How to Perform a Citizen's Arrest of A Bush Administration Official

The news that 4 people had been arrested in Iowa while trying to perform a citizen's arrest on Karl Rove got me wondering: Can we arrest Bush administration officials ourselves? So I slogged through a slew of state statutes, and as it turns out, the answer is yes. But only if you live in certain particular states.

Citizen's arrests have a long, rich tradition dating back hundreds of years. Because the power of ordinary people to help law enforcement execute its duties is important, nearly every state has some sort of statute on the books permitting citizen detentions of suspected criminals.
However, while most states allow citizen's arrests, the majority require the presence of the citizen performing the arrest during the crime. A number of states have more flexible language in their laws, though. The California Penal Code, for example says the following:

837. A private person may arrest another:
1. For a public offense committed or attempted in his presence.
2. When the person arrested has committed a felony, although not
in his presence.
3. When a felony has been in fact committed, and he has reasonable cause for believing the person arrested to have committed it.

Alabama and Kentucky have similar wordings. Montana phrases things thusly:

A private person may arrest another when there is probable cause to believe that the person is committing or has committed an offense and the existing circumstances require the person's immediate arrest.

The dispute here will likely arise over the definition of the words "require the person's immediate arrest." I'd argue that if anyone needed to be immediately arrested, it's Karl Rove, but a Montana judge might disagree. And one of the main downsides to citizen's arrests is that if you're in the wrong, you have almost no legal protection (and depending on state law, may have committed a crime tantamount to kidnapping).

Don't let that deter you, though! If there are reasonable grounds to suspect a felony has been committed by the person arrested, then a citizen's arrest is perfectly legally justified. Just don't go and arrest the man behind the counter at the sandwich shop who gave you the wrong change.
What the four Iowans did is courageous, and is exactly how we should use the citizen arrest power. A citizen's arrest is a peaceful, lawful, old-fashioned, and charmingly Midwestern way to hold government criminals accountable. I suggest that we start a nationwide movement. We will turn any suspected government criminals over to the police. Just wait until a Bush administration official shows up in your town.

Figure out whether they can reasonably be considered guilty of a felony. Check the US Code to see who's guilty of what, and then perform a citizen's arrest.
Rove, for example, could likely be detained on suspicion of obstruction of justice, having violated Title 1, Section 18, Chapter 73, S. 1505:

Whoever corruptly... obstructs, or impedes or endeavors to influence [or] obstruct...the due and proper exercise of the power of inquiry under which any inquiry or investigation is being had by either House, or any committee of either House or any joint committee of the Congress...[s]hall be fined under this title, imprisoned not more than 5 years or, if the offense involves international or domestic terrorism...imprisoned not more than 8 years, or both.

I would think that one's fairly cut-and-dry. I'm not a lawyer, however, and I don't know whether this would interfere with, or be superseded by, the pending contempt of Congress citation. Still, I think it gives plenty of "reasonable suspicion," and if Rove is in California, that's all you need. You might pick up Miers or Bolton as well with that statute.

It doesn't take much perusing of the U.S. Code to find violations that administration officials are surely guilty of (the Elections and Political Activities section is one particular goldmine), and if you live in a state with lax state laws regarding citizen's arrests, detaining these people is perfectly within your right. It's just important to follow a few key steps.

1. Check your state laws first. This can be done by entering the name of your state and "statutes" into a search engine. An official online copy of existing state law will usually be the first result. The process for citizen's arrests will usually be located in the section under Crimes > Criminal Procedures > Arrests > Arrests by Private Persons, or something similar. Sometimes statutes are incredibly confusing to navigate through, but there will often be a search function somewhere on the page.

2. Check to make sure the particular person in question can be suspected of committing a felony (make sure it's a felony, though this depends on state law also).

3. Detain the person, without using physical force of any sort. Announce that you are performing a citizen's arrest, and cite the crime they are suspected of.

4. Call the police. Make sure you know the relevant citizen's arrest statute number and the U.S. Code number. You don't want to be the one being arrested.

5. This is risky, and all depends on your state. Make sure you're on solid legal ground first. It is best to consult a lawyer. WikiHow has an informative article on citizen's arrests in general.

We really ought to be inspired by the 4 courageous Iowans who dared to try to hold Rove accountable for his crimes. Government officials, no matter how high-ranking, should be prevented from even walking the street without fear of arrest, if they are guilty of a crime. Whether or not justice is done should not depend on how politically influential the accused is. If the Justice Department will not do its job, then let citizens uphold the law. Citizen's arrests are a powerful yet peaceful way to show the strength and defiance of the American people.

Comments

[lisakaz2]

There ought to be lessons given on this.

[irishgawdess]

Does the person have to be in one of the four states to be arrested by a citizen?

Perhaps it might be better to wait to arrest and prosecute these bottom feeders until after Bush is out of office with no way to pardon them, i.e. Rove, Cheney, Rummy et al.

