ACORN sues Congress for defunding it; Group says Congress bowed to Fox News

No constitutional basis? What are you talking about? Congress can fund anything it pleases, and that's where ACORN got its funds from.

And the constitutional question they're bring up is completely valid, you can't be cut off from federal funds because of who you associate with. It's something that we've already established.

Of course ACORN can do whatever it wants, but no one does it. That's why they need Federal money, because they're performing a service that the free market never could or would.

I think you're misinterpreting their charge about the right to associate. ACORN was cut off not because it associated with it's affiliates, but because it of how it dealt with certain people, which, by the way, you do not have a right to associate with criminals. They aren't saying that in dealing with ACORN Congress did something unconstitutional by resisting them funds, they're saying that by attacking the allies and affiliates of ACORN Congress did something unconstitutional. The right to associate has more to do with ACORN's friends, not ACORN. "and infringing on the First Amendment right to freedom of association by targeting affiliated and allied organizations, as well." In respect to this way of viewing the right to associate charge I'm fairly ignorant thus I'll stop with definition.

As for the Right to Due Process I don't see any validity. No punishment was handed out to ACORN whatsoever, Congress merely pulled out of supporting them, and since there was no previous law stating that they must fund ACORN, there was no law broke in this regard either..

But I think that's a very narrow definition of punishment. Isn't cutting off funds a form of punishment? It's not like they can prosecute anyone for a non-existent crime, so cutting off their federal funding is a pretty clear response.

Realizing the only crime that was being committed here was essentially fraud on the part of the actors, ACORN committed no crime and thus deserves no retribution.

Furthermore, should ACORN simply have turned people it suspected to be a part of its community into the police? If that's the case, realize that one of the branches DID. So it's not as if this is some uniform conspiracy on their part. It took five tries on the part of the actors to get this scam to work.

I mean, 4 out of 5 basically said GTFO, why should the entire organization be punished for the workers of one group of individuals in one branch?

Just in general, I'm not seeing this as anything other than a political move by the right.

I'd agree with you that it's definitely a political move by the right and a very good one at that.

I'd also have to agree that this is a narrow definition of a punishment and that cutting off funds can be a punishment, but that this narrow definition is necessary when speaking of legal matters.

Yes, someone cutting off funds to someone else is punishment in the sense that it harms them, yet in the judicial sense it is not a punishment by law. They have no right getting those funds from Congress, it was a privilege that was taken away. In law, punishment is a penalty that is inflicted causing you to give something that is a right of yours, not something that is a mere privilege. Going to prison is the giving of liberty (a right), paying a fine is the giving of property (a right), serving probation is once again the giving of liberty, etc. This was merely the taking away of a privilege, not a right, therefore to me it is no civil punishment, it is a punishment in social society. And since this social punishment does not go against any civil laws, Congress has the ability to do it. There is no constitutionality in question.

Once again though, i must mention that I do not know of the right to association case...I definitely am interested and need to learn more.

ACORN did do something wrong. Goonery is not solely a tactic of the right. One branch is one to many to receive tax dollars. These two kids deserve a Pulitzer, ACORN was going to run the census. If your arguement is they should get tax money because Blackwater did, you're wrong on both counts.

Discussions often go nowhere with you if it's about Obama or the Derms john, but I'm willing to level with you on this since you seem so reasonable about it. So let's go over your post one point at a time.

"ACORN did do something wrong."

Annnnnnnnd what was it? No one seems to be able to answer that. Was it that they didn't immediately call the police on someone seeking help for their organization? What was it?

"Goonery is not solely a tactic of the right."

True enough, but leftist agitation is oppressive and ogreish, but never outright fraud and fabrications.

The sins of the left are numerous on this issue, from civil rights to unionism, but they don't -lie- like this. Which in my opinion makes it very fucking different. They're not disingenuous.

"One branch is one to many to receive tax dollars."

That's fucking absurd.

I'm sorry to be so acidic about that, but you pay probably less than a dime in your taxes every year to fund an organization that does a hell of a lot of good that you've ignored to make this statement.

Literally, a sailor crapping in an aircraft carrier costs more than the entire funding of ACORN. If you take issue with that little tax funding, I'd be hard-pressed to figure out what would be sensible by that standard.

"These two kids deserve a Pulitzer, ACORN was going to run the census."

No they don't, since they didn't actually expose anything corrupt. Plus, you should probably look at who won the Pulitzer prize in recent years before saying that, that's pretty offensive. Pulitzers often go to people who expose genocides and things like that.

And no, ACORN was not going to RUN the census, they're not even large enough to do that. Hell, they don't even have a presence all over the nation. That's a complete falsification.

Their data was going to be coordinated since they collect it anyway, like dozens of other organizations, to help fill in the larger picture.

"If your arguement is they should get tax money because Blackwater did, you're wrong on both counts."

No that's not my argument, if they're a fraudulent organization they should be booted like all the rest.

My point was that the media makes a big fuss about stupid shit for the right-wing. But they're completely SILENT about basically what are war crimes on behalf of the right.

They're hypocrites, and it's appalling that fact is not pointed out more often.

pwned!

There is plenty of reason to debate. ACORN is a community organizing group that gives assistance to lower income families which has not been brought up on charges. Halliburton, KBR, and Blackwater (to name very few) which HAVE been found guilty of ACTUAL fraud among other criminal charges are not defunded. ACORN was given millions of dollars in contracts, whereas the others mentioned above were given BILLIONS in contracts. ACORN actually helps people, the others help the military industrial complex. There is A LOT to debate.

I don't get it, conservatives are supposed to be against wasteful spending, and yet they support billions wasted on no-bid government contracts and mercenary armies. Then they get all huffy when someone spends a million here or a million there on legitimate scientific research, soft power or community development. It's mind blowing.

