The American Spectator : The Spectacle Blog : Impeach This Judge

Text Size

Impeach This Judge

By Matthew Vadum on 12.13.09 @ 2:47AM

U.S. District Judge Nina Gershon is unfit to serve on the federal bench.

How do I know this?

Because Gershon, a Bill Clinton appointee, issued a temporary injunction prohibiting Congress from cutting off funding for ACORN.

This injunction is premature, unconstitutional, and an affront to the separation of powers. It appears to rely on a novel, insidious legal doctrine known as legislative due process. In other words, groups have rights in the appropriations process. Congress no longer has the power of the purse regardless of what the Constitution says.

Only in the through-the-looking-glass world of a leftist activist judge could the organized crime syndicate ACORN be deemed a victim because Congress decided to stop funding it. Only in such a world could a cutoff of such funding be deemed a punishment prohibited under the Constitution's ban on bills of attainder.

If cutting off funds is a punishment, ACORN therefore must have a right to funding. This is patently absurd.

By issuing this injunction Gershon has violated her oath to uphold the Constitution and committed an impeachable offense.

(hat tip: Kyle Olson at BigGovernment.com)

View all comments (30) | Leave a comment

Scott| 12.13.09 @ 6:35AM

Agreed but I suspect that the opposing counsel representing the Defendants in this case, the Fed Government, did not put forth winnable rebuttal arguments with the energy and enthusiasm required.

Ret. Marine| 12.13.09 @ 6:52AM

geee yah think? and why would they, afterall, they believe it is needed for ammo to steal the next, next, next election.

martin j smith| 12.13.09 @ 7:20AM

How do you begin the impeachment process ?
On a diferent note: watch out for a group of trolls of the left. I have a sense there is a small group out there that is trying to dominate and disrupt disucssion. I began to sense yesterday in article called "peacenicked".

Richard Baker| 12.13.09 @ 8:37AM

martin j smith:
Let them come in. When folks see their inane comments, it causes their stupidity to be on display for all to see. That is a good thing.

Roy| 12.13.09 @ 1:15PM

It is when they are clearly labelled as such. I am much more worried about the trolling jackasses who put up things like YEAH I AGREE !11!1!!1111!1!!1! AND BY THE WAY BLACK PEOPLE SUCK!111!!1!!1!1!

Then somebody falls for it and etc etc.

Patrick Cunningham| 12.13.09 @ 10:20AM

Since when is it an impeachable offense for a judge to make a ruling with which you disagree? If Judge Gerson's ruling is "unconstitutional," as you say, it can be dealt with in higher courts. Moreover, the injunction she issued is only temporary. I think our republic somehow will survive.

Bob K.| 12.13.09 @ 11:19AM

Of course the Republic will survive! But it's still a good idea when dealing with nonsense like this ruling. It's sole purpose was to delay the implementation of Congress's order.

The House should start impeachment procedings routinely when faced with these petty judicial attacks from low ranking federal courts on it's Constitutionally granted powers. Let Gershon and other mice like her sweat it out when they chose to attack and thereby usurp the rights given to Congress by the Constitution.

Congress should set up a committee for just this purpose. It would return the dignity and decorum that has been missing from these lower Federal Courts for much too long now!

Bob K.

Hangshai| 12.13.09 @ 2:23PM

Wow, thats very optimistic of you. I dont.

where can i purchase an iphone| 12.13.09 @ 11:26AM

where can i purchase an iphone

BUCK JOHNSON| 12.13.09 @ 11:35AM

Hmm.. I wonder how petty a person can be if they want to impeach a judge making a decision based on constitutional grounds. Did not make new law, did not create a new precedent. You should blame the person who wrote since an inane and misguided law, and then to follow it up by making stupid comments for the peanut gallery. The Judge used those stupid comments as basis for her decision. Finally, ACORN is not a criminal enterprise, any more than Blackwater and other defense contractors. Not a single person who ACORN allegedly fraudulently registered voted. If this was this case, please provide proof, as I have been a registered voter for over 30 years and have always had to jump over hoops just to vote.

Truth to Power| 12.13.09 @ 1:19PM

Buck is a pretty obvious liar. He will continue to have to jump over hoops, never being allowed to jump through them.

DINORight| 12.13.09 @ 11:46AM

This is just one of many judges who should be impeached for such rulings. When will ANYONE act? It's been a long time coming! The men (and women) in black have been activists for years. This one takes just pushed the envelope that much farther. Who is going to stop her? And when?!

Oldefarte| 12.13.09 @ 12:00PM

Buck, you are simply FULL OF EXCREMENT! Where in our constitution does it say that the legislative branch of our government cannot stop funding a fraudulent/illegal activity/vendor? Do the tax [and/or criminality] laws mean anything to you, fool? Your argument would have possible meaning IF [and only] Acorn WAS NOT commiting illegal acts [and then the government arbitrarily cut of funding]; which WAS NOT the case here, dummie! This is simply a case of an activist, liberal judge EXPRESSING HIS BIASED OPINION concerning the constitution, and IS NOT constitutional facts/wording [if so please AS YOU SAYprovide PROOF by quoting the constitution's wording that is applicable]. Obviously I [and most other rational, sane readers here] wholeheartedly agree with Matthew's assertions; and furthermore, I'm of the opinion that, not only should this judge be removed from the judicial banch, but any/all Acorn officials [in addition to our government's executive/legislative/judicial branch members] that are/were complicit in their illegal/criminal activities should be tried, convicted and sent to jail!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Roy| 12.13.09 @ 1:19PM

And it should be made clear that this law DID set a precedent, hopefully one that will be repeated quite a bit in the future: groups that take the public's money in order to perform political shakedowns are not immune from public outrage.

