Posted on 01/14/2005 5:57:02 AM PST by hdrabon
ACLU only receives 'welfare' checks
They rate welfare checks as much as any corporation in the USA does - or 90% of those on welfare do.
STOP federal welfare NOW - on all levels!
Financial Details of the ACLU:
http://www.charitynavigator.org/index.cfm/bay/search.summary/orgid/3247.htm
Search FR for ALL threads with ACLU in title:
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/search?s=ACLU&ok=Search&q=deep&m=any&o=time&SX=41e7f27f7382f9c147d9449a38e82b629bfee950
That is false.
Thank you for your correction. Please expound on your understanding so that all of us can get it right, and me especially since I started this thread.
HDR
How about a code cite for this?
ACLU should be included in any Tort Reform.
They are costing the United States Taxpayer more than any civil settlement awarded in the history of the United States, IMHO~
Are you asking about my experience with most of us never having to go to court, or with having gone to court and learned the hard way?
I've been taken to local court and learned the hard way that the legal industry cannibalizes and bastardizes due process to ensure the outcome that is of the greatest benefit to the local legal industry. I've learned that if a citizen is a danger, the local legal industry will circle the wagons and ensure that the citizen is placed in a financial condition that makes it impossible to pursue the matter further up the judicial ladder (primarily in civil cases).
There's much more, but here is an example of someone ELSE who had to think out-of-the-box to make a statement when left with little else to do -- The lady who put a judge up for sale on EBay. Is it very unlikely that her unique action resulted just from being displeased with a judge's decision! She has learned the hard way. Do a Google to see how many citizens out there feel their property rights have been violated or taken away, all by the governmental mechanisms available to the legal industry.
I'm just acting out-of-the-box. . . . What is YOUR perspective on this potential reality?
HDR
Maybe 1000th of 1%. Actually, that number is probably too big.
Please see post # 56. This is the most concise but comprehensive reference to this that I have yet seen.
HDR
Sec. 1988 allows reimbursement of legal fees for those who are successful in their lawsuits against the government for violations of civil rights & civil liberties.
That's not to say they will ultimately get those fees. One must first file an application with the court, which is reviewed by the court, for those fees. Some times fees are not awarded. Other times, only partial reimbusement is given. In rare cases (i.e. very extreme circumstances), fees will be reimbursed aboove & beyond the amount requested.
The basic idea beyond Sec. 1988 is to discourage the Govt from violating citizens' rights. It benefits both the ACLU & groups such as the ACLJ.
(By the way, I don't think the ACLU is part of the Inauguration prayer lawsuit either).
I really feel sorry for your unrepresentation.
But post 56 doesn't say what you said. Post 56 says that people that sue the government for civil rights violations and win can recover legal fees--which, I think, we all agree is a good thing. Or, at least, we all SHOULD agree is a good thing.
That's a far cry from having the government foot the bill for all of the lawsuits that you file.
In that case, mea culpa, and I apologize. I am a naive layperson who probably has no business interpreting what I hear and read, or determining which thing that is said or written is correct.
I guess I would have to be a lawyer to get it right on these kinds of things, right? I admit that I don't have the accumen necessary to properly cut through and get to the bottom of any of the deceptiveness of the legal industry, especially as it relates to the ACLU.
Thank you again for giving me the opportunity to expose myself for being just somebody that is concerned about an issue that you are even now helping make more clear for us all.
HDR
Thank you so much for helping me get all this straight in my head and heart. My weird, potential irrationality certainly has no justification in light of the innocuous legal industry.
HDR
Fair enough. There is certainly quite a lot of minutia involved in these types of things that no doubt require a lot of research and expertise.
For instance, I think, although I'm not positive, 42 USC 1988 doesn't allow a party to recover attorney's fees against municipalities. Just one of those quirks of life, I guess.
Lawyers -- Arrogant whiners. . . .
I'm glad I didn't learn that overused legal industry strategy in high school.
HDR
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.