-
Obama’s Radical, Tasteless Defilement of 9/11
September 9, 2011 | 5 comments
-
Vadum vs Thom Hartmann on Registering the Poor to Vote (Cloward-Piven Strategy)
September 8, 2011 | 3 comments
-
Van Jones To Emcee Center for American Progress 9/11 Event?
September 7, 2011 | 4 comments
-
No, Your Majesty, Congress Will Not Be Available Wednesday
August 31, 2011 | 43 comments
-
Weigel Laughs in the Face of Waste, Fraud, and Abuse
August 29, 2011 | 7 comments
The Spectacle Blog
If you thought you sent representatives and senators to Washington, D.C., to exercise the constitutionally mandated power of the purse -- you're wrong.
Silly you. You wasted all that time in civics class learning a whole bunch of outdated claptrap about separation of powers and the lawmaking process for nothing.
The spending power belongs to federal judges now, regardless of what that quaint little document called the U.S. Constitution says.
That's what ACORN's favorite federal judge, Nina Gershon of the Eastern District of New York ruled Wednesday.
In December Gershon, a Bill Clinton appointee, helped ACORN out by offering the Obama administration political cover by issuing a temporary injunction prohibiting Congress from cutting off funding for ACORN. She found that depriving ACORN of taxpayer dollars was an unconstitutional "bill of attainder" that singled out ACORN for punishment without trial.
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 penalty.
To give credit where it's due, the Obama administration did the right thing and appealed the December ruling.
Now Nutty Nina's made the ruling permanent and it's not yet clear if the administration will appeal this latest ruling. (Here is the permanent injunction and the opinion and order she issued yesterday.)
Gershon showed a similar contempt for the legislative branch previously. In 1999 she ruled then-New York mayor Rudy Giuliani had no right to cut off city funding of the Brooklyn Museum of Art when it displayed dead animals and a painting of the Virgin Mary decorated with elephant dung. Gershon's not exactly courageous, by the way. She managed to get out of taking accused Al Qaeda terrorist Najibullah Zazi's case when a courthouse computer randomly assigned it to her.
If Gershon's absurd ruling remains undisturbed it will mean every parasitic leftist group in the country will have due process rights in the appropriations process. At worst, Congress will not be able to cut off any group for any reason. At best, Congress will have to jump through hoops in order to de-fund any group. The rights of tax eaters will become paramount to the rights of taxpayers.
The ruling should be music to the ears of Rep. Jerrold Nadler (D-N.Y.), a huge fan of ACORN who has given thousands of dollars over the years to the ACORN network. The thoroughly corrupt Nadler urged ACORN's lawyer to sue the government, arguing that a ban on funding constituted a "bill of attainder." Within weeks, ACORN took his advice.
The ruling also appears to mean that ACORN and other
leftist activist groups are eligible for up to $3.99
billion in federal funding included in President Obama's $3.83
trillion fiscal 2011 budget blueprint.
The $3.99 billion comes from a congressional slush fund known as the Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) program, which is part of the Department of Housing and Urban Development's (HUD) $48.5 billion fiscal 2011 budget. CDBG grants, which are awarded to states and localities, flow indirectly to ACORN and similar groups that compete at the state and local level for grants.
Thanks, Nutty Nina. You've outdone yourself this time.
View all comments (18) | Leave a comment
Leave a Comment
More Blog Posts by Matthew Vadum
http://spectator.org/blog/2010/03/11/judge-nutty-nina-parasites-lik
Follow us:
ADVERTISEMENT
SPONSORED LINKS
Special Feature
Better that we become a nation of choosers rather than beggars. Our symposium on choice from the May, 2012 issue:
FLASHBACK TO: 1984
-
The Fairness Delusion
The speech our President should make.
-
Media Smears: One Man’s Experiences
A noted economist fires back.
-
Chuck Colson vs. The Fundamentalists
How political can you get?
-
The Reagan Doctrine
You might have missed it, but it was boomed in January.
-
The Woman Problem
Farcical feminism is a decades-old phenomenon, as George Will's essay from 1970 reminds us.
