My Thoughts on the Decision in ACORN vs. the United States

My friends, I've been fairly quiet the past few days. I've read and re-read Judge Gershon's opinion in ACORN vs. the United States of America, and I'm still baffled. I am personally of the belief that defunding was a proper use of Congressional regulatory power. The decision to protect the taxpayers from waste, fraud, and abuse seems important if not imperative to me.

ACORN disagrees. They feel they are being punished.

Also, after reviewing the Harshbarger report, ACORN seems to believe that it has not been at fault for any of the criminal activity occurring within its offices. Harshbarger lays blame on ACORN's founder, ACORN's members, and the intrepid young journalists who dared to expose ACORN's corruption. Harshbarger concluded that laws were not broken and no doubt endorses ACORN's strategy of suing those who dare expose the truth. We've seen whistleblower Anita MonCrief, Hannah Giles, James O'Keefe, Andrew Breitbart, and even the federal government taken to court by ACORN.

Last Friday was a decisive win for ACORN. Legal scholars have made the case for the Constitutionality of the defunding. The Department of Justice even was forced to acknowledge the Constitutionality of the law, and attempt to defend it. ACORN however carried the day. Judge Gershon looked beyond the legitimate regulatory concern of Congress to find what she believed to be in the hearts of the lawmakers. This empathic quality, when coupled with the defense of ACORN should entitle her to a promotion from President Obama.