Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

ACLU Is Funded with Tax Payer Dollars!!
Rush Limbaugh Show - Roger Hedgecock

Posted on 12/03/2004 10:23:37 AM PST by drc43

Section 1988. Proceedings in vindication of civil rights

(a) Applicability of statutory and common law
      The jurisdiction in civil and criminal matters conferred on the
    district courts by the provisions of titles 13, 24, and 70 of the
    Revised Statutes for the protection of all persons in the United
    States in their civil rights, and for their vindication, shall be
    exercised and enforced in conformity with the laws of the United
    States, so far as such laws are suitable to carry the same into
    effect; but in all cases where they are not adapted to the object,
    or are deficient in the provisions necessary to furnish suitable
    remedies and punish offenses against law, the common law, as
    modified and changed by the constitution and statutes of the State
    wherein the court having jurisdiction of such civil or criminal
    cause is held, so far as the same is not inconsistent with the
    Constitution and laws of the United States, shall be extended to
    and govern the said courts in the trial and disposition of the
    cause, and, if it is of a criminal nature, in the infliction of
    punishment on the party found guilty.
    (b) Attorney's fees
      In any action or proceeding to enforce a provision of sections
    1981, 1981a, 1982, 1983, 1985, and 1986 of this title, title IX of
    Public Law 92-318 (20 U.S.C. 1681 et seq.), the Religious Freedom
    Restoration Act of 1993 (42 U.S.C. 2000bb et seq.), the Religious
    Land Use and Institutionalized Persons Act of 2000 (42 U.S.C.
    2000cc et seq.), title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (42
    U.S.C. 2000d et seq.), or section 13981 of this title, the court,
    in its discretion, may allow the prevailing party, other than the
    United States, a reasonable attorney's fee as part of the costs,
    except that in any action brought against a judicial officer for an
    act or omission taken in such officer's judicial capacity such
    officer shall not be held liable for any costs, including
    attorney's fees, unless such action was clearly in excess of such
    officer's jurisdiction.
    (c) Expert fees
      In awarding an attorney's fee under subsection (b) of this
    section in any action or proceeding to enforce a provision of
    section 1981 or 1981a of this title, the court, in its discretion,
    may include expert fees as part of the attorney's fee.


TOPICS: Constitution/Conservatism; Front Page News; Government; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: aclu; extortion; federalfunding; lawsuits; taxpayer
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-54 next last
Roger Hedgecock says the ACLU has been using this law to recover all attornies fees associated with their suits against the Boy Scouts, Ten Commandments and others.

We are being sued with our own money!!

1 posted on 12/03/2004 10:23:37 AM PST by drc43
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: drc43

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1293717/posts


2 posted on 12/03/2004 10:25:58 AM PST by mcg1969
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: drc43
We are being sued with our own money!!

Isn't Congress a wonderful thing??

3 posted on 12/03/2004 10:26:41 AM PST by technomage
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: drc43
He had a congressman on from California that heard this. As a result, The Cogressman has PROMISED to introduce legislation to prevent this from happening in the future.

He could not believe it.

4 posted on 12/03/2004 10:27:00 AM PST by drc43 (We have 4 years left to get it right)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: drc43

More data please!!!


5 posted on 12/03/2004 10:27:10 AM PST by pointsal
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: drc43
Yes, but they have to win the cases first, and then the judge has to decide it is justified to award attorney's fees.

This is a red herring. The problem is NOT that they are being awarded attorney's fees. In fact, we ought to see an expansion of "loser pay" in this country.

The problem is, of course, that they're winning cases that they shouldn't.

6 posted on 12/03/2004 10:27:24 AM PST by mcg1969
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: mcg1969

Well good. Glad it's out there. I could not get it to come up on search. I am getting tired of trying to search, then nothing, then getting told "already posted".


7 posted on 12/03/2004 10:28:39 AM PST by drc43 (We have 4 years left to get it right)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: drc43

A true conservative president and a conservative led congress, would first of all, cut off all federal funds that go to those that oppose American values. I may disagree with many things Michael Savage proposes, but BORDERS+LANGUAGE+CULTURE are the principal American values. The Anti-CLU is against all three, plus nearly all others.


