CRS: House ACORN ban may be unconstitutional - Glenn Thrush - POLITICO.com »
Posted By deathray 1 month, 3 weeks ago in Political News
The Congressional Research Service has analyzed the case law and other legal issues surrounding last week's ACORN ban passed in the House and found the measure could be interpreted as a "bill of attainder" and therefore unconstitutional, according to copy of the report obtained by POLITICO.
Read Full Story at politico.com »
737 Views Share Story 204 Comments Report
Submitted By:
deathray
Hm...summarizing a life...Investment banker, sailor, unintentional gourmet cook. Ex US Naval officer, also Foreign Service. Split my time between NYC and Miami Beach ...
Who Also Submitted:
Other Related Articles:
RSS Join the Discussion
+ Add CommentComments So Far: 204 (view all)
-
91%
deathray1 month, 3 weeks ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
fta:
Reply
A bill of attainder – which is prohibited in Article 1 of the Constitution -- is a law targeted to hurt or help an individual. If a bill is regarded primarily as punitive, instead of being strictly regulatory, it could be interpreted as an attainder bill, according to legal experts.
The conclusion of the executive summary, written by CRS legislative attorney Kenneth R. Thomas [paragraph breaks are added for clarity]:
"While the regulatory purpose of ensuring that federal funds are properly spent is a legitimate one,
it is not clear that imposing a permanent government-wide ban on contracting with or providing grants to ACORN fits that purpose."
"Thus, there may be issues raised by characterizing this legislation as purely regulatory in nature. While the Supreme Court has noted that the courts will generally defer to Congress as to the regulatory purpose of a statute absent clear proof of punitive intent, there appear to be potential issues raised withattempting to find a rational non-punitive regulatory purpose for this legislation."
Thus, it appears that a court may have a sufficient basis to overcome the presumption of constitutionality, and find that it violates the prohibition against bills of attainder."
i think this is a very interesting question. maybe some of our local constitutional law experts would like to chime in.-
95%
Beau78901 month, 3 weeks ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
A quick search at http://thomas.loc.gov reveals one House bill, two Senate bills and four Senate amendments that specifically mention that ACORN should not receive government funds.
Reply
I wouldn't call my self an expert on the Constitution, but it's hard to imagine any legislation singling out one organization by name not being interpreted as a bill of attainder.
Here are those bill numbers, if anyone's interested in looking up the text:
H.R. 3571
S. 1687
S. 1710
S.AMDT. 107
S.AMDT. 705
S. AMDT. 2355
S. AMDT. 2394
I also just have to wonder: Whatever happened to the concept of "innocent until proven guilty"? -
83%
hyperbola1 month, 3 weeks ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Well, if you had any illusions that the Dems were about "change", this is one more nail in that coffin.
Reply
ACORN and Pfizer - Who's the Pimp?
http://www.propeller.com/story/2009/09/25/acorn-an...
Acorn is a poor people’s grassroots organization.
Earlier this month, some of it’s employees were caught on tape giving advice to two young right-wing activists posing as pimp and prostitute.
Pfizer is a wealthy and powerful multinational corporation.
Earlier this month, a Pfizer unit pled guilty to a felony in connection with a major health care fraud and paid $2.3 billion in fines.
So, if the Democratically controlled Congress were to vote to either:
a) strip federal funding from the grassroots group Acorn, or
b) ban corporate felon Pfizer from future government business
Which would it be? Let me guess.
Last week, the Democratic controlled Congress voted to strip Acorn of its federal funding.
Why?
The vote came a day after the release of the latest video by the two activists who crisscrossed the country trying to get Acorn employees to help them in setting up a child-prostitution business.
In some Acorn offices, workers reported the two to the police.
In others, they sought to help the fake pimp and prostitute.
Fox and Limbaugh and Hannity and Beck and O’Reilly made it seem as if Acorn was a corporate felon.
And reacting to the right-wing echo chamber, the House and Senate voted to end Acorn’s federal funding.
Unclear whether such a move is Constitutional. The Constitution prohibits bills of attainder. -
-
89%
alakazam1 month, 3 weeks ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
I gotta tell ya D-Ray...this is a good one.
