Renegade Leftist Judge Permanently Restores ACORN’s Taxpayer Funding
If you thought you sent representatives and senators to Washington, D.C., to exercise the constitutionally mandated power of the purse — you’re wrong.
Silly you. You wasted all that time in civics class learning a whole bunch of outdated claptrap about separation of powers and the lawmaking process for nothing.
The spending power belongs to federal judges now, regardless of what that quaint little document called the U.S. Constitution says.
That’s what ACORN’s favorite federal judge, Nina Gershon (pictured above) of the Eastern District of New York ruled Wednesday.
In December Gershon, a Bill Clinton appointee, helped ACORN out by offering the Obama administration political cover by issuing a temporary injunction prohibiting Congress from cutting off funding for ACORN. She found that depriving ACORN of taxpayer dollars was an unconstitutional “bill of attainder” that singled out ACORN for punishment without trial. It’s a nonsensical argument unless you believe that cutting off funding –funding that no one has a right to– for an organized crime syndicate is somehow a punishment.
To give credit where it’s due, the Obama administration did the right thing and appealed the December ruling.
Now Nutty Nina’s made the ruling permanent and it’s not yet clear if the administration will appeal this latest ruling. (Here is the permanent injunction and the opinion and order she issued.)
Gershon showed a similar contempt for the legislative branch previously. In 1999 she ruled then-New York mayor Rudy Giuliani had no right to cut off city funding of the Brooklyn Museum of Art when it displayed dead animals and a painting of the Virgin Mary decorated with elephant dung. Gershon’s not exactly courageous, by the way. She managed to get out of taking accused Al Qaeda terrorist Najibullah Zazi’s case when a courthouse computer randomly assigned it to her.
If this ruling remains undisturbed it will mean every parasitic leftist group in the country will have due process rights in the appropriations process. Congress will not be able to cut any group off for any reason. The rights of tax eaters will become paramount to the rights of taxpayers.
The ruling should be music to the ears of Rep. Jerrold Nadler (D-N.Y.), a huge fan of ACORN who has given thousands of dollars over the years to the ACORN network. The thoroughly corrupt Nadler urged ACORN’s lawyer to sue the government, arguing that a ban on funding constituted a “bill of attainder.” Within weeks, ACORN took his advice.
The ruling could also appears to mean that ACORN and other leftist activist groups are eligible for up to $3.99 billion in federal funding included in President Obama’s $3.83 trillion fiscal 2011 budget blueprint.
The $3.99 billion comes from a congressional slush fund known as the Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) program, which is part of the Department of Housing and Urban Development’s (HUD) $48.5 billion fiscal 2011 budget. CDBG grants, which are awarded to states and localities, flow indirectly to ACORN and similar groups that compete at the state and local level for grants.
Trackbacks and Pingbacks
- » Breaking: While An Anxious Nation Is Transfixed By The Healthcare Debate, The Obama Administration Restores ACORN Funding - Big Government
- The American Spectator : AmSpecBlog : Obama Restores Cash-Strapped ACORN's Funding As Reward For Loyal Health Care Support
- No Mighty Oaks Here; ACORN Is Gone
- Obama Refunds ACORN for Healthcare Support – Funds Given « The Dysfunction of Maryland Politics and The National Scene
- ACORN Dies But Like An Indestructible Fictional Android Assassin It’ll Be Baaaack | NewsReal Blog
- ACORN On “Life Support”; Shouldn’t It Be Dead Already? | NewsReal Blog
Unbelievable. So this is what it's like to live in a third world country. Can't say I like it much. How much more of this kind of crap are the American people going to endure? My guess is "Quite a lot." Maybe we've already passed the point of no return and just haven't acknowledged it to ourselves yet. The entire democratic process has been subverted to push forward an agenda that will completely transform the relationship between government and business, between government and the citizenry. And no one seems to notice or care.
Amen! Absolutely drunk on her unbridaled power trip Judge Nina "DUNG" Gershon the Clintons "Craptivist" judicial gift that keeps on giving! … Nina will only be emboldened to keep rubbing dung of one kind or another into the public's faces unless removed from office. First it was cultural dung; rubbing that publicly funded and despicable pornographic rendering of the Virgin Mary into the face of the people paying the bills with zero consequences ! …. Now her utter contempt for the body politic by insisting that Congress smear ACORN dung every day and in every way all over the country! … Is there not left even one single "Cicero" to restore a tiny bit of respect for the US Senate? … Is there not left even one Senator willing to stand up every single day and call for the impeachment of this ACORN lackey judge and the defunding of this vile political action organization? … Is there not left even one Senator willing to use the tool entrusted to them by the Constitution and defend the sanctity of the legislative process and the power of the purse? ..Are they all now just frightened sheep cowed by the usual cabal of liberal harpies and all their running dogs in the media?
