Bruce Zuchowski, a Trump-supporting Republican, likened migrants to “human locusts” and called the vice president a “Flip-Flopping, Laughing Hyena.”
The sheriff’s department in Portage County, Ohio has been stripped of its election security duties after its MAGA sheriff said people displaying Kamala Harris signs in their yards should have their addresses recorded so illegal immigrants can be sent to their homes.
Portage County Sheriff Bruce Zuchowski, a Donald Trump-supporting Republican seeking re-election, likened migrants to “human locusts” and called Harris a “Flip-Flopping, Laughing Hyena” on his personal and campaign Facebook accounts earlier this month.
…
The Ohio Secretary of State’s Office determined last week that Zuchowksi's post didn’t break state election laws, but local citizens expressed their discomfort with having an immigrant-hating MAGA sheriff in charge of protecting the vote.
Over 100 people attended an emergency meeting called by the local NAACP chapter, the *Ravenna Record-Courier *reported. Frank Hairson, the communications chair of the NAACP chapter said people told him: “They’re afraid to vote. They’re afraid to put signs in their yard.”
local citizens expressed their discomfort with having an immigrant-hating MAGA sheriff in charge of protecting the vote.
They should, uh, also have discomfort with an immigrant-hating MAGA sheriff in charge of protecting the community. Vote him out when he's up for re-election.
Nice. Not sure what to make of his opponent based on the website. No major red flags come up, but I'm sure the people in Portage County probably know him and where he stands on things way better than I do.
OTOH, the website is largely boring and factual, so I'm assuming he may not be that bad? The MAGAts are usually running from similar scripts, and this doesn't seem to fit that.
He's a Democrat and he hasn't made national news for his despicably racist remarks about immigrants. Outside of that, who really cares what the county sheriff's platform is? If I lived there, I'd vote for him.
Is it normal to know anything at all about your local Sheriff?
I had to do three google searches and then scroll down for a while to even find my local one, then their bio was so dull when I looked it up it was difficult to pay attention to it.
...distinguished career in law enforcement includes experience with various law enforcement agencies serving the metropolitan area. ... going on to serve with both the City and the County Police Departments. In 2008, applied that experience to the creation of the public safety office for the rapidly expanding College ...became the Assistant Chief of Police and...
Two issues - it's likely too late to recall him, the time it would take to get through the legal processes would be longer than voting him out in November. Secondly the secretary of state has already abdicated his responsibility in the matter.
The Ohio secretary of state's office said it did not plan to take any action.
“Our office has determined the sheriff’s comments don’t violate election laws,” said Dan Lusheck, a spokesperson for Republican Secretary of State Frank LaRose. “Elected officials are accountable to their constituents, and the sheriff can answer for himself about the substance of his remarks.”
I did wonder on that - are all sheriffs typically voted in, or are some appointed? And is there a rule about failure to do your job and appointing a replacement until the next election?
Sheriffs are generally elected, but the scope of their responsibility varies widely in different jurisdictions. In some places they are mostly responsible for some combination of courtroom bailiffs and serving legal documents and running the county jail. In others, they're the primary law enforcement that citizens will deal with on a daily basementbasis.
It varies state by state, and even county by county. Some are directly elected, some are appointed by other elected officials.
Direct elections theoretically make sheriffs accountable to voters, but realistically almost no one cares who the sheriff is unless they directly stir up a controversy. Bad but quiet sheriffs can fester for decades.
It also causes issues with them being accountable to other elected officials, like the mayor or city council.
Directly appointing Sheriffs makes them accountable to whoever appointed them, who are in turn accountable to voters. It can lead to sheriff roles changing more often if the appointing body shifts, and can result in cronyism.
Personally I think they should be appointed, but have independent, direct oversight outside of the appointing structure.