Reply
Wow...Disallowing Legislative recourse? ...I just don't think that flies at all.
I would suggest Acorn take it directly to Court.
Is this the corporate equivalent of dissolving Habeas.
No.
The Corporations involved are granted a Day in Court.
I for one would cheer brightly, brightly and with Beauty if they would indict the Board of Halliburton before an SEC Commission.
Only the Truth will set Men Free...
If Corporations are entitled to a Day in Court?
Then so are ALL the accused. -
27%
Icantwait1 month, 3 weeks ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
My Fellow American: Let me compliment you on your Legal Explanation. However, It seems our Constitution is irrelevant in this Administration. They pretty much make up the Laws to suit their agenda as they go.
Reply
So, Acorn, can do just about anything they so desire either Constitutional or Unconstitutional because the have The Fearless Leaders Blessing.
Acorn can make false voter registration, beat people up, steal Stimulus Money, prefabricate census information, or whatever they have a hankering to do. Constitutional Restraints on Acorn? No Way. This is the Direction O is leading our Country towards. The Real American
-
-
96%
Charlson1 month, 3 weeks ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Watched Rachael Meadow's show last night and she gave a very convincing investigation into the republican smear of Acorn and it's ties to business who felt threatened by Acorn's work for raising minimum wages and LEGALLY registering the poor and disenfranchised to vote. Any irregularities where self-reported but falsely reported as voter fraud by right wing media and then picked up by the right leaning main stream media.
Reply-
90%
Progressive1 month, 3 weeks ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Here's a link to that segment of the Rachel Maddow show:
Reply
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/26315908/#33013202 -
30%
Georgia501 month, 3 weeks ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Tell Rachael that if she wants to be perceived as credible next go-around, she MIGHT wanna tell her side of the story BEFORE A-brothel drags itself through its own mud with its own ineptitude.
Reply
As it is, now even the chronology of events screams her down without conservatives having to utter a word.
-
-
93%
deathray1 month, 3 weeks ago
-
35%
tadair9191 month, 3 weeks ago
-
57%
tadair9191 month, 3 weeks ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
it's not a presumption when i've already given you the quotes from the Framers who explicitly stated what they wrote in plain English.
Reply
it's like arguing over the meaning of a No U-Turn sign.
"Gee, I wonder what this means. I'm open to new interpretations. What's that? No taking a U-Turn? Naw, couldn't be."
-
-
74%
mesodude1 month, 3 weeks ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Thanks so much for posting this, deathray. What I find stunning about most of the smear attacks against ACORN is that they have *fully* cooperated when the occasional bad apple has been discovered in their midst. Sadly, this is *way* the hell more than we've gotten from supporters of the likes of Ensign, Vitter, Sanford, Craig, Gingrich, et al. These neocons are absolutely filthy and I cannot believe how quickly Democrats caved on this.
Reply-
-
33%
mack0831841 month, 3 weeks ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
How has ACORN been fully cooperative? They have refused to open up their books and refuse to admit that the people depicted in these videos done anything wrong. Unfortunately, I believe they are reaching a little too far trying to invoke this law. The spirit of the law was not to protect groups who misappropriate federal money. To clear any misunderstanding up, all that would be needed is strict investigative and regulatory language. Word it in such a way that it is prohibitive and perpetual. That will insure that any money that they are given is not misused or they will get no money at all. I really don't want any of my tax dollars in their hands.
Reply
-
-
-
31%
Commodore11 month, 3 weeks ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
It sounds like the liberals in Congress are looking for a loophole to cover themselves. Funding to ACORN should be banned and never changed from that. They have done nothing to convince me they are a legitimate organization any more. I know at one time they were as indicated by Hannity and Beck but got skewed by greedy liberals. Only when they return to their original charter then they can be federally funded.
Reply -
82%
cleare1 month, 3 weeks ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
i wouldn't call a bill of attainder a "loophole".
