New Court Decision: Congress Can Withhold ACORN Funding
Looks like ACORN lost another round in court last week. New York’s 2nd Circuit Court of Appeals has reversed a lower court’s decision to re-instate Congressional funding of the Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now (ACORN) ruling that halting funding did not violate the group’s rights.
Congress finally cut off federal funding to ACORN after the controversy stirred by conservative activist James O’Keefe who videotapped various ACORN offices advising a prostitute to hide her profession in order to get federal housing funding. The “prostitute” was in truth an investigative reporter working with O’Keefe.
ACORN tried to sue James O’Keefe but its lawsuit was thrown out.
Eventually ACORN became so politically toxic that Congress eventually and properly cut off funding for the organization. In response to the actions by Congress ACORN sued to re-instate the finding claiming their rights were being violated and that Congress had given the group what amounted to a “corporate death sentence” by having the funding removed.
After winning the first round with favorable decision by a district court judge in Brooklyn, the case was appealed to the 2nd District Court of Appeals. The Appeals Court ruled that the Brooklyn judge was wrong and said that since ACORN only got 10 percent of its funding from the federal government that the organization’s rights were not being violated and its existence was not endangered by removal of federal funding.
It would appear however, that ACORN is fighting a losing battle. Time will tell, certainly.
Sphere: Related Content
August 15, 2010
Posted in: Racist News
|
Fair Use Disclaimer
"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion,
or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of
speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to
assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances."
Under the 'fair use' rule of copyright law, an author may make limited use of another author's work without asking permission. Fair use is based on the belief that the public is entitled to freely use portions of copyrighted materials for purposes of commentary and criticism. The fair use privilege is perhaps the most significant limitation on a copyright owner's exclusive rights.
Fair use as described at 17 U.S.C. Section 107:
"Notwithstanding the provisions of section 106 and 106A, the fair use of a copyrighted work, including such use by reproduction in copies or phono-records or by any other means specified by that section, for purposes such as criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching (including multiple copies for classroom use), scholarship, or research, is not an infringement of copyright.
In determining whether the use made of a work in any particular case is a fair use the factors to be considered shall include:
Loading ...