Exercise your rights—protest to your Congressional representatives!
If you have a roof over your head, if water comes out of your tap, if you have a refrigerator and shoes on your feet you are better off than 95% of the people living in third world countries. Think before you say something stupid.
It's time to take politics out of the justice system.
B.S. !!!! This system MUST be dismantled on so many levels it's beyond ridiculous.
IRS rulings pertaining to charitable tax exempt not for profit organizations state that such organizations must be nonpartisan. Which they were not! So they should lose their nonprofit status thus making them ineligible to receive most if not all of the goverment grants and funding they receive.
Should the U.S. ever descend into a civil war, it will be the judiciary that will be the area of contention. I'm convinced of that. All it will take is a court decision so outrageous that enough citizens, legislators, and law enforcement refuse to comply. A few ACORN-rigged elections for example, maybe in 2012.
Time for a revolution.
Zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz,
Nothing but lies and distortions. The judge is correct – it was a bill of attainder and unconstitutional on its face. ACORN has been found guilty of nothing – a blanket law to ban them from receiving funding denies ACORN their due process rights. The same was true when the Clinton administration tried to deny evangelical groups funding. You cannot single out an entity or person and deny their rights because you don't like their politics. . . The author lies in calling ACORN an organized crime syndicate. No one, has convicted ACORN of a crime – even that organization has not been convicted of anything. . . . Third, he lies about the ruling itself. Nothing in this ruling guarantees ACORN any funding, only the right to apply for it as any other potential recipient would. The ruling only says that the law making a blanket denial of all funding is unconstitutional, which it is. It does not mean ACORN is eligible for any of the $4B in CDBG funds, it means they are eligible to APPLY for such funding. IF HUD determines that they are not the best use of the money, they will not get it. If they are, then they will get it. . . . For an author that spouts off about the constitution, it would be nice if he knew what it says.
Voter registration fraud, 1998
A series of voter registration fraud accusations hit ACORN. In 1998, an Arkansas employee is arrested for falsifying voter registration forms. Shortly thereafter, Philadelphia authorities spot hundreds of registration papers they suspect were filled out by the same person.
The founder's brother gets in trouble, 1999
Dale Rathke, the brother of founder Wade Rathke, embezzles almost $1 million from ACORN and its affiliates over two years. The family finds out and agrees to put the money back, but doesn't tell ACORN's board or the police. Dale Rathke remains on ACORN's payroll until word gets out and he resigns in June 2008.
Fraud charges persist, 2004
ACORN — which now stands for Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now — claimed it registered more than 1 million new voters nationwide in 2004, a presidential election year. But authorities in Minnesota, Ohio, Florida, and other states suspect that some ACORN workers filed phony papers.
Conservative outrage builds as fraud charges mount, 2008
During the 2008 presidential campaign, ACORN collected more than 1.3 million voter registrations in 21 states. About 400,000 are rejected as incomplete, duplicated or fraudulent.
Criminal charges, 2009
The state of Nevada files criminal charges against ACORN, saying its leaders illegally paid workers to register voters.
The video sting, September 2009
ACORN's troubles spin out of control after independent filmmaker James O'Keefe and conservative activist Hannah Giles pose as a pimp and a prostitute and secretly videotape workers in several ACORN offices giving them advice on dodging taxes and establishing a brothel with underage girls. Congress strips ACORN of millions in federal funding.
24,800 Google hits for "acorn criminal convictions"
Yeah and none of those hits lead to a page saying ACORN has been convicted, only accused of wrongdoing. Surely you don't believe in a justice system where accusation=guilt? Because that would put Blackwater/Xe into the same boat.
Your "research" also begs a clarification. There's numerous accusations of "voter registration fraud" which is NOT the same as "voter fraud." If you recall forms were found with names like Mickey Mouse on them. None of these fraudulent forms were ever filed, and even if they were, do you think someone could go as Mickey Mouse and vote? IF they managed to register and vote under a false name, THEN they are guilty of voter fraud, which is extremely rare.
I can get more than 24,000 hits if I Google "fake moon landing" but it doesn't mean it's true. C'mon..
It took me about 20 seconds of "research" to completely blow ACORN out of the water. ACORN is as much a criminal enterprise as the Cosa Nostra. Beats me why you expend energy defending a criminal enterprise, but that's life.
I guess if you're actually a member of the mafia, the mafia doesn't seem so bad. "Sure, Icepick Tony was accused of killing those guys, but he was never actually CONVICTED. Tony's not so bad. He's a good father to his kids, pays his bills on time."