Regardless, we have yet another ACORN hater without a shred of evidence to support their arguments, not even internet sources. Then, shadowtrekker has the lack of tact to call those of us who require evidence to form an opinion morons...

If there are any, I hope they come to light. I would happily hop on the "bring-down-ACORN" bandwagon if they get brought down for the right reasons (real crimes) according to our laws.

Rather than assumed crimes because somebody doesn't like the fact that they support progressives?

I agree.

Prejudice runs rampant, here.

Millions of voters like Donald Duck, Mickey Mouse, Tony Romo, etc., etc., ......

All of whom could not place a vote without a valid ID. Thank goodness the justice dept already looked into it and could not bring charges up against ACORN. Of course, several people lost their job at the DOJ because they couldn't. Remember that little scandal under the Bush Administration?

"...don't use our tax dollars for your schemes anymore, that's all."

Please expound. To which "schemes" are you referring? Please cite your references.

Any of them, all of them, do it on your own dime, not on mine.

Sorry. Thought we could have an intelligent debate. If you find some proof, come on back.

Proof of what, that they have an agenda? I think they pretty much admit that. Which is fine, do whatever you want, as long as my tax dollars aren't paying for it, I could care less about their agenda.

I want the world to be a better place too. I just don't believe giving money to ACORN or voting for the GOP are the best ways to make it better.

I am surprised, John. Your profile fits a fiscal conservative. Then again, republicans aren't all that fiscally conservative, anyway.

Track record says: democrats balance budgets, republicans ruin them.

We are all still waiting for you to back up your initial statement, by the way.

They went to several branches. One of the branches did report them.

And of those several branches, how many actually were recorded as trying to give the investigative journalists aid? Note, I'm not trying to be an ass, I just didn't pay that much attention to it at the time and it only seemed like one branch had the issues from the footage that was shown.

The rest of them "heard them out". I have heard from several current members that people in their line of work are trained to listen and just let the person talk. Based on the accounts of the ACORN workers, most of them could tell that the situation was not real, so they played along (if you see the filmmaker and his outfit you would know why). The unedited video has not been released, and the only version that has been broadcast has so many edits in it that it is highly suspicious. The ACORN workers insist that the video does not show the actual events as they occurred.

In that case I would think that Acorn would be better off demanding or suing the kids who did this to release all of the tapes from their "investigation."

Don't kid yourself, they did it to themselves. They had a nice cushy little taxpayer funded "advocacy" gig, but they decided they wanted more, too much. They have no one to blame but themselves. Don't blame the messenger, those two kids deserve a Pulitizer.

ACORN did it to themselves. Congress gives and Congress takes away...... ACORN'S reputation can't be saved, because they're a bunch of crooks.

No, no, Kari, these people who don't like ACORN already thought they were "crooks" and that they weren't valuable to society because they help people. That means they didn't deserve any funding. (ironic from a bunch of Jesus freaks, hunh?)

Their opinion never changed in light of the latest events. What changed is that they feel justified in openly expressing it, now.

It never has to make sense. It doesn't have to be researched by a credible source. The law, and the constitution don't matter. Justice doesn't matter.

What matters is being in the club. I have some conservative friends who congregate together, and they feel betrayed by you if you don't go along with whatever the party line is.

See how fast they were to throw a bunch of labels at their target. They have to compartmentalize because the world is binary to them. Good vs. Bad, Them vs. Us, Republican vs. Democrat, Crooks vs. Honest Americans. It's about fighting for your side, not making sense.

Do you ever notice how evidence is ineffective? They already made up their mind who they supported, long ago. To support something else is betrayal.

Have you ever been to a republican household. If politics bubble up in conversation they look sternly at whomever is talking and say "this is a republican household."

Discussion, learning, compassion and analysis are lost on these people.

It's sad. It's political impotence.

A trial for what? There are no criminal charges, there is no punishment involved here. They just don't get money from the taxpayers anymore. They can still do whatever they want. Are you trying to say they have some kind of devine right to receive taxpayer money, that they own an entitlement to receive our tax dollars?

So JohnA, you think this whole Defund ACORN Act was a random act of legislation? completely coincidental with the Fox attacks and the release of the video?

At least he's not a baby-eating cannibal!

Why is it so hard for the right to accept rationality as a basis for discussion?

By stopping funds to an organization it is not punishment. If they charged them a fine, or asked for previous funds to be returned I would understand their case. But the fact is, Congress merely stopped funding someone that was bringing a bad rep to the government. They did nothing more but remove themselves from the organization. The organization is free to do whatever they want and to go about their business with their own funds. Yes, they have been discredited, but that is not a crime as well, as long as there is no slander or libel involved. Congress is not forced to give money to ACORN by any previous law, thus they are not breaking any law nor is their disassociation unconstitutional.

It is merely as if I were giving to a charity that I found out was going against my ideals. By stopping my charitable donations to that organization I am not punishing them, i'm merely removing myself from being involved with them. Yes, by not contributing my funds they could cease to exist, but this is not to be considered me punishing them, merely them making wrong choices that caused their supporters to flee. Congress, in my opinion, has this right to disassociate.

To me the right of due process does not come into play anywhere. As for the right of association i'm too ignorant of the case to speak on that matter.

From the article:

We have due process in this country, and our Constitution forbids lawmakers from singling out a person or group for punishment without a fair investigation and trial.

And, I am really sick of Congress, Pelosi, Obama and other news organizations singling out FOX news. What's the difference about how they're demonizing Fox from the US Capital vs what ACORN believes about them being "singled out"? It's a shame and should be rather embarrassing that a President and Congress has to attack a news organization.

The fact that you don't recognize the difference is the problem.