[NortheastNeighbor]

Good thought. That could explain why we haven't seen any action on their crimes to date. I like the idea.

[StanTheManic]

Say what you will about all of us dumb-ass huckleberries out here in EYE-OH-Way -- I am proud as hell of these people.

It was the work of folks from the Catholic Worker House in Des Moines. Frank Cordaro is the head of CWH in Des Moines -- he's been a rabble rouser for decades, from splashing blood at Ouffitt Air Force base in Omaha ... to dumping ashes at a Nixon (?) press conference.

Good work!

Hey -- other 49 states' citizens -- where are your balls???!!!

[Laserbeam]

I'm on the left coast, but I too applaud them. Iowa rocks!

[JiminNC]

The Congress won't do it. They abdicate their responsibility to the people.

[Vinca]

JiminNC: YOU NAILED IT

[Heavy]

How to Perform a Citizen's Arrest of A Bush Administration Official: With excessive force

[LWkcma]

with 'extreme prejudice" snicker-snicker

[ElPerro]

Taze him, Bro!

[lisakaz2]

Here the 9 times might be justifiable, too.

[UncleOwen]

Can foreigners vacationing in the US do that as well?
Since the international community seems to hate Bush & co just as much as we do, they may be eager to support our efforts.

Anyways, makes you wonder (or not) why B & co were adamant -to say the least- to stay as far away as possible from the ICC?
"The Bush administration's hostility to the ICC has increased dramatically in 2002. The crux of the U.S. concern relates to the prospect that the ICC may exercise its jurisdiction to conduct politically motivated investigations and prosecutions of U.S. military and political officials and personnel. The U.S. opposition to the ICC is in stark contrast to the strong support for the Court by most of America's closest allies."
Read the rest of it here: http://www.hrw.org/campaigns/icc/us.htm

[Broga]

What a great idea! Here in Europe the detestation of Bush (and Blair) has become visceral. Perhaps we can start by arresting Blair who is strutting the world "bringing peace to the Middle East" while young military men try to come to terms with the consequences of his deceits. One of the agonising frustrations in the UK is watching Blair and his acolytes spending public money, refusing to be accountable for the finances they take from the public purse, while hearing his successors promise to "do something about crime" and this involves punishing young men for crimes which are minor compared to that of Blair, Bush and Co.

[RJII]

I'll help you arrest detested blair, if you help me arrest detested idiot Bush.

[KareninSac]

I suggest you contact your state and federal representatives and tell them that you and your friends are thinking maybe this is a good idea, since they can't seem to uphold the law. Maybe when they realize that the citizenry is serious about prosecuting people who have committed crimes, such as Bush, Cheney, Rove, Gonzales, etc., they'll finally do something other than just order another "non-impeachment" hearing or some such nonsense, instead of actually doing their jobs!

[elbzee]

YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES

[FirstShirt]

Did your keyboard stick or did you accidentally tase yourself?

[Daniboy]

Bill Clinton impeached-George Bush not impeached. What can an impartial observer conclude from this???

[Michale32086]

Easy..

There was actually courtroom evidence that Clinton broke the law..

Such does not exist in the case of George Bush..

Michale.....

[BassMonk]

Technically correct, since he hasn't been indicted.

[caferide]

No there's no courtroom evidence yet. And do you know why? Because GWB has stacked the courtrooms with partial judges, and changes the rules when the judges DO rule against him. But fear not...there's always the United Nations War Crimes Tribunal.

[Yatata]

i'm sorry Michale, but as of 2006 Bush had already violated 750 laws under the constitution. There has never been so much hard evidence for the impeachment of a president in the history of the United States.

[TheHandyman]

Not to the willfully blind and ignorant there isn't!

[rsaillant1]

Michale, I would suggest you read a book or two. One that comes to mind is; "The Prosecution of George W. Bush For Murder" by Vincent Bugliosi. It's a best seller, so I'm certain you could obtain a copy with relative ease.

In it you'll find a litany of documented offenses, laid out in chronological order, so that the simplest of readers will comprehend the content and the severity of the charges.

So, your comment that no such evidence exixts is either a gross oversight on your part,
a lack of comprehension or a blind faith in you party and its' leaders. Sad...

[DocWylie]

that the job isn't yet finished?

[Old Writer]

We are lost if we cannot tell the difference between

Lying about having oral sex
and
Lying about torturing people.

[zacharyS]

very well said!

thank you for the simple yet dynamic truth of your statement

[Vinca]

We can conclude , WHERE'S THE JUSTICE IN THAT?

[DixieChic]

That we are, indeed, living in an Idiocracy.