BUCK JOHNSON| 12.14.09 @ 5:19PM

More silliness. What criminal activity? Have you read the op? Perhaps you should before you comment on my digestive system

Richard Baker| 12.13.09 @ 12:52PM

Correct me if I'm wrong. Isn't it the job of the Judiciary to hold the case at hand up to the Constitution and compare? It appears that Her Honor forgets that. The prohibition against a bill of attainder is intended for safeguarding the rights of the individual and not a supplicant for Federal dollars appearing as a line-item on a budget. Judicial legislation, indeed. But I forgot. the Constitution is a living, breathing, and evolving document.

Astonerii| 12.13.09 @ 1:51PM

I really wish that our country had a moral compulsion to do what you ask. But the honesty required in our government would be entirely too great. Because when it comes right down to it, congress enjoys the courts who ignore the constitution. A court that ignores the constitution has allowed the congress to run through the entire economy of our country through interstate commerce. Has allowed the government to create monstrosities such as social security, medicare and medicaid. Has allowed congress to control our schools and indoctrinate our children in progressive socialist propaganda. All of which, with a little thought about what the constitution reads would automatically be deemed unconstitutional.

sam| 12.13.09 @ 2:30PM

It will be interesting to see if the politics of party outweight the politics of "branch of government". I'll never forget when that nitwit Dennis Haster - Republican Speaker of the House - came to Democrook William Jefferson's defense when the Fed's grabbed the 90K in Congressional Office freezer. He literally came to his defense and tried to subvert the office apparently to ensure the power of the Congressional branch of government. I guess it was on a "principle", something I'm sure the Dems have no concerns with.

mike| 12.13.09 @ 3:45PM

I would guess that all three parties agreed with the outcome. the judge, acorn and the government are all on the same page. they're probably all at a BBQ right now. It is their club after all, not ours.

eaglewingz08| 12.13.09 @ 3:56PM

Yes, I'm sure that the democrap House Judiciary Committee will begin impeachment proceedings against a liberal democrap Judge who saved the organization whose shenanighans were responsible for most of these democrap Judiciary Committee members to be elected to office.
If anyone has any of the Government's briefs/
opposition papers to ACORN's injunction request, please post link because I'm sure they are precious.

Uriel| 12.13.09 @ 11:17PM

Just one question:

Who the heck is supposed to do the impeaching?

I mean, impeach Obama, impeach Pelosi, impeach them all. It can't be done.

"Our" Government has become destructive to the end of securing our unalienable rights of the people, and no longer derives just powers from the consent of the governed.
This is the purpose for which governments are instituted among men; and, it is the only JUST just purpose of all governments.
This circumstance has arisen through the unfolding of a long train of abuses and usurpations.
These abuses and usurpations invariably pursue the same object; to reduce the people under absolute despotism.

Hmmm, what to do? What ... to .... do?

Yosemeti Sam| 12.13.09 @ 11:34PM

Protecting the ACORN syndicate judicially?

Protecting the ACORN syndicate via LMSM ?

Protecting the ACORN syndicate through
Politico-Congress foreplay?

Come 2010, the Democrat party and their
collaborators will not suffer backlash.

Actually, they'll suffer whiplash!

Good and proper.

Won't mean a thing if it suddenly rains money from taxpayer-funded Porkulus bill.

Marc Jeric| 12.14.09 @ 7:18AM

Abu Hussein from Kenya is our Community Organizer-in-Chief and also the boss of his ACORN brown shirts and SEIU thugs. These two organizations constitute his system of local soviets on the model of Lenin; the one thing needed for a complete power takeover is to organize these soviets within the armed forces and the National Guard. Obama has reserved $8.5 billion for them in his stimulus bill - to be spent mainly in the 2010 census work and the November elections.

BUCK JOHNSN| 12.14.09 @ 5:16PM

No comment needed.....Just plain silly

Sir| 12.14.09 @ 10:51AM

My money says that Gershon is bucking for a SCOTUS appointment.

BUCK JOHNSON| 12.14.09 @ 5:14PM

The comments on this post are hilarious. A sitting Judge to be impeached.... for what, doing her job. If you are going to critical, be critical of the author of this insane and inane bill, a bill just ripe for judicial intervention. A properly written bill might hold up to judicial scrutiny. Also blame all the grandstanding that pols did after the bill was passed, words in which Gershon used in her op to justify her ruling

racking| 1.6.10 @ 10:45AM

http://www.racking-shelving.com
http://www.cold-store-equipment.com

as a whole contractor for cold store equipment, design, manufacturing, installation.

professional racking & shelving manufacturer, pallet racking, drive in racking,
cantilever racking, longspan shelving, dexion racking,

Eileen McDermott| 3.12.10 @ 12:17AM

Is this judge just stupid? ACORN is a corrupt organization. Why did it ever receive government funds in the first place? It's obviously Obama's pet, since it's the only real job he ever had. So, be honest, the Justice Dept. will never investigate it's corrupt practices. And obviously the judge is a big time liberal (progessive) and had to side with Obama's only hope of getting re-elected in 2012.
Pray for America, we're in deep do-do!!!!