The Jury Talks Back


The Unbelievable Ignorance of Congressman Nadler

Filed under: Uncategorized — Amphipolis @ 7:39 am

BigGovernment links to this statement from Representative Jerrold Nadler, D-NY, claiming that the ACORN defunding is unconstitutional because it constitutes a Bill of Attainder:

Congress must not be in the business of punishing individual organizations or people without trial, and that’s what this Amendment does. Whatever one may think of an organization, the Constitution’s clear ban on Bills of Attainder is there for the protection of all of our liberties.

A Bill of Attainder is a legislative act declaring someone guilty and punishing them without trial.

Leave it to a Democratic Congressman to claim that denying government funding is akin to declaring guilt, or that not giving an organization taxpayer money constitutes punishment.


  1. This guy is on the Judiciary committee, and I believe is an attorney. He’s got no excuse.

    Judiciary has been one of the most biased and ridiculous committees since 2006, when they stopped having Downing Street Memo hearings in the basement and brought them upstairs.

    Nadler is such a putz. ACORN helps elect democrats and target opponents to democrats. Funneling money to them has always been about using taxdollars to elect more democrats. It’s inherently corrupt. It would be like giving huge government contracts to the NRA and the Heritage Foundation.

    Can’t ACORN separate its partisan vote group from its CRA type group? Of course not… that’s the whole point!

    Comment by Juan — 9/18/2009 @ 9:51 am

  2. If not being handed taxpayer money is a bill of attainder, I feel pretty attainted myself.

    Comment by Xrlq — 9/18/2009 @ 3:09 pm

  3. To the best of my knowledge, the John Birch Society has never been convicted of a crime other than breech of taste. Would Nadler then assert that they must get some government funding?

    Comment by Kevin Murphy — 9/18/2009 @ 4:41 pm

  4. I wondered a lot about this. It didn’t seem right, but I didn’t have the legal knowledge or the access to a computer to actually check.

    Comment by Teflon Don — 9/18/2009 @ 8:20 pm

  5. Teflon, I don’t understand the confusion, and I’m easily confused.

    If the congress has decided to send Acorn leaders to prison, or even to fine them, that would be one thing. But cutting them off?

    The Us Census was badly damaged for its association with ACORN. Would you want your kid or wife to answer the door if you knew ACORN was supplying the census worker? I hope the IRS has wised up and stopped sending people to tax cheats for tax help. But the IRS is also run by tax cheats, so what can I expect?

    Comment by Juan — 9/18/2009 @ 11:05 pm

  6. Nadler is not ignorant – he just assumes that his audience is either ignorant or stupid. Unfortunately, too often, he is right!

    Comment by Longwalker — 9/19/2009 @ 11:23 am

  7. The Government does not have to convict someone of a crime in order to not give them money.

    Comment by Amphipolis — 9/19/2009 @ 3:12 pm

  8. Nadler ought to be force marched back from DC to NYC at gunpoint. He’ll lose so much weight that he’ll be forced to lose the fat in his head.

    Comment by PCD — 9/21/2009 @ 4:55 am

  9. Add Conyers and Frank to the list:

    The Democratic duo also ask CRS whether the legislation defunding Acorn “could constitute an unlawful bill of attainder” by singling out the group—as if the refusal to continue providing federal subsidies is tantamount to punishing it for a crime. Such Constitutional scruples were not evident in March, when the pair joined all but six House Democrats (and 85 Republicans) in voting to impose a 90% tax on executives of AIG and other disfavored corporations.

    Comment by Amphipolis — 9/23/2009 @ 7:06 am

RSS feed for comments on this post. TrackBack URI

Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.

Powered by WordPress.