Reply
further, i am proud to say i worked with acorn on voter registration drives in 1994 & 1996; they were effective and professional.
just because a couple of "plants" found a few individuals "playing the game", doesn't mean the whole organization and its' mission is corrupt.-
37%
tadair9191 month, 3 weeks ago
-
92%
mesodude1 month, 3 weeks ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
I've already predicted that it won't be long before cons will find themselves on the receiving end of similar stings (because when cons are bitching and crowing about something, 9 times out of 10 it's because *they* are themselves engaging in the very behavior they condemn). And, as if often the case, when caught red handed (or in a "wide stance" tapping their toes with their pants down around their ankles in an airport restroom stall), cons won't acknowledge they've done anything wrong. The useless MSM now smells money and they will be on the lookout for sleazy con hypocrisy they can report on for weeks and weeks and weeks while the country falls apart. Cons, mark my words. The next Larry Craig, or Ted Haggard, or Mark Foley, or Mark Sanford, or John Ensign, or David Vitter, or Newt Gingrich...phew...is just around the corner. ;-(
Reply
-
-
-
80%
jordan111 month, 3 weeks ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
MSNBC presented a bit of an expose on how ACORN has been dogged by the right wing for years, including in Congress and by areas of the country where they were at risk for losing their conservative voter stronghold. Of course they presented facts that made about 80% of the propaganda about ACORN a lie. The organization has its imperfections, but certainly not to the extent the propagandists would have us believe. Problem is, if people won't listen & dig their heels in to their beliefs based on limited investigations or even emotion alone, there isn't much that can be done to put a stop to this kind of public opinion manipulation.
Reply-
-
33%
Icantwait1 month, 3 weeks ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
My Fellow American: Jordan11, anyone who defends Acorn is either in with them or intimidated by them. They are Criminals, so should we assume you are a criminal as well? They are anti American, so should we assume you are anti American as well? They are Stimulus Paid Thugs, so should we assume you are a Stimulus Paid Thug as well?
Reply
MSNBC has no credibility with Americans and you want us to believe their pack of Lies? You must be hallucinating. Don't bother us with 80% percent of anything MSNBC reports. I rather read the National Enquirer at least they can back up most of their stories. The Real American -
-
-
29%
Georgia501 month, 3 weeks ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
All the House did was keep additional funding from going to A-brothel. The only way this might be construed as "punitive" or even approaching Bill of Attainder territory is for those so misguided to presume to have some automatic, de facto claim on taxpayer money. Which, by the way, includes most liberals.
Reply-
85%
mesodude1 month, 3 weeks ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
"All the House did was keep additional funding from going to A-brothel. The only way this might be construed as "punitive" or even approaching Bill of Attainder territory is for those so misguided to presume to have some automatic, de facto claim on taxpayer money. Which, by the way, includes most liberals."
Reply
--ROTFLMAO
--Since when did Congress hate funding brothels? Get serious. -
75%
ConquerorWyrm1 month, 3 weeks ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
When you say A-brothel, what are you talking about? The Republican Party? I mean, that is the only organization I can think of that has regularly used the services of a brothel. Being that there has been no prostitution actually associated, outside of by smear, with ACORN, your pathetic attempt at sounding witty is, well, pathetic at best.
Reply
You really are the worst, most uneducated and idiotic of all the neo-con America-haters here on Propeller.
-
-
75%
mesodude1 month, 3 weeks ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Dear Lying Con Trolls:
Reply
You supported Bush when he destroyed the Justice Department for political gain (which partly involved harassing ACORN for reporting its own bad apples to authorities). Why the hell would you think anyone believes you are genuinely concerned about rooting out corruption? Exactly...*No one believes this* cons. ;-(-
78%
oldslowjim1 month, 3 weeks ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
What does this have to do with the issue of whether acorn is systematically corrupt or just badly managed?