Clip of the Day
ADVERTISEMENT
jacobus cambria| 3.11.10 @ 9:49AM
The author of this article is, apparently, not aware of the "bill of attainder" clause of the Constitution of the United States of America.
It would seem to me that you should be angry about representatives and senators seeking to exercise the constitutionally mandated power of the judiciary.
Nick| 3.11.10 @ 10:09AM
Mr. Cambria,
You, apparently, are not aware of what a "bill of attainder" is.
My organization isn't getting any federal funds. Am I being punished?
jacobus cambria| 3.11.10 @ 3:38PM
According to Judge Rehnquist, "a bill of attainder was a legislative act that singled out one or more persons and imposed punishment on them, without benefit of trial. Such actions were regarded as odious by the framers of the Constitution because it was the traditional role of a court, judging an individual case, to impose punishment." My understanding is that the SCOTUS includes bills of pains and penalties under this interpretation.
As far as I'm aware ACORN has not been found guilty of anything to this point in time. Individual persons who work for ACORN may have been accused of various forms of malfeasance. If you are aware of any findings of guilt by a court, I'd be happy to be enlightened.
I'd also be more than pleased to learn which part of the judge's ruling in this particular case is incorrectly reasoned.
As for whether you are being punished, I cannot say one way or the other. Have you been subject to "a legislative act that singles out an individual or group for punishment without a trial?" If yes, then that would be illegal.
Nick| 3.11.10 @ 4:03PM
Mr. Cambria,
I think you mean CHIEF JUSTICE Rehnquist.
What was the Congressional ACT that punished ACORN? House or Senate bill number will suffice.
Congress wasn't going to take ACORN's money with a fine or tax. They were going to stop giving them taxpayer's money. That is not punishment, it is common sense.
Is this so hard to understand?
ZerObama| 3.11.10 @ 11:22PM
Well, of course ACORN hasn't been found guilty of any crime--Obama's corrupt Justice Dept. keeps covering up for their disgusting crimes.
OBAMA = ACORN--what do you expect?
kathy| 3.12.10 @ 6:58AM
You sure don't understand what a "bill of attainder" is, Jacobus! Congress has the right and responsibility to decide how to spend taxpayer money. They are responsible for deciding how best to morally spend that money.
That is different than taking private property by the government. There is only so much money for public groups, and they Congress can decide who deserves it the most and cut the funds of the rest.
The Congress can also even dismantle the court system if they want too and establish a different system, which means Nutty Nina may have to ask ACORN for a job!!
ACORN is an anti-social group. You can tell if a group is social or anti-social by their products, behavior and who they associate with.
The taxpayers do not have to fund anti-social groups. Thomas Jefferson did not believe in having an income tax system because he said that it may then cause people to contribute to things they do not morally believe in. He believed in a tariff system on goods from other countries.
In fact, no one who is sane, intelligent and peace-loving would contribute to an anti-social group. The Congress acted responsibly to cut off our money to that anti-social group.
However, you're just the type of person who is a weak link in America because you can't morally weigh data or personal behavior.
A wise man once wrote: "Crazier still are those who just stand around and do nothing in the face of insanity."
Whose team are you on, J? Good or evil? It's time to decide.
Marc Jeric| 3.11.10 @ 12:03PM
Why is it that we cannot sue the judges for malfeasance in office? I would sentence that creep to 20 years without parole. Clinton appointee - right? Aha - that disbarred felon!
Jon B| 3.11.10 @ 7:02PM
I agree. When the US SC violated the Constitution to install the President, there was no punishment available except impeachment and removal. The Republican majority was not going to support support the Constitution.
There is no 12-12 deadline for counting votes written in law anywhere. This was a deadline created out of thin air by the US SC when they chose to give 0 value to 10's of thousands of legal votes, preferring to give full value to another set of legal votes. A direct violation of the equal protection cause of the 14th amendment, and one of the biggest crimes this nation has ever witnessed. No punishment at all for it since there is no law to prevent the US SC from violating the Constitution.