8 posted on 12/03/2004 10:29:19 AM PST by jeremiah (Sunshine scares all of them, for they are all cockaroaches)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: mcg1969
"The problem is, of course, that they're winning cases that they shouldn't."

We should not in anycase be funding the suits.

9 posted on 12/03/2004 10:30:36 AM PST by drc43 (We have 4 years left to get it right)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: drc43

Yeah, this story is worth posting (even though I think it's a red herring). But it's hard to do an adequate search on a talk show topic because there's no standard headline to search with.


10 posted on 12/03/2004 10:31:32 AM PST by mcg1969
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

Comment #11 Removed by Moderator

To: drc43

I wrote this letter to all of my elected representatives please write yours.

"The ACLU is using my tax dollars to destroy the United States, just like the Islamic terrorist, except they are using our tax dollars to do it. Please repeal the law that allows the ACLU to use hard working American tax dollars to destroy our country.

The American people will be happy when this law is repealed."


12 posted on 12/03/2004 10:33:10 AM PST by YOUGOTIT
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: mcg1969
"even though I think it's a red herring.."

Fine. Let's choke 'em with a red herring if that's what it takes.

13 posted on 12/03/2004 10:33:26 AM PST by drc43 (We have 4 years left to get it right)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: drc43
We have to decide these principles separately. Either we believe in a loser pay system, or we don't. And again, it's important to remember we're not funding them per se, we're paying out only if we lose. I don't like it any more than you, but again, my real problem is that we shouldn't be losing these cases.

Now one thing I'd like to know is, do we have to pay if the case is overturned on appeal? I'd like to make sure that if we're going to have a loser pay system that the attorney's fees are held in escrow until the case is fully resolved.

14 posted on 12/03/2004 10:33:27 AM PST by mcg1969
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: itsmyboy

>>What the hell! How come they cant be stopped. I just dont understand. Why cant we do something?<<

...said the Jew in Berlin, 1936...


15 posted on 12/03/2004 10:35:04 AM PST by RobRoy (Science is about "how." Christianity is about "why.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: All
Citizens Mobilized to Stop ACLU

WorldNetDaily.com ^ | Nov. 20, 2004

Posted on 11/20/2004 8:50:24 AM PST by SeasideSparrow

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1284680/posts

Citizens mobilized to stop ACLU Website seeks to consign group to 'ash heap of history'

A Chicago man has launched a website to mobilize millions of Americans to consign the American Civil Liberties Union to the "ash heap of history."

The ACLU, says the website StopThe ACLU.org, is "relentlessly and fiercely assaulting America's foundations by feverishly working through activist court systems to impose same-sex marriage and remove all vestiges of the Ten Commandments wherever they may be posted."

[snip]

16 posted on 12/03/2004 10:37:43 AM PST by JesseJane ("If the enemy is in range, so are you." -Infantry Journal)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: mcg1969; drc43
Seems like a search for "ACLU" immediately before clicking the Post button would have done the trick.

No offense, just an observation.

17 posted on 12/03/2004 10:40:00 AM PST by newgeezer (When encryption is outlawed, rwei qtjske ud alsx zkjwejruc.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: All
Revealing FACTS on the ACLU from its own writings
18 posted on 12/03/2004 10:40:15 AM PST by JesseJane ("If the enemy is in range, so are you." -Infantry Journal)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: drc43
We are being sued with our own money!!

The islamonazis are doing the same thing to us, scamming our system to send money back to fund terrorism.

So the ACLU and the islamos have something in common.

These enemies of the US must be stopped!

19 posted on 12/03/2004 10:43:07 AM PST by texasbluebell
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: newgeezer
"Seems like a search for "ACLU" immediately before clicking the Post button would have done the trick.

I did. I didn't or I didn't see it. I guess dupes are a bigger crime here than I realized.

Won't happen again

20 posted on 12/03/2004 10:43:32 AM PST by drc43 (We have 4 years left to get it right)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

Comment #21 Removed by Moderator

To: drc43

"We are being sued with our own money!!"


Conversely, some people are suing to GET their own money back!


22 posted on 12/03/2004 10:46:06 AM PST by Blzbba (Conservative Republican - Less gov't, less spending, less intrusion.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: drc43

There should be lawsuits filed by individuals around the country against the ACLU for what they've been pulling.

