has his day in court just as everyone else.
The "average citizen" can pursue the legal process like anyone else. The problem here is that this whole thing may be - as I mentioned - long on hyperbole and short on facts.
and lastly, why did I go to school for art instead of law?!
Because art was less of a headache?
"according to what the city said" - in legal terms, even if the cities opinion is coming from officials who have placed themselves (illegally) as head of office, are these the words that will be relied upon? If a mayor and their citizens have spoken in opposition to injustices or illegal activities, does it matter?
Statements from city staffers are given the same weight and credibility as those who are saying otherwise. Or, are people critiquing the government the only ones who are capable of telling the truth or knowing the law?
This whole thing could have been averted had the council just let that woman speak her three minutes (or whatever is required by state law and local ordinance) and then ask her to step down. If she refused, THEN the Mayor or whomever could have asked the police to remove her and indicate they wished to have her placed under arrest if she refused.
I have had to do this for school board and city council meetings. It's ugly. But, it is much nicer when the issue is clear and the Mayor is willing to sign the private person's arrest.
As for the mutiny section ... uh, yeah, we haven't gotten there. And there is still nothing that says the police chief has "ousted" the mayor by force. Small town politicos - and fringe bloggers - tend to engage in rather exaggerated and inflammatory language at times. When emotions run hotter than objective reporting, then it is difficult to discern the truth of the matter.
