Everybody knows if you have the resources you can sue for anything, but the latest courtroom endeavor by the controversial group ACORN needs a quick slap down.
ACORN is argueing that Congress' cutoff of their funding was unconstitutional because it singled out one organization for funding elimination. The vote came after a spate of allegations about unsavory practices by the left-leaning group.
It doesn't matter whether you think the FOX expose on ACORN was legitimate or a set-up. Nor does it matter whether you agree with public funding of such groups.
It's not unconstitutional because the Constitution vests the appropriation of public funds with the Congress.
Congress is the elected body designed to do the will of the people. Now that's always open to interpretation but its the only system we have.
If you can go to court for being defunded, that's bad.
To localize it, City Council makes appropriations of dollars each year to the Zoo and the Historical Society on the premise that these bodies contribute to the public good and are worthy of public support. Agree or disagree if you want, but that debate should occur in the Council Chamber.
Imagine if we cut the Zoo funding and the Thompson Park Conservancy immediately ran to Judge Gilbert demanding he reverse the vote of the duly elected public body.
Ridiculous....I think so...and to expect the courts to expand their right to review and reverse legislative decisions is an improper use of the courts.
9 comments:
graham, only a lawyer should be commenting on this...you are an idiot.
go ACORN !
Only the Watertown mayor and a few rednecks would compare ACORN funding to Zoo funding.
Screw the zoo funding. You and your drinking buddies could do a Booze for Bears promotion, get drunk, and relieve the tax payers from having to feed the beasts. What the zoo needs is a beer drinking, dancing bear, dressed liked Sarah Palin. That would increase the attendance.
BaaaaWHAhahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha
Hay Mayor,Some great Constitutional scholars read this blog.....
maybe a booze for bums fundraiser for acorn ?
Not a good analogy at all -- you get an "E" for effort. ACORN was singled out for political reasons and a huge vendetta has followed ... That's the question to be answered in this case: Why ACORN, and why is FOX mostly the “leader” on that Witch hunt?
From my research and believe me, my research extends far, far beyond FAUX gnus and the likes Glenn "Psycho" Beck’s ranting and raving. My research is more focused on facts than red meat and hyperbole or TV show ratings.
ACORN has done many good deeds for millions of people on a small budget. The few stunts some of their employees pulled are bad, for sure... but not the organization as a whole – it has provided good service
But, when you talk about those people on the short end of the political stick (that ACORN mostly helps), it gets personal and those at the top of stick just think they "are getting hand out's" and thus they attack anyway possible and use terms like we have heard over the years: "Welfare queens, public trough, handout’s, etc." ... That is all this is ... nothing less; but, a heluva lot more.
Synapse error here....Whether it's ACORN, the Zoo, CAPC, the Historical Society or whatever is getting a line item appropriation, that money is subject to the review and consent of the elected body in charge of the money.
The issue is whether someone not satisfied with the legislative process and their inability to prevail, should then have a judge overrule the elected lawmakers...
It was Congress who originally funded ACORN...should Conservatives have been able to overturn that in court ? No, of course not.
And all these decisions are political and that's the way it should be.
Wouldn't you agree that "political decisions" can sometimes be unlawful or unconstitutional? That's why our forefathers created a judicial branch, to keep in check those who believe that a bunch of politicians in the majority of Congress should not be questioned.
If Congress voted to increase federal taxes on pub owners based on allegations of impropriety would you advocate that those pub owners take their licks and "let Congress be Congress"?
better yet, is city funding a line item appropriation?
Post a Comment