It took me about 20 seconds of "research" to completely exonerate ACORN of all wrongdoing. ACORN is as much a criminal enterprise as the Boy Scouts. Beats me why you expend energy actively ignoring facts in order to fit a preconceived narrative, but that's life.
See what I did there? Anyone can make claims and not back them up, but it sure sounds convincing right? By the way, I hope you research things for more than 20 seconds before you make judgments, but I assume for you it's more of a gut thing, am I right?
And as long as you view ALL accusation or charges as being the same as a guilty verdict, that's fine. But when you cherry pick who you force guilt upon based on whose side they're on or 20 seconds' research, it makes your argument invalid.
TROLL ALERT !!
Just ignore this putz and hopefully he'll go away.
Your impassioned defense of the criminal enterprise ACORN is laudible. You have access to the information as me, so facts and figures are incidental. This is personal for you.
For example, it would not affect your opinion of ACORN one iota to know that last September Rasmussen conducted a poll that showed only 15% of voters had even a somewhat favorable opinion of ACORN, while 67% had an unfavorable view of the group. Those figures included only three percent (3%) with a very favorable opinion and 47% with a very unfavorable view. Eighty-five percent (85%) of Republicans, 73% of voters not affiliated with either major political party, and 44% of Democrats – DEMOCRATS – had an unfavorable view of ACORN. ANd here's the kicker – Liberal voters (that would be you, friend) were evenly divided—35% favorable and 38% unfavorable. Eighty-two percent (82%) of conservative voters gave ACORN unfavorable marks along with 60% of political moderates.
Facts would be as ineffective in changing your opinion as aspirin would have been to the drinkers of the lethal Kool-Aid in Jonestown in 1978. And you have definitely swallowed the leftist Kool-Aid if you're supporting the criminal enterprise ACORN.
Ed Whelan at National Review has written about this, and his argument is far more persuasive than yours, Bill.
http://bench.nationalreview.com/post/?q=ZmI3MWYzZ...
The Bill of Attainder clause has absolutely nothing to do with either the Due Process clause or the Equal Protection clause. For someone who berates the author for ignorance regarding the Constitution, perhaps you should reasses your own understanding.____The Bill of Attainder clause deals with a specific legislative tool that the founding fathers understood to be abhorrent: a legislative act that pronounces an identifiable person (or group) guilty of some offense, and then enacts an attainder, a form of punishment that deprives the legislatively convicted person of life, property, or the liberty to exercise some right.____The ACORN statute neither specifies an offense committed by ACORN nor pronounces ACORN guilty of such offense. Further, barring ACORN from the opportunity to apply for discretionary public funds does not constitute a punishment in accordance with the historical or constitutional meaning of an attainder.____Finally, Judge Gershon's order violates the separation of powers with respect to the Appropriations clause, which gives the Legislature the sole power to appropriate public monies.____As worded, the order potentially gives ACORN legal precedent to claim a right to federal funds, in perpetuity.
Man, that radical leftist judge. Appointed by that radical leftist, Bill Clinton at the recommendation of that radical leftist, Patrick Moynihan.
HOLY SHIT!! WHAT HAS HAPPENED TO THIS COUNTRIE??!!
A radical leftist judge, appointed by that radical leftist, Bill Clinton, on a recommendation by that radical leftist Patrick Moynihan.
WHAT HAS HAPPENED TO THIS COUNTRIE?
THE COUNTRIE CAN'T SPELL ANYMORE!
Home schooling?
Texas textbooks.
The fault was Congress' for ever having passed a bill of attainder to begin with. The knock-kneed weasels do whatever they think will make them look good in the press.
Oh, and Tip, if you actually check the records you will find registration fraud convictions running about 100/1 in favor of Republicans. But then anyone who tries to use google hits as proof of anything is rather obviously not in full possession of their senses; it's like trying to use the popularity of Rush Limbaugh or Carl Schmitt as proof of their veracity.
One really really important fact about voter registration: groups that collect voter registrations are required by law to submit ALL the registrations they collect, even if they are for "mickey mouse". Organizations cannot collect voter registrations and then screen out the ones they don't like. It is the elections office responsibility to determine the validity of a registration.
The right constantly rails against judges being "activists" and making their own law. In this case, the judge cites the prohibition of Bills of Attainder….legislation aimed at a single entity, and found that Congress actions cutting funding strictly for ACORN met that definition and ruled that the action was not legal.
So what's your problem?
Go ACORN! God bless ACORN for all the wonderful work they do!
