YouTubeXLinkedInFacebookTelegramTelegramRumbleRumbleInstagram

About ACRU Staff

The American Constitutional Rights Union (ACRU) is dedicated to defending the constitutional rights of all Americans. ACRU stands against harmful, anti-constitutional ideologies that have taken hold in our nation’s courts, culture, and bureaucracies. We defend and promote free speech, religious liberty, the Second Amendment, and national sovereignty.

John Armor: When Terrorists Walk Free

By |2009-02-10T19:07:01-05:00February 10th, 2009|

Making the decision to close Guantanamo Bay without any real plan for dealing with the prisoners demonstrates the pervasive lack of understanding policymakers and the public have about the entire system. There are many gross misconceptions about the differences between trials of the Gitmo prisoners in military tribunals and criminal trials in the U.S., but few people understand them. And if the people don't know these differences and state their opinions, additional Americans may die as a result of the presidential order about Gitmo.

Free Enterprise Fund v. Public Company Accounting Oversight Board

By |2009-02-10T09:24:11-05:00February 10th, 2009|

On February 9, 2009, the ACRU filed an amicus brief with the United States Supreme Court arguing that the Court should review the decisions of the courts below upholding this arrangement.

In response to the scandals at Enron and elsewhere, Congress passed the Sarbanes Oxley Act in 2002, imposing costly, unnecessary regulatory burdens on business. The Act also created the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board to oversee and regulate accounting practices, and enforce its regulations through even criminal penalties. The PCAOB even has the power to finance itself through its own tax. But the President has no appointment, removal, supervisory or oversight authority […]

Jan LaRue: Pornography Advocate at DOJ?

By |2020-04-23T21:53:04-04:00February 9th, 2009|

This column originally appeared on Townhall.com on February 9, 2009.

It’s been a taxing two weeks for President Obama and his nominees. And there’s another nominee with bigger disqualifiers than unpaid taxes.

Imagine. A veteran pornography defense attorney takes a top spot at the agency charged with enforcing the nation’s child pornography and obscenity laws.

And that’s what will happen if David G. Ogden is confirmed as Deputy Attorney General, the second in command at the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ), the nation’s top law enforcement agency.

Who’s next?

Jack Kevorkian as Surgeon General?

Jane Fonda as Deputy Secretary of […]

Ken Blackwell: Obama, Ginsburg and Guns

By |2020-04-23T21:53:48-04:00February 9th, 2009|

Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg is being treated for pancreatic cancer. While Americans pray for her recovery, this sad news is a sobering reminder that President Obama is likely to appoint several justices to the U.S. Supreme Court. And in the aftermath of last year's landmark decision on the Second Amendment, gun owners need to zero in on what these events mean for the future of the right to bear arms.

Horace Cooper: Bush v. Gore Redux?

By |2009-01-28T16:54:32-05:00January 28th, 2009|

This column originally appeared in the Washington Times on January 28, 2009.

Sen. Norm Coleman’s campaign is charging that cheating has occurred in Minnesota, where Al Franken has mysteriously pulled ahead in a recount of the U.S. Senate race.

The Coleman campaign’s lawsuit, filed on January 6, uses strikingly similar arguments to those successfully raised by the Bush campaign against Al Gore in November 2000.

The suit says that “irregularities, mistakes, and violations of law” by the state canvassing board resulted in Franken being certified erroneously as the election winner. Vote counting irregularity was a key issue in the landmark Bush v. […]

Peter Ferrara: The Constitutional Right to Listen

By |2020-04-23T21:50:28-04:00January 28th, 2009|

We usually think of freedom of speech as involving the right of speakers to speak, whether through public addresses, in writing, or over radio and television airwaves. But the courts have recognized an additional dimension to First Amendment free speech rights: the right to listen and watch. This right takes center stage in a current challenge to the McCain-Feingold campaign-finance law and could play a role in the debate about the Fairness Doctrine.

Peter Ferrara On the Air in Worcester, MA

By |2009-01-26T09:58:45-05:00January 26th, 2009|

On Thursday, January 29, 2009 at 2:10pm ET, Peter Ferrara will be on “Engaging Your World” on 760 WVNE AM out of Worcester, MA. He will be discussing the freedom to listen. Tune in if you are in Worcester or you can listen live online,

Peter Ferrara on The Jon Justice Show

By |2009-01-25T22:33:21-05:00January 25th, 2009|

On Monday, January 26, 2009 at 8:00am ET, Peter Ferrara will be on the “The Jon Justice Show” on 104.1 KQTH FM out of Tuscon, AZ. He will be talking about the freedom to listen. Tune in if you live in the Tuscon area or you can listen live online.

Hans Zeiger: So Help Me God

By |2009-01-21T10:26:10-05:00January 21st, 2009|

Michael Newdow, the professional atheist who tried to have "one nation under God" stricken from the Pledge of Allegiance, has lost his crusade to prevent the mention of God at the inauguration. Though it's not written into the Constitution, presidents usually close their oath with the words "So help me God." Newdow wanted a court to tell President-elect Obama that he cannot say those words, and he also wanted to ban the tradition of inaugural prayers. On Thursday, U.S. District Judge Reggie Walton threw out Mr. Newdow's attempt to establish his religion -- the religion of atheism.

Citizens United v. Federal Elections Commission

By |2009-01-16T00:07:27-05:00January 16th, 2009|

On January 14, 2009, the American Civil Rights Union filed an amicus curiae brief with the United States Supreme Court in favor of Citizens United v. Federal Elections Commission, arguing that prohibiting broadcast of the movie “Hillary: The Movie” violated the fundamental right of freedom of speech, not only for Citizens United and the individuals who contributed to produce the movie to advance their ideological viewpoint, but also for the viewers who would choose to watch the movie. The ACRU brief argues that these viewers “hold their own constitutionally protected, freedom of speech rights to watch and to listen to the movie and its speech.”

Go to Top