ACORN says US funding cut was unconstitutional (lawsuit filed on ACORN’s behalf in Brooklyn)

AP on Yahoo ^ | 11/12/09 | AP

[NormsRevenge]

NEW YORK – ACORN has filed a lawsuit claiming that Congress violated the Constitution when it passed a law cutting off federal funding to the organization.

The Center for Constitutional Rights filed the lawsuit on ACORN's behalf Thursday in Brooklyn federal court. It claims the law was unconstitutional because it punitively targeted an individual organization.

Messages for comment left at the White House and the federal agencies named in the suit were not immediately returned.

[JoeMac]

ACORN is unconstitutional.

[St. Louis Conservative]

It seems they are implying that ACORN has a constitutional right to federal tax money?

[RC2]

They got this a little backwards. Funding was Un-Constitutional to begin with. Cutting funding is just enforcing the Constitution.

[E. Pluribus Unum]

Suddenly, ACORN becomes aware of the US Constitution.

[pepsionice]

I believe that these guys who work for the Center for Constitutional Rights....need to go back and actually study Constitutional rights.

[piytar]

That is EXACTLY what they are claiming.

[DonaldC]

And being unconstitutional, when does acorn start paying the country back.

[mnehring]

How was the funding in the first place Constitutional?

[Dallas59]

Huh?

[Scotsman will be Free]

Talk about irony. LOL!

[WayneS]

No. Funding them in the FIRST place was un-Constitutional.

[SoldierDad]

Is not the government funding of a private, partisan organization with taxpayer money unconstitutional?

[luvbach1]

ACORN has constitutional right to funding? lol!

[RebelTXRose]

They who trample the Constitution now want to pick it up and dust it off in their favor...

[fifthvirginia]

definition of “Bill of Attainder”:

“These clauses of the Constitution are not of the broad, general nature of the Due Process Clause, but refer to rather precise legal terms which had a meaning under English law at the time the Constitution was adopted. A bill of attainder was a legislative act that singled out one or more persons and imposed punishment on them, without benefit of trial. Such actions were regarded as odious by the framers of the Constitution because it was the traditional role of a court, judging an individual case, to impose punishment.” William H. Rehnquist.

[DoughtyOne]

BINGO! We have a winner.

And it’s on a number of levels, not just one.

Being funded by the government in the first place...
Registering as if an arm of the Democrat party...
Fraudulent Registrations...
Intimidation at the polls...

As free pass on all this...

[lonestar]

ACORN funding is unconstitutional!

[GovernmentShrinker]

It claims the law was unconstitutional because it punitively targeted an individual organization.

What was unconstitutional was federal funding of this preferentially targeted individual organization. Eliminating the funding was a corrective measure.

[soycd]

Where is MY funding from congress acorn? I would like to sit on my lazy fat butt and play politics all day for taxpayer dollars but I have a brain, a conscience and a work ethic.

If you need money then go look under your work boots. You lazy, reparation seeking,
over breeding, racist scumbags have had a free ride for far too long.

Get a job!!!

[rhombus]

A well rigged election, being necessary to the security of crooked politicians everywhere, the right of ACORN to your loot, shall not be infringed.

[NormsRevenge]

Government sued for defunding scandal-hit ACORN
Reuters
http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20091112/pl_nm/us_usa_acorn_1

NEW YORK (Reuters) – The scandal-hit liberal grass-roots group ACORN sued the U.S. government on Thursday, saying it did not have the right to cut off ACORN’s federal funding because the group had not been convicted of a crime.

The U.S. Congress voted in September to cut off federal money to the Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now (ACORN), after conservative activists secretly filmed employees in several cities giving tax and housing advice to a couple posing as a pimp and a prostitute.

“It’s not the job of Congress to be the judge, jury, and executioner,” said Jules Lobel, an attorney with the Center for Constitutional Rights, which brought the case in Brooklyn federal court.

[Drango]

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/11/13/nyregion/13acorn.html?_r=2&partner=rss&emc=rss

In an affidavit attached to the lawsuit, Bertha Lewis, the chief executive of Acorn, said she “underestimated” the effect of the resolution. “It gave the green light for others to terminate our funds as well,” she said. “All of our state and local grants were frozen, as were most of our private foundation funds.”

~snort...giggle...LOL

[NormsRevenge]

Actions have consequences, Bertha.

Ya had a helluva ride.

[Anitius Severinus Boethius]

If they are declaring a “bill of attainder” against them, they are barking up the wrong tree. If Congress can send you money, by default Congress can stop sending you money.