The Thomas More Law Center is a pro-bono organization set up to defend Christians against attacks.


http://www.thomasmore.org/

The Thomas More Law Center is a not-for-profit public interest law firm dedicated to the defense and promotion of the religious freedom of Christians, time-honored family values, and the sanctity of human life. Our purpose is to be the sword and shield for people of faith, providing legal representation without charge to defend and protect Christians and their religious beliefs in the public square.


23 posted on 12/03/2004 10:47:20 AM PST by texasbluebell
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: drc43

Yep. Betcha it is the same sort of setup in the other liberal legislate-through-litigation organizations too.


24 posted on 12/03/2004 10:59:54 AM PST by The Ghost of FReepers Past (Legislatures are so outdated. If you want real political victory, take your issue to court.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: mcg1969
In fact, we ought to see an expansion of "loser pay" in this country.

"Loser pays" would be great, as long as our system is consistent in dispensing justice. It seems like the obvious problem would be that anyone with the means to hire a Dream Team of lawyers would forever be insulated from little guys like me. No matter how good my case might be in truth, I likely couldn't afford to take the risk of losing.

Some people think our justice system already belongs to those who can afford the better lawyers. Unless I'm missing something, it seems like "loser pays" could provide some justification for that opinion.

I guess the Brits have it to some extent. If it works, I wonder how.

25 posted on 12/03/2004 11:00:21 AM PST by newgeezer (When encryption is outlawed, rwei qtjske ud alsx zkjwejruc.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: newgeezer
"Loser pays" would be great, as long as our system is consistent in dispensing justice."

In this case, ACLU recovers their expenses and fees and salaries under a Federal Code intended for Civil Rights infractions.

Win or Lose.

26 posted on 12/03/2004 11:04:02 AM PST by drc43 (We have 4 years left to get it right)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: drc43

The ACLU, like any other litigant who sues for violations of civil rights laws, only gets attorney's fees if they prevail.

The alternative would be for persons to violate civil rights and get away with it because litigants could not not afford to litigate.


27 posted on 12/03/2004 11:04:03 AM PST by CobaltBlue
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: drc43
Win or Lose.

Wrong, only if they "substantially prevail".

28 posted on 12/03/2004 11:06:13 AM PST by CobaltBlue
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: CobaltBlue
"Wrong, only if they "substantially prevail"."

Ok, I guess I heard wrong.

Thanks

29 posted on 12/03/2004 11:07:43 AM PST by drc43 (We have 4 years left to get it right)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: itsmyboy

Why can't you eliminate an organization whose political ideology you dislike? Is that a serious question?

Try "this is America, we have to tolerate organizations with political ideologies we dislike".


30 posted on 12/03/2004 11:07:52 AM PST by CobaltBlue
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: drc43

No prob. I've fought, and won, several civil rights cases myself.


31 posted on 12/03/2004 11:08:53 AM PST by CobaltBlue
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: newgeezer

The law should be designed not to discourage honest lawsuits but should make it quite easy to assign attorney fees in the case of a genuine dispute, and nearly automatic in the case of a frivolous lawsuit. The most important part of a loser pay system is that it not be automatic, but rather subject to judicial review. I'd also like to see the attorney fee award appealable, separate from the primary decision.


32 posted on 12/03/2004 11:36:11 AM PST by mcg1969
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: CobaltBlue

Re #31 -

"No prob. I've fought, and won, several civil rights cases myself."

Well, OK... but whose side are you on there, Podnah? }B^{!~

UJ, wondering in ME


33 posted on 12/03/2004 11:46:33 AM PST by Uncle Jaque (Vigilance!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: CobaltBlue
"No prob. I've fought, and won, several civil rights cases myself."

I think this is a good example of the "Law of Unintended Consequences".

When laws regarding civil rights were drafted, who knew that years later, the Boy Scouts, the Ten Commandments, hints of the word God, a Cross, Christmas, a Nativity Scene, or other parts from the fabric of our society would be considered threats to our Civil Rights?

34 posted on 12/03/2004 11:53:29 AM PST by drc43 (We have 4 years left to get it right)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: drc43

I don't have time to read through this entire thread, but is there a petition being circulated to call for Congress to repeal this law?


