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.