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.

A "Sanctuary City" Has Second Thoughts

By |2023-05-20T09:39:20-04:00May 2nd, 2007|

The Virginian-Pilot reports today that Virginia Beach, which had instructed its police that, except in limited circumstances, they were not to inquire into the immigration status of persons they arrested, has now changed course. The Pilot article begins as follows:

VIRGINIA BEACH – “City police will begin asking all people from another country about their immigration status if they are arrested, even on misdemeanor charges, and taken before a magistrate.

“The change, announced at a news conference Tuesday by Chief of Police Jake Jacocks Jr., represents an about-face for Beach police and comes after public outrage over a car crash March 30 that killed […]

Constitutionality Is Just For Those Law School Eggheads

By |2023-05-20T09:39:20-04:00May 2nd, 2007|

An AP story posted on MSNBC late this afternoon carries the following exchange — of sorts — between the Majority Leader of the Senate and the President concerning the Iraq war funding bill that the President vetoed yesterday:

“[Mr. Bush called] the original bill unconstitutional for directing war operations ‘in a way that infringes upon the powers vested in the presidency.’

“Outside the White House, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid bristled at that claim. ‘We are not going to be submitting our legislation to somebody at one of the law schools to look for its constitutionality. We have an obligation, under the terms of the […]

The Most Dangerous Branch (cont'd)

By |2023-05-20T09:39:21-04:00May 2nd, 2007|

The Supreme Court’s overturning of the death sentence in Smith v. Texas is an apt example of how activist judges subvert popular will (see my previous post on this subject). The point here is not that the majority opinion is incorrect on the merits, although it is for the reasons ably stated by the four dissenters. The point is to illustrate how, little by little, and under the pretense of restraint, major issues of public policy are being decided by the courts instead of by the elected branches.

No fair reading of the record in Smith v. Texas leaves any doubt that the defendant […]

We Missed "Law Day"!

By |2023-05-20T09:39:21-04:00May 2nd, 2007|

We admit it: The ACRU forgot that yesterday was “Law Day.”

And my bet is that you did, too. But special thanks and kudos go out to Rush Limbaugh, who just brought this oversight to our attention, as well as that of millions of his listeners.

In 1958, President Dwight D. Eisenhower proclaimed May 1 to be Law Day, in order to draw attention to both the principles and practice of law and justice in America. Here is the text of his Proclamation:

WHEREAS it is fitting that the people of this Nation should remember with pride and vigilantly guard the great […]

The Most Dangerous Branch

By |2023-05-20T09:39:21-04:00May 2nd, 2007|

John Armor performs a crucial service with his three recent blog entries about liberals’ use of the courts to counteract democratic self-rule (see John’s article today about the Supreme Court opinion in Smith v. Texas, and his two articles about the “ACLU Against Wisconsin”). Ostensibly, the articles have different subjects: The article about the Texas case discusses adjudicating capital punishment, and the articles about Wisconsin discuss efforts by allies of the losing candidate (and of the ACLU) effectively to reverse the outcome of a judicial election. In fact, the articles bring great insight to the same pernicious development, i.e., the role of liberals in […]

Vicious Murderer to Have Another Hearing

By |2023-05-20T09:39:22-04:00May 2nd, 2007|

Smith v. Texas, No. 05-11304, was decided by the US Supreme Court on 25 April, in a sharply divided 5-4 decision. The convicted murderer was arguing against his death penalty sentence in accord with the theories of the ACLU’s Death Penalty Project.

As usually happens in such cases, the Justices supporting the ACLU position fail to describe the facts of the crime. The facts appeared only in the Dissent by Justice Alito, joined by the Chief Justice and Justices Scalia and Thomas:

Mr. Smith was a former employee of a fast-food restaurant. He took “some friends” to the restaurant. As the staff was […]

Be Compassionate: Let the ACLU Win One

By |2023-05-20T09:39:22-04:00May 1st, 2007|

My colleague John Armor notes below (“ACLU Gets It Dead Wrong in Indiana”) that our friends at the American Civil Liberties Union have sued Indiana, alleging that the state’s failure to charge a fee for a license plate bearing the national motto, “In God We Trust” constitutes discrimination, since the state does charge a fee for other “specialty plates.”

John points out that the “In God We Trust” plate is not really a specialty plate, but is one of two standard plates the state issues without a special charge. This would seem to be enough to dispose of the ACLU’s complaint. Still, there is […]

ACLU Gets It Dead Wrong in Indiana

By |2023-05-20T09:39:22-04:00May 1st, 2007|

The ACLU in Indiana has just filed suit against the state’s Bureau of Motor Vehicles on behalf of a tree-hugger who doesn’t like religion. Does that sound unfair? Here are the facts, from an article in the Journal Times in Fort Wayne, Indiana. (There is some irony in the fact that the article came to the Indiana newspaper from the Los Angeles Times, and has a distinct liberal bias as a result.)

Mark Studler is the ACLU’s chosen plaintiff. He normally gets, for a special fee of $40, a pro-environment specialty plate. But when he found out that there was another plate “that he felt also […]

ACLU Against Wisconsin, Round II

By |2023-05-20T09:39:22-04:00May 1st, 2007|

A common tactic of the ACLU when it loses a point in the political process is to use the judicial process to trump democracy, when the people fail to see the wisdom of the ACLU position. The same tactic has reared its ugly head in Wisconsin, where allies of the ACLU have mounted a legal challenge to prevent Judge Annette Ziegler from taking her seat on the Wisconsin Supreme Court for the ten-year term she has just won in last fall’s election.

The Wisconsin Democracy Project (WDP), which is a left-leaning ally of the ACLU, as one might gather from its name, has filed a complaint […]

ACLU Against Wisconsin, Round I

By |2023-05-20T09:39:23-04:00May 1st, 2007|

The facts for this piece come from an article, but not the legal conclusions, in The Wall Street Journal on 21 April. It noted that $40 million was spent on all races for the state Supreme Courts across the country, but of that, $6 million was spent on a single race for an open seat in Wisconsin.

The two candidates for this position were, in alphabetical order, Linda Clifford and Annette Ziegler. Clifford was a proponent of the concept of “a living constitution,” meaning the same thing in Wisconsin that that concept means on the US Supreme Court, namely that the judges could read new meanings […]

Go to Top