35 posted on 12/03/2004 12:11:22 PM PST by TommyDale
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: CobaltBlue
"The ACLU, like any other litigant who sues for violations of civil rights laws, only gets attorney's fees if they prevail." Actually, they get reimbursed even when they lose, if the case involved civil rights. That is what makes them so disgusting.
36 posted on 12/03/2004 12:15:25 PM PST by TommyDale
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: TommyDale
Actually, Congressman Cunningham from California called in and has promised to introduce legislation to deal with this. He said he would work with Sensenbrenner (sp?) on this.

He could NOT believe the law could be twisted in this manner.

37 posted on 12/03/2004 12:21:08 PM PST by drc43 (We have 4 years left to get it right)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 35 | View Replies]

To: CobaltBlue
The ACLU, like any other litigant who sues for violations of civil rights laws, only gets attorney's fees if they prevail. The alternative would be for persons to violate civil rights and get away with it because litigants could not not afford to litigate.

Except the taxpayers do not get reimbursed if the ACLU is defeated in one of their lawsuits of adventure.

38 posted on 12/03/2004 12:23:57 PM PST by Hacksaw (You can judge a man by the members of his bump list.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: drc43

The IRS should determine whether the ACLU----through its Foundation----is properly accounting for all of its tax-funded activities, whether it is inflating legal costs, and whether the ACLU is using tax dollars for the purposes stated.


As part of the Tax Exempt Compensation Enforcement Project, the IRS announced it intends to examine non-profit organizations (NPO's) and foundations, to learn more about the practices nonprofits follow as they fill out Form 990, the main public disclosure documents for NPO's, including charities and foundations, and whether accounting fraud and tax evasion is taking place, and whether the compensation of specific individuals is excessive and, and whether instances of questionable compensation practices may evade IRS, and US banking laws.

We need to know whether the ACLU is engaged in Enron-style accounting and spending practices using our tax dollars, and whether the ACLU is cooking the books.


39 posted on 12/03/2004 12:28:10 PM PST by Liz
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: b4its2late; Recovering_Democrat; Alissa; Pan_Yans Wife; LADY J; mathluv; browardchad; cardinal4; ...

40 posted on 12/03/2004 12:33:10 PM PST by Born Conservative (Entertainment is a thing of the past, today we've got television - Archie Bunker)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Liz
"The ACLU was founded on January 12, 1920. Among its founders were William Z. Foster, Elizabeth Gurley Flynn and Louis F. Budenz. All three later became prominent leaders of the Communist Party, USA, although Budenz broke with the Party in 1945 and became a militant anti-Communist.

In 1976, Congress passed the Civil Rights Attorneys Fee Awards Act, which was designed to encourage private lawyers to take on suits to protect civil and constitutional rights. The law provides that judges can order federal and state governments to pay legal fees to private lawyers who sued the government and won. The result has been a flood of civil rights cases in federal court. From The New American Feb. 2, 1987

It's an outrage that US law, passed during the Watergate era, allows the ACLU to collect attorney's fees for makework----Christian-hatng lawsuits it itself launches.

That means "values voters" have been footing the bill for the ACLU's launching a juggernaut to remove Ten Commandments images, Christmas creches and Christmas carols, taking God out of the Pledge of Allegiance, and because they claim they have a civil right not to see the Ten Commandments, a civil right not to hear the word “God” in the Pledge of Allegiance, not to see a creche of the Baby Jesus, not to hear Christmas carols. The ACLU has collected a huge amount of our tax dollars in this left-handed fundraiser for the ACLU.

FReepers can silence the ACLU with a bit of activism. We need to insist our Congressmen repeal this abusive law that allows the ACLU to get rich on harassing Christian America. Congress must repeal laws enabling the ACLU's Christian-hating activities. Cut off the ACLU's funds and watch them disappear. Here's what we can do.

The IRS should determine whether the ACLU is properly accounting for all its tax-funded activities, whether it is inflating legal costs, and whether it is using tax dollars for the purposes stated. We need to know whether the ACLU is engaged in Enron-style accounting and spending practices.