No one has ever produced a single ballot that was wrongfully cast or counted because of ACORN.
Not one.
I can't believe people are still pushing the discredited, partisan voter-fraud conspiracy theory that already cost Bush's Attorney General his job. Oh, boy – Bush DOJ voter registration prosecutions. Woo hoo. You "limited government" types are endorsing prosecutorial fraud with this nonsense.
So, do you think O'Keefe will do time? You people need a hobby.
Come on…this argument is ridiculous…You know teabaggers are no match against a non-profit organization that helps the poor. ACORN WINS!!!
Folks, look at it this way…the NRA has not been convicted of any crime, so how would you react if it were that group (or the John Birch Society, or Americans for Tax Reform, or the Tea Party Express) instead of ACORN? You'd be screaming that Congress had no right to defund the NRA without due process – and you'd be absolutely right, just as the Court is correct in this case. Bills of attainder are clearly, unequivocally, explicitly un-Constitutional. The Constitution doesn't give any wiggle room whatsoever; it doesn't get much more clear than:
"No bill of attainder or ex post facto Law shall be passed."
That's all there is to it.
"Due Process" != "Bill of Attainder".
Due Process is a broad-application concept, while a Bill of Attainder is a specific concept, specifically trial, conviction, and punishment by legislation. Denying a person (or class of persons) due process is not the same thing as enacting a Bill of Attainder against that person (or class).
ACORN did not claim a Due Process violation; thus, a Due Process argument is not germane to their suit. And according to the constitutional and historical context of a bill of attinder, Congress did not violate the Bill of Attainder clause. Judge Gershon invented, out of whole cloth, an entirely new class of attainder – that being "deprivation of opportunity to apply for discretionary public funds".
Thanks for playing. Please try again.
It is interesting if that is the language used in the judgement, as the judge clearly speaks to
deprivation of opportunity, yet does not state where it occured and insinuates in and
insouciant way and obligation by Congress and thus the government to
fund sans application. If it was not so stupid it would be relegated to the idiot box of
law school dropouts which does not deserve that much insult…………..
However as this is ad hoc legislating from the bench any thing is game, and as far as
it goes it is just more pulling of the chain…………..William
Hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha! America – 1, Wingnuts – 0!
I just do not understand how the fact that no one is entitled to tax funds unless it is approved by
the Congress of the United States, the courts do not control funding and do not budget expenses
of the nation. Clearly this Judge is out of bounds and should not just be corrected but impeached
by the Congress that she clearly attacks and demeans…………….Wiliam
So have you protested to your Congressional representatives?
Yes!
Why are Liberals so stupid? If you like Socialism, please MOVE ! This is the last "free" country left in this screwed up world. Why are liberals trying so hard to destroy it? Big government never has worked and never will. Liberals HATE facts and truth, they are creatures of emotion, not reason.
1. Welfare = destruction of families and increased dependence on government.
2. Social Security = destruction of financial independence & increased govt. dependence.
3. Gun Control= increased violent crimes (lots of data to prove this).
4. Illegal aliens= bankrupt hospitals, schools and police departments.
The list goes on and on and on….
How does it make sense to say something like "Liberals HATE facts and truth, they are creatures of emotion, not reason". You can't really think that ALL liberals are like that. Obviously there are good arguments on both sides of the debate or else there wouldn't be a debate. There is a way to disagree with someone and still not call them out as irrational. Liberals and conservatives share many of the same goals for the country. They both want the country to be free and prosperous. It is a question of how to achieve those goals.
Having said that, why do you think that "Big government never has worked and never will"? I can think of a number of countries where big government works pretty damn well. I'd also like to see your argument for how gun control "=" increased violent crimes. For point 4, conservatives often hold that massive social security fraud is taking place AND illegal aliens are bankrupting the government. If an illegal alien presents a bogus social security card where do you think that money goes? The money goes into social security. Because they are illegal they cannot withdraw whatever their employer puts into social security for them. That doesn't sound like something that will bankrupt the government. So the argument against illegals on grounds of social security grounds doesn't hold water.
Does it sound like I am a creature of emotion and not a creature of reason? Or do you think maybe you went too far in calling ALL liberals irrational and emotional? Maybe your emotions got the better of you and you weren't thinking rationally or intelligently.
p.s. haha just realized your statements about liberals would apply to supposedly liberal academia including all sorts of scientists. What better examples are there of cold, calculating rationality than scientists? Surely you don't mean that.
You don't sound emotional at all…
You're just wrong!
In ever single one of the items you addressed, your assumptions are 180 degrees from truth & reality.
fs
This is why republicans will lose the next election… you are all batsheet crazy.