ZerObama| 3.11.10 @ 11:31PM
Wrong thread, dumbtard! lol
Ike| 3.11.10 @ 12:10PM
Mr. Cambria: A bill of attainter was a practice of the English Parliament, a law passed which forfeited the lawfully owned property of a person or a family to the Crown as a punishment. Most often, it was accompanied by some criminal conviction and in addition to whatever punishment was meted out via the courts, but not always. In the 18th Century, it was most often used to punish political opponents without resort to the courts.
But the difference is that ACORN has no ownership rights to public money, whether appropriated or not. If Congress had passed a law confiscating ACORN's bank deposits, real and personal property, and other assets, that would have been a bill of attainter.
Pete| 3.11.10 @ 12:11PM
This is a HUGE issue. This is the only chance the Dims have of winning elections in the next 2 cycles - outright fraud. This must be elevated into the public consciousness ASAP. Why isn't every Republican on TV hitting this issue hard?
uncle curmudgeon| 3.11.10 @ 2:08PM
Absolutely correct, Pete. De-funding the Left is job # 1. Should the GOP ever exercize the competence option, it could become their Energizer Bunny issue for years to come. Somebody hand those dopes an ax. Timmm-buuurrr!
John Baker| 3.11.10 @ 3:05PM
So, I guess it's OK for ACORN to help people to smuggle underage children into the country as sex slaves. What else would you expect from such a radical person.
JUDGE NINA GERSHON SUPPORTS PROSITUTION AND THE ABUSE OF CHILDREN!!!!!
DanMingo| 3.11.10 @ 3:17PM
Acorn did not help or offer to help smuggle anyone anywhere.
If an employee of Acorn did, they were punished.
If you are referring to the highly edited smear films of the indicted Breitbart acolyte; that's not proof of anything.
The court has no lawful right to deprive an agency which is receiving public funds of those funds because of rumors and smears.
If you have information regarding the arrest and conviction of anyone from Acorn for prostitution, soliciting, or child abuse it would be helpful for you to share it (facts only please, not right wing ranting), but if, as is likely, you are just parroting rush, glen, sean or whoever, you have no basis for your accusatory statements.
ZerObama| 3.12.10 @ 3:15PM
Any proof with your hackneyed DNC talking points whine, dumbtard? Talk about a bird-brained parrot.
Projection is a pillar of leftist thought.
Bruce| 3.11.10 @ 4:57PM
Well - I guess if you lefty nutroots can parrot MoveOn, Daily Kos, WaPo, and Soros - we can parrot whoeverthehell we want. Tit for tat and all that. And by the way - ACORN is not an "agency" of the government. At least officially, that is, no matter how hard Zero tries to give them official recognition. They are a private political organization, and have absolutely NO right to public taxpayer money.
Moby Froll| 3.11.10 @ 7:13PM
Ah, yes, Jihadists everywhere love the American court system!
It's all about "branding," so we have hired a New York consultant to help us.
Al-Qaeda will become "Hugs Across the Gulf" and Taliban will change its name to "Fluffy Bunny Slippers."
We are going to rolling in the (federal) dough very, very soon!
I mean, who could turn down hugs or bunny slippers! Those guys in their Brooks Brothers suits were worth every dime!
Maybe they'll even put us in charge of the census! Since we are experts in the cross-border exploitation of women, we can put ACORN to shame in advising aspiring pimps and 'hos.
I just love it when our enemies fund us. Sweet . . .
Lenin said: "When the time comes to hang the capitalists, they will sell us the rope."
He was only half right, though.
They will GIVE us the money to buy it!!!
Prepare for the coming Caliphate!
Better start learning Arabic, Infidels!
Allahu Akbar!
Free Major Hasan!
Gene| 3.11.10 @ 8:50PM
"Only in the through-the-looking-glass world of a leftist activist judge could the organized crime syndicate ACORN..."
And this means? Oh - you have no idea. Neither do I except to show your total prejudice. What a bunch of fascist malarky!