REFERENCE SOURCE FOR ARGUING REPEAL TO CONGRESS

Apparently, when Congress contemplated the fee-shifting bill three decades ago, it never conceived that 42 U.S.C. §1988 would be used to secure fees in esoteric battles over the meaning of the establishment clause of the First Amendment.

The statute gives a court "discretion" to award attorneys' fees to the prevailing party in civil rights cases.

Study of the legislative history of the statute reveals that Congress intended this statute to apply to civil rights abuses, including certain race and sex discrimination cases, but not to arguments about whether Judge Roy Moore is allowed to display the Ten Commandments in the Alabama courthouse.

During the deliberations on the bill, the Senate penned that "in many cases arising under our civil rights laws, the citizen who must sue to enforce the law has little or no money with which to hire a lawyer."[6] In the recent First Amendment lawsuits filed by the ACLU, the tables are turned.

Small school districts and municipalities can either defend lawsuits and risk paying the ACLU's attorneys' fees if they lose, or they can voluntarily submit to the ACLU's view of the Constitution.

Even if lawsuits over the establishment clause somehow fall within 42 U.S.C. §1988, the statute empowers courts with nothing more than "discretion" to award fees.

In these cases, one would expect courts to withhold awarding fees. Since this is not happening, Congress must take immediate action to clarify 42 U.S.C. §1988 to explicitly exclude lawsuits related to the acknowledgement of God."

Terrific information from your posting this morning.

I think bears repeating here and often until we get some action.

41 posted on 12/03/2004 12:40:30 PM PST by drc43 (We have 4 years left to get it right)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 39 | View Replies]

To: drc43

Wrong. If the government razes your house, takes your bank account, imprisons you, and then realizes its all a mistake and says, "Sorry" but refuses to make you whole again (and then some), are you telling me they shouldn't be responsible for your attorney's fees when you sue and win?

Let's not let our hatred of the ACLU (which is entirely justified) ruin our perspective here. The poster you responded to was 100% right; they shouldn't be winning these cases, but in the example above you should. If this law wasn't in place, you'd never be able to find an attorney to take your case, and you wouldn't win on your own.

The headline is terribly misleading. This statute is called a "fee-shifting" statute. It isn't public financing of anything, and there are other fee-shifting statutes to apply to other litigation. In this case, the government just happens to be the defendant, and the government just happens to be taxpayer financed. But that doesn't mean the fee shifts become public financing.


42 posted on 12/03/2004 12:46:55 PM PST by 1L
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: drc43

BTTT


43 posted on 12/03/2004 12:56:32 PM PST by Liz
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 41 | View Replies]

To: drc43
IL POSTED The headline is terribly misleading. This statute is called a "fee-shifting" statute. It isn't public financing of anything, and there are other fee-shifting statutes to apply to other litigation. In this case, the government just happens to be the defendant, and the government just happens to be taxpayer financed. But that doesn't mean the fee shifts become public financing.

Under the aegis of its Foundation, the ACLU could get away with murder. Within that structure all kinds of financial misdeeds can be hidden. For example, the ACLU also receives private funds. It would be interesting to know what kind of financial activities officers of publicly-traded corporations engaged in and whether their donations to the ACLU were properly accounted for on company financial statements, whether shareholders were duly notified of corporate ACLU donations, whether the donations were made from corporate funds in the names of private individuals, and whether the ACLU itself properly accounted for these donations when filing official statements.

44 posted on 12/03/2004 1:17:04 PM PST by Liz
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 42 | View Replies]

To: mcg1969
Yes, but they have to win the cases first, and then the judge has to decide it is justified to award attorney's fees.

They also use the attorneys' fees right as a bludgeon to win cases out-of-court.

45 posted on 12/03/2004 1:45:32 PM PST by tuesday afternoon (Everything happens for a reason. - 40 and 43)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: tuesday afternoon

Thanks, tuesday---I hadn't thought of that. I would definitely be open to alleviating that.


46 posted on 12/03/2004 2:16:39 PM PST by mcg1969
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 45 | View Replies]

To: Liz

Very well thought out Liz!!


47 posted on 12/03/2004 2:20:33 PM PST by international american (Proudly posting without reading the article since 2003.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 44 | View Replies]

To: JesseJane
FOr future archives...

