thinkprogress.org — Rep. Alan Grayson challenged his conservative colleagues ? reducing Rep. Broun (R-GA) to incoherent defenses ? to prove ACORN de-funding measures were unconstitutional 'bills of attainder,' given that they were singling out one organization for punishment without trial. Yesterday, a federal judge ruled he was right: the ban is unconstitutional.
Dec 12, 2009 View in Crawl 4
joedittoDec 12, 2009
Their twisting antics also causes Delays, Havoc and Distractions, which prevents people from focusing on the real issues..
beratebirthersDec 13, 2009
Isn't it clear? There's nothing wrong with giving advice. It's a FIRST AMENDMENT issue.
Closed AccountDec 14, 2009
This is NOT a Bill of Attainder. I wish the hell the Judge would read & understand the Constitution. What a f**king idiot.A Bill of Attainder is a bill that declares a person an "outlaw" & subject to arrest without trial. It allows government to take a person's life, liberty or property without due process. ACORN does NOT have a property right in future funding by Congress. They do not own any money that is in the Federal Treasury, therefore a law that says the US government will no longer provide funds from the Treasury to ACORN cannot be a Bill of Attainder. The Congress may decide who the government will do business with. If the Congress decides that the US government will no longer do business with ACORN, then they certainly have constitutional authority to do so.Grayson & the judge are dead wrong.
Closed AccountDec 14, 2009
I wish you had some idea what you are talking about. More than that, I wish the judge has some idea what HE was talking about. This is NOT a Bill of Attainder.
verchiel77Dec 14, 2009
Keep crying, Coco.You not liking the result doesn't make it incorrect.Love how the biggest critics of "judicial activism" are the first to want to see it happen when they don't get the outcome they like.
verchiel77Dec 14, 2009
"Why not?"----------------Because ol' Coco doesn't like the result. It's the same excuse offered by every wingnut who's dissatisfied with a court ruling.
Closed AccountDec 14, 2009
I really don't care if people like you won't believe the truth. But you cannot refute a single thing I have said about Cloward-Piven, ACORN, or Obama's role in implementing the plan while an employee of ACORN. The best you can do is call people names. It shows how intellectually bankrupt & immature you are.
Closed AccountDec 14, 2009
Call names all you want -- that's ALL you have since you are so obviously wrong. You don't have any arguments against my position. You are showing just how mentally bankrupt you are.