ACORN finally won a round in its battle with Congress and the Obama administration on Friday, as a federal court ruled the United States acted unconstitutionally by targeting the organization in an attempt to withhold funding.
Judge Nina Gershon found that Congress' attempt to limit ACORN funding violated the Constitution's ban against government action that specifically singles out a person or group. That clause, officially known as a ban against "Bills of Attainder," is based on the idea that the legislative branch must not act like a court or jury in punishing individuals.
"The plaintiffs have raised a fundamental issue of separation of powers," writes Judge Gershon in the opinion. "They have been singled out by Congress for punishment that directly and immediately affects their ability to continue to obtain federal funding, in the absence of any judicial, or administrative, process adjudicating guilt."
Several observers, including MSNBC anchor Rachel Maddow and The Nation's own Jeremy Scahill, had stressed that the ACORN bill was probably unconstitutional, and that the amount of money involved was quite small.
The Obama administration is defending the law in this case; it is expected to continue to argue against Friday's preliminary injunction in later court proceedings.
Follow Ari Melber on Twitter: www.twitter.com/AriMelber
J
Consider the worst complaint conservative lodge against Acorn: they engage in vote fraud. Republican-dominated state legislations have passed a series of laws against voting fraud, with severe penalties, which have driven most of the organiztions that registered voters, like the League of Women Voters, out of the voter registration arena. One of these laws says voter registars MUST turn in all completed forms. So, if a person signs Mickey Mouse as a joke, or a worker fills the cards out himself to avoid the work, the organization MUST turn those cards in, even if they know they're not valid. Republicans then seize on these invalid registration cards as clear, convincing evidence of voter fraud, which was the original purpose of passing the law in the first place. Acorn is being prosecuted under these voter fraud laws even though they pointed the invalid regisrations themselves.
They also advocated for poor people in the areas of wages, housing, training and the right and ability to vote.
These are GOOD thins unless you believe the poor shouldn't have the ability to exercise their rights in this democratic society.
J
So you're saying that we should go back to the rules as they existed at the signing of the Constitution? Where only men, who were 21 and up, and landowners, could vote?
Or perhaps you mean to after the 15th Amendment was passed, where only men could vote, as long as they were 21?
Or maybe we could just obey the Constitution which says (ever since the passage of the 19th and 26th Amendments) that EVERY single person who is at least 18 years old has the RIGHT to vote!!!!
The Obama administration should stop wasting the taxpayer's money on the pursuit of this ruling.
Didn't Obama say -- during the campaign -- that he was a "constitutional lawyer'?
The score is:
The Constitutiion (1)
The Congress and the Administration (0).
Give it up, already.
Now, whether they get funded NEXT year is another matter. Congress would be perfectly within the law to refuse to fund them again.
J
However, the DOJ needs to go through this process to set a precedent, and to allay any apperance of impropriety.
The courts sure can't dictate that.
They punished ACORN for all of the good things they did. Shame on the Democrats who helped their loathsome agenda.
Right...
1) Article 1, Section 9, Clause 3 of the US Constitution states:
"No bill of attainder or ex post facto Law shall be passed."
2) a Bill of Attainder is defined as:
"an act of the legislature declaring a person or group of persons guilty of some crime and punishing them without benefit of a trial."
3) The court has determined (correctly, IMHO) that passing a bill SPECIFICALLY banning ACORN from ever getting any more government money qualifies as a bill of attainder.
Now then, ACORN can still lose all their government funding, IF it's done legally. For example, if it's determined by the person granting their contracts that they are no longer providing the services they are supposed to, or if another group can do it cheaper, then they will lose all their funding. But that won't be an act of Congress!
For Congress to say that ACORN is guilty of criminal actions and orders their leadership to be arrested and throw into jail with out a trial...That would be a bill of attainder.
Here are the facts, Constitution trumps Congress and in this case the Congress was wrong.