Reply
Are you saying acorn should not be investigated because someone else got away with a crime? Our justice system would fall apart if that was the case. -
27%
Icantwait1 month, 3 weeks ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
My Fellow American: Mesodude, what business does Acorn have in our Government anyway? We are infiltrated with Little Acorns running all over the Place disrupting normal American Activities. Czars multiplying in O's Baby Sitting Day Care. Tax Frauds and Tax Evaders in O's Administration. Do we Conservative Real Americans have to put up with all this Crap or Do we just say No. You Guessed It. The Real Americans
Reply
-
-
-
80%
Radiofreeeuropa1 month, 3 weeks ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
The irony of accusing Acorn of voter fraud for reporting finding bogus signatures on some of it's voter reg forms should escape no one. The organization performs a service, suggesting the entire organization is valueless is like claiming all non atheists are at fault because Father O'Cornhole buggered his acolytes. From the constitutional point of view it appears this defunding is not legal. I suspect the reason republicans are so upset about "ho s" finding ways to pay their taxes is the fear of being listed as a client.LOL! Anyway why are these folks not equally outraged at Halliburton who has done far more wrong over and over yet continue to receive public funds?
Reply -
55%
lum-chate1 month, 3 weeks ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Sticking up for Acorn is like saying cesspools don't stink. It's simply not reasonable to defend this out of control over funded outfit. All Daily Kos & Huff Post followers please neg me on this post I won't be satisfied till I get a 0. Its funny, maybe 10% of the Senate still want to fund Acorn yet 90% of the posters here do, that says something. You cannot defend an undefendible position without scorn from the rational.
Reply-
60%
mrlecher1 month, 3 weeks ago
-
75%
Beau78901 month, 3 weeks ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
lum-chate:
Reply
You appear to be expecting negs all around on your comment, while saying "You cannot defend an undefendible position without scorn from the rational."
Are you saying you're defending an undefendible [sic] position and expecting scorn from the rational?
Here's some scorn (and a neg). I wouldn't want to disappoint. -
75%
Radiofreeeuropa1 month, 3 weeks ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
In what sense is defending the value of an organization that helps find jobs for jobless and generally provides services for the poor like helping them find ways to keep from freezing to death when their heat is cut off by utilities, etc, like a cesspool? Here is a list of 243 republicans convicted of everything from rape to child molesting to bribery.
Reply
http://www.republicanoffenders.com/
Now use your same arguments, but replace "the republican party" with Acorn.
There are far more documented reasons to prohibit the Republican Party from doing any business with the federal government than Acorn.
Won't you now say that these 243 criminals don't really mean the whole party is worthless?
Why is Acorn not afforded the same reasonable thinking from you?
The right's obsession with Acorn is ludicrous. -
-
-
100%
ConquerorWyrm1 month, 3 weeks ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
“As Mankind becomes more liberal, they will be more apt to allow that all those who conduct themselves as worthy members of the community are equally entitled to the protections of civil government. I hope ever to see America among the foremost nations of justice and liberality.”
Reply
George Washington -
40%
truthfirst1 month, 3 weeks ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Liberals just amaze me. Many of you think that you are such intellectual giants. When much of what you espouse is a bunch of nonsense based on what you consider superior knowledge on various subjects. You wouldn't know the truth if it was starring you in the face. For months I have been reading your posts and listened to your liberal biases, and I have to say that it is great entertainment as I have listen to how some of you think so highly of yourselves. I can't believe that you actually believe all the rhetoric you dish out. So once again, I would like to say, thanks for the hours of entertainment.
Reply-
86%
alakazam1 month, 3 weeks ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
I do not think he meant "Liberal" in the sense of freely and liberally using Federal Powers.
Reply
He meant it in the classic sense of the words Laissez-Faire.
Leave people alone and let them be Free.
That term was corrupted and I am sure anyone who is honest with themselves understands just how and why that happened. -
100%
ConquerorWyrm1 month, 3 weeks ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
And this second meaning which you use is NOT what "liberal" or "liberalism" means. That can be blamed on a purposeful misuse of the word reaching back to the administration of GHWBush and an conscious attempt at perverting the language. This perversion has taken hold, this new meaning ascribed to the word 'liberal', through constant repetition of the lie first by the mouthpieces of the neo-con movement (such as Limbaugh) and then, unchallenged, it worked its way into common usage.
Reply
Thing is, that perversion of the word is exactly that...a perversion. And, like the saying goes in that all it takes for evil to succeed is for good men to do nothing, all that it takes for such a perverse lie to succeed is for people to continue repeating it.
