It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


ACORN Sues Over 'Unconstitutional' Funding Cuts By Congress

page: 1

log in


posted on Nov, 12 2009 @ 03:54 PM
And there you have it. The title says it all. ACORN is suing under the bills of attainder clause of the US Constitution.

The suit charges Congress with violating the Constitution when it passed legislation in September that specifically targeted ACORN to lose federal housing, education and transportation funds.

That qualifies the legislation as bills of attainder, according to the Center for Constitutional Rights, which filed the suit on behalf of ACORN. A bill of attainder punishes a person or group without the benefit of a trial, and is illegal under Article 1 of the Constitution.

I personally do not see how this is a bill of attainder issue as money is provided for the good of the people in which that money came from. To me it is like saying, taxes are bills of attainder because they penalize me without a trial. Sorry ACORN, public trust is a social issue not a constitutional issue, and congress may fund whom best serves that public interest. This will obviously head to court, and legal scholars will weigh in on both sides. It's important to note another thread on ATS which pointed out this constitutional issue prior to ACORN suing.

I do agree that all of these programs would need to be overturned if in fact there is a constitutional issue with defunding or prohibiting a company from equal access to government funding. Certainly, we can't have a federal government that funds only certain organizations over another.

posted on Nov, 12 2009 @ 03:57 PM
reply to post by ExPostFacto

I'm pretty sure that any law that targets one specific group or section of society was already found to be unconstitutional.

It may not be what people like but perhaps they need a better written law.

posted on Nov, 12 2009 @ 04:02 PM
reply to post by Seiko

If that's the case the funding should be cut to all groups.

I'm a group. Where's my federal funding? Time to guilt the fed into giving me your money it so nicely collected up at gun point for us groups.

posted on Nov, 12 2009 @ 04:02 PM
Hell, maybe Acorn does have a suit, maybe they dont.
That said, if it was up to me, they would be lucky to still have that Acorn sign hanging outside their offices. I would have gotten rid of them a long time ago. Thats just me though.
Good Luck Acorn

posted on Nov, 12 2009 @ 04:12 PM
Does ACORN have any business with our personal information?
Have they proven themselves trustworthy?

Perhaps the government, or we the people, should sue them for misuse of funds and for deceitful tactics?

Why have they been putting together personal dossiers on all of us at the community level?

What is this info really to be used for?

Could they be gathering info for a powerful special interest group?

Doesn't this seem above and beyond the government level?

Perhaps a countersuit is in order.

[edit on 12-11-2009 by Alethea]

[edit on 12-11-2009 by Alethea]

posted on Nov, 12 2009 @ 04:41 PM
Okay after looking into the wording of the bill that defunded ACORN...the bill was written broadly enough to cover any organization that had charges against them such as ACORN has.

Here is the Bill:

Now, ACORN has a leg to stand on that they were specifically targeted in part of the bill. It is my opinion, that section needs to be removed. When courts consider constitutional issues in legislation they can rule a portion of the law as unconstitutional and leave another portion as constitutional. My opinion, being a student of the law, will be the judge will rule in ACORN's favor declaring the "additional definitions" section unconstitutional; however, will leave the rest of the bill intact. The rest of the bill covers ACORN's behavior whether it spells them out by name or not, they fit within the definition of the remaining portion. That said, ACORN will remain unfunded but will win on the constitutional issue.

And all the money that will be used to fight this lawsuit, taxpayers money, they deserve to remain unfunded in my opinion.

posted on Nov, 12 2009 @ 05:01 PM
Am I the only one who sees the irony of Acorn using the Constitution as a defence.

I would have thought that document wasn't allowed within their offices.

Oh, sorry, It was a lawyer who brought up that defence on their behalf.

I knew no one in ACORN could have possibly found out about that, much less understood what they were reading.

posted on Nov, 12 2009 @ 05:27 PM
The stupidity of this astounds me but nothing should astound me any more. This world has become so screwed up it's ridiculous. Good is bad, bad is good; evil is virtue, virtue is vice.
So now it's a constitutional issue when a corrupt organization is caught on video performing illegal acts? And they have the right to sue to get OUR tax dollars? Give me a break!! They need to crawl back under the rock they came from. They have NO right to OUR tax dollars. They are a proven corrupt organization who should be disbanded and those members responsible for the illegal activities should be tried for their crimes and jailed.
This is absolutely NOT a constitutional issue! If they feel targeted it's because they broke the law. Not only in the covert video but numerous members of ACORN all over the country have been arrested for voter fraud. And there are still numerous ongoing investigations of this corrupt organization. The way ACORN has undermined the vote is more of a constitutional issue than them losing their funding. They have violated every voters' rights. Should all of us be able to sue ACORN?

posted on Nov, 12 2009 @ 05:37 PM
Congress, along with their other duties, is responsible for overseeing how our tax dollars are spent. If they are spent inappropriately they have a responsibility to cease funding on behalf of the tax payer. The "bill of attainder" clause in the constitution does not apply to ACORN. They have no "right" to this money. It is provided by the taxpayers by the Congress under certain rules and stipulations. Defunding this corrupt organization is well within the right of Congress acting as agent for the people of the United States. Congress got one right for once and should be applauded for their efforts in this instance.

posted on Nov, 12 2009 @ 05:44 PM
Well then maybe a criminal investigation and trial should be done first. If congress put a "freeze" on additional funding it does not mean they can't ever receive funds, it means until the legalities are dealt with. Sounds like someone is impatient

posted on Nov, 12 2009 @ 07:06 PM
reply to post by eaglehawk

While I agree with you in concept, I still believe in the right of anyone to petition for redress or file a lawsuit. If congress is smart, they will admit the section in question is unconstitutional, remove the section, and include ACORN use administrative means to block funding rather than legislative means.

new topics

top topics


log in