Revealing FACTS on the ACLU
from its own writings

;

by Diane Dew

Ever notice how the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) seems to take on only cases that are anti-Christian - pro-sodomy, pro-abortion, anti-family, pro-pornography, pro-prostitution, pro-euthanasia, pro-homosexual, pro-infanticide, pro-crime, pro-humanism, anti-God -- and, except for atheism, anti-religion?

It calls itself the American Civil Liberties Union, but the ACLU is not American; it is uncivil (to the unborn, which are shredded mercilessly to pieces without anesthetic); and it knows nothing of true liberty, which can only be found in Jesus Christ, when one is set free from the bondage of all the SIN this evil organization PROMOTES!

Stated Goals

The ACLU's founder, Roger Baldwin, stated: "We are for SOCIALISM, disarmament, and ultimately for abolishing the state itself... We seek the social ownership of property, the abolition of the propertied class, and the SOLE CONTROL of those who produce wealth. COMMUNISM is the goal." (Source: Trial and Error, by Geo. Grant)

The ACLU is destructive to the fabric of our society. Christians must recognize Satan as the source - the instigator - when the end results of an organization's efforts are only "to kill, to steal, and to destroy." All we need to is examine the (rotten) fruit.

Following are some of the stated goals of the ACLU, from its own published Policy Issues:

-- not to mention the defense and promotion of euthanasia, polygamy, government control of church institutions, gun control, tax-funded abortion, birth limitation, etc. (Policies 263, 133, 402, 47, 261, 323, 271, 91, 85).

Following is a case in point (from David Barton's "America: To Pray or Not to Pray").

In 1988, California was considering adopting legislation on sex education for public schools requiring that course material and
instruction should stress that monogamous heterosexual intercourse within marriage is a traditional American value.

The Senator promoting the bill received a letter of protest from the ACLU dated April 18, 1988 stating:

; ; ; ; ; ; "It is our position that monogamous, heterosexual intercourse within marriage
; ; ; ; ; ; as a traditional American value is an unconstitutional establishment of religious
; ; ; ; ; ; doctrine in public schools.... We believe [this bill] violates the First Amendment."

Truth is, liberals are unwilling to simply let others be, but rather seek to impose their UNgodliness upon Christians. It is a mission to
them and other atheists to pervert the freedoms of others. The ACLU does not run to the defense of those who are harmed; it aggressively
seeks out opportunities to corrupt pure freedoms.

Finances

How does the ACLU pay for its activities?

George Grant, author of "Trial and Error," puts the ACLU's annual budget (1993) at $14 MILLION (FOURTEEN MILLION DOLLARS) - much of which is "SUPPLIED BY THE AMERICAN TAXPAYER through the Federal program mandated by the Civil Rights Attorneys' Fee Awards Act of 1976. If the ACLU wins a case that involves a public institution, for instance, the organization collects the full legal fees of its attorneys even though those attorneys offered their services pro bono (without charge).

Membership

1993 membership in the ACLU was 250,000 members, with 70 staff lawyers, and 5,000 volunteer attorneys, handling an average of 6,000 cases at any one time.

You can read about the ACLU at the ACLU's official web site: http://aclu.org/ ;


48 posted on 12/03/2004 2:41:52 PM PST by vannrox (The Preamble to the Bill of Rights - without it, our Bill of Rights is meaningless!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: international american

If the ACLU rigged its federal and state funding statements in collusion with officers of publicly-held companies who filed false financial instruments, that would be considered aiding and abetting the commission of federal and state crimes. Employing fraudulent accounting practices in order to cover-up corporate wrongdoing would have jeopardized the financial interests of stockholders, corporate associates and partners which would compel the SEC to step in.


49 posted on 12/03/2004 3:13:29 PM PST by Liz
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 47 | View Replies]

To: Liz

"Employing fraudulent accounting practices in order to cover-up corporate wrongdoing would have jeopardized the financial interests of stockholders, corporate associates and partners which would compel the SEC to step in."

How I would love to see this come to pass. You must be in finance.


50 posted on 12/03/2004 4:18:05 PM PST by international american (Proudly posting without reading the article since 2003.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 49 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-54 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson