Skip to comments.Judge rules against HUD in civil rights case
Posted on 01/06/2005 1:01:29 PM PST by Graybeard58
Ruling in a 10-year-old civil rights case, a federal judge in Baltimore decided today that the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development did not meet its obligations under fair housing laws by the agency's "failure adequately to consider a regional approach to desegregation of public housing."
In a victory for public housing residents and the American Civil Liberties Union delivered before a packed courtroom, U.S. District Judge Marvin J. Garbis said it "was, and continues to be unreasonable for the agency not to consider housing programs that include the placement of more than an insubstantial portion" of public housing residents in white, middle-class areas outside the city.
Garbis said the public housing residents did not prove bias against the city. But he said the residents have proven a "statutory claim, and possibly a Constitutional claim as well" against HUD for failing to provide "housing free from discrimination."
"Baltimore city should not be viewed as an island reservation for
(Excerpt) Read more at baltimoresun.com ...
Wonder what constitution that judge is reading?
Alliance Defense Fund (ADF) - http://www.alliancedefensefund.org
Thomas More Law Center (TMLC) - http://www.thomasmore.org
American Center for Law and Justice (ACLJ) - http://www.aclj.org
The Rutherford Institute - http://www.rutherford.org/
Stop the ACLU Coalition - http://www.stoptheaclu.org
Here are a few examples of how two of those organizations are fighting back:
Thomas More Law Center: Town of Palm Beach Pays $50,000 In Attorney Fees Apologizes To Women In Nativity Lawsuit
Let me know if you would like to join my ACLU ping list
Another ruling to be taken up the food chain...
You seem to have me on your ping list twice.
Access the Baltimore Sun with:
User Name: graybeard_57
Correction - That should be User Name graybeard_58
The get free housing and then bitch about where it is located?
You should see the new Section 8 condo's they are building in Cincinnati where the old Section 8 apartments were. You see, the apartments were destroyed by the tenants so they had to tear them down to build new ones. The new condos these people are getting are nicer than the first apartment my wife and I had.
I could vomit when I think about how much money I've paid for some thug to have a place to live where he can sell drugs and create illegitimate children.
THIS BEST DESCRIBES THE ACLU:
A nation can survive its fools, and even the ambitious. But it cannot survive treason from within. An enemy at the gates is less formidable, for he is known and carries his banner openly. But the traitor moves amongst those within the gate freely, his sly whispers rustling through all the alleys, heard in the very halls of government itself. For the traitor appears not a traitor; he speaks in accents familiar to his victims, and he wears their face and their arguments, he appeals to the baseness that lies deep in the hearts of all men. He rots the soul of a nation, he works secretly and unknown in the night to undermine the pillars of the city, he infects the body politic so that it can no longer resist. Marcus Tullius Cicero
Afterwhich, they will cease to be white or middle-class. Whatcha gonna do then, judge?
A lady in central Cal was telling me about a family of Blacks from the ghetto in Oakland(no father)that HUD moved into a home in a middle class neighborhood.
Within days these kids were breaking into homes and cars thinking that they we going to be protected by their friends at the school.
It was their friends who turned them in to the cops.
HUD moved them back to Oakland for their safety.
This is why the best weapon against them is exposure.
Under the aegis of its Foundation, the ACLU could get away with financial murder. Within that structure all kinds of financial misdeeds can be hidden.
For example, 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.
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.
Furthermore, as part of the Tax Exempt Compensation Enforcement Project, the IRS intends to examine non-profit organizations (NPO), to learn more about the practices nonprofits follow as they fill out Form 990, the main public disclosure documents for 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, banking and SEC laws.
The IRS will examine NPO insider transactions, such as (1) loans, the (2) sale, (3) exchange or (4) leasing of property to non-profit officers and others. In particular, the IRS will look to see how organizations report (5) "excess benefit transactions" on Form 990, and (6) executive pay.
The IRS could determine whether the ACLU----through its Foundation----is properly accounting for all of its activities including tax-funded activities, whether it is inflating legal costs, and whether the ACLU is using tax dollars for the purposes stated.
Form 990, the main public disclosure documents for NPO's, including charities and foundations, could determine whether accounting fraud and tax evasion is taking place, and whether the compensation of specific ACLU individuals is excessive and, and whether instances of questionable ACLU compensation practices may evade the IRS, and US banking laws.
We need to know whether the ACLU might be engaged in Enron-style accounting and spending practices using tax dollars for personal expenses, for example, and whether the ACLU is cooking the books.
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." 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.
You can take the thug out of the ghetto but you can't take the ghetto out of the thug.
I can't afford a Ford GT. Why does Ford discriminate against me so? This is a pattern I have seen reapeated througout the automobile industry. Don't even get me started on those elitist snobs at Ferrari who purposely price their automobiles out of the middle class' reach. They need to dispense with these discriminatory pricing schemes so regular working people like me and you can afford a decent car to take our kids to school and pick up chicks in.
A home or a piece of property is an investment, not just a place to live. I do not wish to sell my house for less than I paid for it. Apartment complexes, subsidized housing and "manufactured housing" have proven time and time again to lower property values. I'm not interested on losing thousands of dollars in equity on my property just so some rentor can feel better about their station in life.
People see their heighborhoods going to crap and they sell and move somewhere else or start renting the property before the value of their property tanks, leaving a once nice neighborhood to the rentors and HUDs who have no respect for, or investment in, the property. Subsidized housing is poison to real esate values.
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.