[returnofthejedi]

The fact that the people that where actually doing the job that the politicians and the police SHOULD be doing themselves ought to wake Americans up to reality.
The people we entrust with enforcing our laws only want (it seems) to enforce laws on the poor and politicaly powerless. There-in lies the real reason that the so called "conseratives" want to use any crooked method they can for keeping men like Barack Obama away from the White House. They know and have known for quite awhile that if someone that will not turn a blind eye to the plight of the less well to do would threaten their mastery over the levers of power in America. This is why these old bastards and their children are so negative and resistant to change taking place in this land. After they wear out their welcome in the U.S. they know that there is no other people as tolerant to them as Americans are. Like that nut job that shot those innocent folks in church, thesehidden enemies of ours would rather see the country destroyed rather than see a change take place that would strip them of their power to control our minds, our money, and our well being.

[Michale32086]

}}}}}}}}}}}}}
And one of the main downsides to citizen's arrests is that if you're in the wrong, you have almost no legal protection (and depending on state law, may have committed a crime tantamount to kidnapping).

Don't let that deter you, though!
}}}}}}}}}}}}}

I hope this was sarcastic and tongue in cheek..

If not, are you volunteering to serve in the person's stead when they go to jail on kidnapping charges??

It's hilariously hypocritical that those who are ALLEGEDLY all about the "rule of law" are ready to VIOLATE the law...

Encouraging people to make citizens arrests is wholly irresponsible. If I were Rove, I would LET those ignorant sheeple make the citizens arrest and then sue them and everyone who encouraged such illegal and unethical actions.

Michale.....

[wesinohio]

No Michale. Those people are patriots who arrested an alleged criminal and traitor. The law is clear and they followed the law. I eagerly await the favorable resolution of this illegal arrest of citizens doing their duty, and then to the trial of Karl Rove! I hope it's the first of many trials of figures in the Bush administration.

[Michale32086]

}}}}}}}}}
Those people are patriots who arrested an alleged criminal and traitor.
}}}}}}}}}

Actually, no they didn't..

}}}}}}}}}
I eagerly await the favorable resolution of this illegal arrest of citizens doing their duty, and then to the trial of Karl Rove! I hope it's the first of many trials of figures in the Bush administration.
}}}}}}}}}

It's a wet dream...

I prefer to live in the real world...

But, you are certainly entitled to your fantasies...

Michale.....

[wesinohio]

No Michale. Those people are patriots who arrested an alleged criminal and traitor. The law is clear and they followed the law. I eagerly await the favorable resolution of this illegal arrest of citizens doing their duty, and then to the trial of Karl Rove! I anticipate his conviction and I hope it's the first of many such arrests and trials and convictions of figures from the Bush administration.

[AzRealProgressive]

You are getting ahead of yourself. Probable cause is needed to bring charges, and specific violations of those statues, and evidence of those violations. In two years of the Democratic congress no one has been able to find even the smallest violation.

And those people did not follow the law. That is why they were hung out to dry.

[mordoormat]

Rove is fair game. He has a subpoena to appear before congress and the only reason he hasn't is because the Justice department is totally corrupt.

If any of us had such a subpoena you can bet there would be no consequences for somebody dragging us into congress by the hair and hurling us before the chair.

Rove should get no special treatment.

Why are people like you so willing to become apologists to these people?

[stimpy]

I suspect there is a time component we are missing here: that a citizen's arrest must take place because law enforcement personnel are not available and the suspect represents a flight risk.

What I'd really like to know is how John Q. Public can charge people like Rove with a crime?

I know it's possible, only because I've had state troopers offer ME the opportunity to charge someone with a traffic infraction. But of course the burden would have been upon me to show up in court and testify against the offender.

[doctorwang]

There's a big difference between being charged and being arrested.

[Heavy]

If I see him, I hope he resists arrest :)

[PlantGod72]

HEE HEE.......Don't TAZE me, Bro!!!

[cobra7]

LMAO.....and when you are done with him, it will be my turn......nuff said

[FirstShirt]

You liberal Rambos are so amusing.

[CyrusBeaucephus]

I hear a chickenhawk pecking at his keyboard

[ChaosMotor]

You say the crime has to be committed in your presence. However, if the person is, say, violating federal statues by ignoring a Congressional subpoena, if you are in their physical presence, you are witnessing them commit that crime, unless you are watching them walk into Congress to rectify the situation. So if you chance upon Rove, he IS committing a crime in your presence, by continuing to be in violation of federal statutes by ignoring Congress's subpoena.

[returnofthejedi]

My thoghts exactly.

[pkafin]

I think you are correct enough here to justify continuing attempts by citizens to place him under arrest.

[realityczech4u]

Woohoo! I can't wait to see Code Pink add this to their repertoire:
"WAAAAAAAAAAR CRIIIIIIIIMIIIIIIIINAAAAAAAAL!!!!!!!!! I AM PLACING YOU UNDER ARREST!!!!!!!!!!"

Life gets curiouser and curiouser.