I, like Washington, am a Liberal in the true sense of the word. I reject being defined by others to be what I am not. By that very logic, I can define all neo-cons as child rapists...though that does not make them so en masse.
-
-
-
33%
guitarfreakstyle1 month, 3 weeks ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Ok let's get this straight. First off. Stop trying to point the finger that the Republicans are behind the Acorn "pimp and Ho' Scandal. The Journalist O'Keeffe that brought this scandal to the public's attention has stated many times over he is not a republican or a Democrat. He calls himself a progressive. He chose to be Non partisan in this issue but rather be known as an Independent Journalist. Why is this story being treated as this is something new? This was the ACORN office in Maryland for damn sakes. And as you may know most ACORN offices are purposely located in low Income poverty demographic parts of town to feed off the poor. ACORN has been behind prostitution and Human Trafficking for more then a decade with the protection of the Chicago Political Machine and other wealthy corporate bullies that use ACORN to channel untaxed money to further their Mafia agenda. Prove to me that ACORN doesn't have interest in the drug trafficking Biz. Prove to me that ACORN isn't involved in destroying families and using their authority to punish honest people to further their special gain. For all you libtard activists that rage on Pro hate for Republicans. Look at your own self and explain to me what makes Democrats any better when all I see in every liberal and Democrap is a "every man for himself" attitude. Get a life Libtards
Reply-
-
86%
Radiofreeeuropa1 month, 3 weeks ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Can you link your source for Acorn being behind prostitution and human trafficking?
Reply
Didn't think so.
Acorn provides services to the poor...so they shouldn't be in poor neighborhoods?
"all I see in every liberal and Democrap is a "every man for himself" attitude. Get a life Libtards"
Really?
If your "guitar" skills are anything like your conversational skills...get a day job. -
83%
jakesguile1 month, 3 weeks ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Libtards? Gee I seem to remember someone else around here liked to use that term.... and OH look at that you've only been here less than 4 hours. And the person who liked to use it? noonrock? He was banned. Might you be noonrock's sockpuppet come back to mouth off to us some more? I think you might be so just sit tight, you'll be back to blacklisted status shortly
Reply
-
-
33%
Wolfie20071 month, 3 weeks ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
This past winter Congress voted to tax 100% of all bonuses given to AIG employees. Now that was plainly a "Bill of Attainer" not funding ACORN means just that, not funding ACORN. It's apparent that there are no great legal minds in attendance on this thread.
Reply
Did you post this so everyone could have a good laugh, Death? -
dzfffffComment removed: Hard Banned
-
dzfffffComment removed: Hard Banned
More News
Politics Daily
Obama's Approval Rating Falls in Iowa Where He Got His First Big Boost
Senate Votes to Bring Health Care Reform Bill to Floor
Pollster Celinda Lake: Where Women Really Stand on Health Care
Democrats Get to 60 Votes, Health Care Poised to Clear First Senate Hurdle
Economists Say Stimulus Package Rescued Economy from Free Fall
Fox News Politics
U.S. Helping Anti-Taliban Militias in Afghanistan
Suspicious Package Found at Fort Benning
New Documentary Challenges Gore's 'Inconvenient Truth' on Global Warming
Tough U.N. Critic Tapped to Represent U.S. on Human Rights Council
Germany Concerned Its Evidence to Be Used to Back Death Penalty in 9/11 Trial
The Huffington Post
Esther Wojcicki: Creative Commons In 2009: The Accomplishments In Promoting Worldwide Sharing
Bernard-Henri Lévy: We Must Replay the Match
Kevin Ross: Does This Black Republican Understand Sarah Palin's Appeal? You Betcha!
Dan Agin: How It Was: The Year After the Crash of 1929
Barbara Ann Radnofsky: Authors Of Texas Marriage Amendment: Who Barks The Loudest?
Submit a Story
Advertisement
Add a Comment
Sign In With Your Propeller Account
Please keep your comments relevant to this story.
To create a live link, simply type the URL (including http://) or email address and we will make it a live link for you. You can put up to 3 URLs in your comments. Line breaks and paragraphs are automatically converted — no need to use <p> or <br /> tags.