Move to cut ACORN funding ruled unconstitutional

By ADAM GOLDMAN (AP) – 13 hours ago

NEW YORK — The U.S. government's move this fall to cut off funding to ACORN was unconstitutional, a federal judge ruled Friday, handing the embattled group a legal victory.

U.S. District Judge Nina Gershon issued the preliminary injunction against the government, saying it's in the public's interest for the organization to continue receiving federal funding.

ACORN claimed in its lawsuit that Congress' decision to cut off its funding was unconstitutional because it punitively targeted an individual organization.

Gershon said in her ruling that ACORN had raised a "fundamental issue of separation of powers. They have been singled out by Congress for punishment that directly and immediately affects their ability to continue to obtain federal funding, in the absence of any judicial, or even administrative, process adjudicating guilt."

Bill Quigley, the legal director of the Center for Constitutional Rights, which brought the lawsuit on behalf of ACORN and two affiliates, said the decision sends a sharp message to Congress that it can't single out an individual or organization without due process.

"It's a resounding victory for ACORN," he said. "I'd be surprised if the government decides to appeal."

ACORN, or the Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now, describes itself as an advocate for low-income and minority homebuyers and residents in communities served by its offices around the country. Critics say it has violated the tax-exempt status of some of its affiliates by engaging in partisan political activities.

The law that halted ACORN's federal funding took effect Oct. 1 and was extended Oct. 31. It was set to either expire or be extended again on Dec. 18.

ACORN's lawsuit was filed in federal court in Brooklyn and sought reinstatement of the funds. Quigley said millions of dollars in funds should begin to flow again to ACORN next week. The judge said the "public will not suffer harm by allowing the plaintiffs to continue work on contracts duly awarded by federal agencies."

ACORN has been dogged by allegations of voter-registration fraud and embezzlement.

Several of its offices were the subject of an embarrassing hidden-camera sting in which ACORN employees were shown advising a couple posing as a prostitute and her pimp to lie about her profession and launder her earnings. The videos sparked a political uproar, with Republicans trying to use the group's troubles to portray Democrats as corrupt.

The group's lawsuit named the U.S. government, the secretary of Housing and Urban Development, the director of the Office of Management and Budget and the secretary of the Treasury as defendants.

Justice Department spokeswoman Beverley Lumpkin said the agency was reviewing the decision and declined to comment further.

"Today's ruling is a victory for the constitutional rights for all Americans and for the citizens who work through ACORN to improve their communities and promote responsible lending and homeownership," ACORN CEO Bertha Lewis said in a statement.

This country is gettin' real a$$ backwards.

Can't understand all this rewarding criminals.

Oh this is just freaking brilliant.

They are constitutionally entitled to take money, even though they employed several people who blatantly attempted to skirt the law.

What a joke.

I'm not sure I understand how anybody can be constitutionally entitled to taxpayer money

The judge may have a point.
Congress took action before taking the proper steps of doing a proper investigation, filing charges and taking ACORN to trial.

It may have been an oversight or intentional fck up, knowing full well, they were screwin' a pooch and ACORN would be put back on the books.

Beings how our leadership is proving themselves to be manipulators, I would tend to lean to the latter, that it was a purposeful act on the part of a Democratic Congress.

understanding such concepts requires an understanding of the constitution and that it's not about rewarding criminals it's about protecting certain rights. read the constitution lately? ever read it?

Where in the constitution does it give special interest groups the right to taxpayer money?

nowhere. nor does it prohibit such. the constitution doesn't give rights. it protects certain inaileanable rights. the constitution does not give you the right to drive nor does it prohibit the states from restricting how fast you drive. the judge ruled that the constitution has no bearing on congress funding special interest groups. therefore it is not unconstitional for congress to do such. accorn sucks. the kkk sucks. but both groups have rights that are not abridged by the constitution.

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Some more made up law . when well it end .. The courts ned to be changed NOW . Only people who can read can be judges .

It also helps ACORN to have someone on their side who's in a higher position.. Ain't namin names but, I bet ya'll can guess who.