ACLU no longer for equal right?

Editor’s note: This article was first published in The Hill.

The Director of the American Civil Liberties Union has now acknowledged what should have been obvious to everybody over the past several years: that the ACLU. is no longer a neutral defender of everyone’s civil liberties; it has morphed into a hyper-partisan, hard-left political advocacy group. The final nail in its coffin was the announcement that for the first time in its history the ACLU would become involved in partisan electoral politics, supporting candidates, referenda and other agenda-driven political goals.

The headline in the June 8 2018 edition of the New Yorker tells it all: “The ACLU is getting involved in elections – and reinventing itself for the Trump Era.” The article continues:

In this midterm year, however, as progressive groups have mushroomed and grown more active, and as liberal billionaires such as Howard Schultz and Tom Steyer have begun to imagine themselves as political heroes and eye Presidential runs, the ACLU, itself newly flush, has begun to move in step with the times. For the first time in its history, the ACLU is taking an active role in elections. The group has plans to spend more than twenty-five million dollars on races and ballot initiatives by Election Day, in November.

Since its establishment nearly 100 years ago, the ACLU has been, in the words of The New Yorker, “Fastidiously nonpartisan, so prudish about any alliance with any political power that its leadership, in the 1980’s and 90’s, declined even to give awards to likeminded legislators for fear that it might give the wrong impression.” I know, because I served on its National Board in the early days of my own career. In those days, the Board consisted of individuals who were deeply committed to core civil liberties, especially freedom of speech, opposition to prosecutorial overreach and political equality.  Its Board members included Republicans and Democrats, conservatives and liberals, right wingers and left wingers – all of whom supported neutral civil liberties. The key test in those days was what I have come to call “The shoe on the other foot test”:  would you vote the same way if the shoe were on the other foot, that is if the party labels were switched?

Read the rest at ACLU

Previous articleThey hated him so much they were willing to act like KGB!
Next articleDid the IG soft-shoe the report?
The Real Side
Posts categorized under "The Real Side" are posted by the Editor because they are deemed worthy of further discussion and consideration, but are not, by default, an implied or explicit endorsement or agreement. The views of guest contributors do not necessarily reflect the viewpoints of The Real Side Radio Show or Joe Messina. By publishing them we hope to further an honest and civilized discussion about the content. The original author and source (if applicable) is attributed in the body of the text. Since variety is the spice of life, we hope by publishing a variety of viewpoints we can add a little spice to your life. Enjoy!

 

Join the conversation!

We have no tolerance for comments containing violence, racism, vulgarity, profanity, all caps, or discourteous behavior. Thank you for partnering with us to maintain a courteous and useful public environment where we can engage in reasonable discourse.