[SirAllen]

ACORN - the gift that keeps on giving.

[Bitsy]

And acorn’s fraud is, er, what? Criminal

[stockpirate]

At least we know that using the 2nd amendment to return liberty isn’t unconstitutional.

[ConservativeMind]

Must have something to do with 0bama’s desire to have “negative rights” in the US Constitution...

[browardchad]

The group's CEO, Bertha Lewis, says she underestimated the impact of the Congressional action. She says state, local and most private funds have been cut off as well.

And all for no reason -- no reason whatsoever (except for encouragement of prostitution and smuggling of underage illegal sex slaves, but hey, doesn't everybody?)

Poor, poor ACORN. The world is so unjust.

[Reagan Man]

Imagine that. ACORN and unconstitutional in the same sentence.

Truth revealed.

[ImJustAnotherOkie]

The pot is calling the kettle blackbad

[Hoodat]

It claims the law was unconstitutional because it punitively targeted an individual organization.

I actually hope they win this one since our tax code punitively targets our best wealth creators.

[WayneS]

I know what a Bill of Attainder is. But in what way does the bill which removed ACORN's federal funding fit that definition? What punishment does it impose on them?

The answers: The bill in question does NOT impose punishment on ACORN and is therefore NOT a Bill of Attainder. All the bill did was cut ACORN off from tax-payer money. It is tantamount to a budget amendment.

The bill did not try to dissolve ACORN as an organization. Nothing in it prevents ACORN from continuing to operate, nor does it imprison or fine any of ACORN's employees or officers. It in no way imposes punishment on them.

[Cheerio]

It seems they are implying that ACORN has a constitutional right to federal tax money?

Sounds about right, just like Piglosi and her minions are claiming that federally funded abortions are a right, and if you don't purchase you insurance policy you go to prison.

When does the civil disobedience commence?

[FrankR]

I did a “word search” of the Constitution, and “ACORN” did not appear a single time...case closed.

[Art in Idaho]

Where in the Constitution does it say ACORN has a right to exist?

[WayneS]

To quote Jerry Garcia (out of context): “Bertha don’t you come around here any more...”

[The Comedian]

The Center for Underage Prostitution, Voter Fraud, and Constitutional Law has spoken...

Frowning takes 68 muscles.
Smiling takes 6.
Pulling this trigger takes 2.
I'm lazy.

[Unrepentant VN Vet]

If the judge that get this turkey doesn’t throw it right back in their teeth, that’s just one of the many cans of worms that’s going to wind up being opened.

...if the judicial system isn’t totally corrupted now as well. (And don’t even ask my opinion on that.)

[LearsFool]

“It’s not the job of Congress to be the judge, jury, and executioner,”

Absolutely right. That job is being done by other offices. (You might want to get busy with that shredding.)

What Congress has done is give you a boot-to-the-snout so you can't gorge from the public money-trough any longer.

[SandyInSeattle]

ACORN says lots of stupid stuff.

[Tublecane]

“ACORN has filed a lawsuit claiming that Congress violated the Constitution when it passed a law cutting off federal funding to the organization.”

Someone needs to go back to Constitution school. Future Congressional funds are not ACORN’s property; due process is not necessary to deprive them of it. Where the money ends up is entirely contigent upon Congress’ whims (within the bounds of what they’re Constitutionally allowed to do, of course).

[MindBender26]

I know how we ALL feel, but is this a Bill of Attainder.

Once the funding was given, was the removal of such a punative / penalty set for one group or person?

This is a LEGAL issue. Don’t let it be an emotional one.

[ichabod1]

The group’s CEO, Bertha Lewis, says she underestimated the impact of the Congressional action. She says state, local and most private funds have been cut off as well.

[a fool in paradise]

ACORN has never READ the Constitution. EVER.

[a fool in paradise]

ACORN says lots of stupid stuff.

At least if Shelia Jackson Lee ever gets voted out of office, she won't have to go on unemployment.

[pillut48]

SCHADENFREUDE!!!

By all means, ACORN loons, cite for me the exact part of the non-living, non-flawed document, the United States Constitution, that states,

"Corrupt Organizations Shall Heretofore Be Entitled To Receiving Billions of American Taxpayer Dollars from the United States Congress, Regardless of Guiltiness in Conducting Illegal Business Dealings With Pimps And Prostitutes, Et Al, in perpetuity"

Bwahahahahahahahahahahahahaha!!! PULEEZE! :-) :-)

[ichabod1]

thass raciss

[RebelTXRose]

Maybe the PRIVATE FOUNDATIONS decided that they’ve given ENOUGH!