The problem with the ACLU is not with their stated mission, but with their application of it. Overwhelmingly, they favor liberal civil liberty issues over conservative ones. If they were more non partisan in their application, I would have no problem with them.
2007-08-25 09:04:51
·
answer #1
·
answered by Trav 4
·
0⤊
1⤋
1
2016-06-10 21:21:59
·
answer #2
·
answered by ? 3
·
0⤊
0⤋
You're wrong. The ACLU does not handle cases like that. They will only take a criminal case if it is a civil liberties question or perhaps a discrimination question(or something similar).
The American Civil Liberties Union of Ohio, ACLU National, The Children’s Law Center and the Ohio Public Defender’s Office filed a petition with the Ohio Supreme Court on March 9 calling for the court to protect children’s right to counsel when they are accused of a crime. The U.S. Supreme Court ruled that the Michigan law denying legal representation to poor people in a criminal appeal is unconstitutional. The ACLU of Michigan filed the one of a kind case after the law was passed in 1999. Under the law, an indigent criminal defendant who wished to challenge his sentence after pleading guilty was generally not entitled to appointed counsel, even for a first appeal. Michigan was the only state in the country that denied appointed counsel under these circumstances.
Those are the type of criminal cases the ACLU takes. Please cite a case in which the ACLU has helped a "heartless murder" go free?
.
2007-08-25 09:08:40
·
answer #3
·
answered by Run Lola Run 4
·
3⤊
1⤋
The ACLU defends against virtually any kind of injustice. That might - at times - allow a guilty person to go free, or a 'retarded' person to 'get off the hook' in YOUR eyes, but there usually are extenuating circumstances that you might not understand.
Even if YOU believe a person to be a "criminal", there might be special circumstances that caused his conviction to be executed illegally. We are, after all, a nation of law and order. Without the assumption of guilt being proved beyond a reasonable and cautious doubt, we become a society no better than that of Stalin's communism or Hitler's nazism, where innocence was not the standard. We become a totalitarian society where the citizen is presumed guilty until proven innocent.
Hope and pray that YOU are never convicted of a crime you didn't commit, because some people might then consider YOU a "criminal" and YOU might come to rely on the ACLU to prove your innocence, or demonstrate how you were wrongly convicted.
Our justice system is not perfect. Innocent people go to jail everyday because of lawyer's incompetence, judicial prejudice, or legal loopholes. We all should be thankful that there is a legal organization such as the ACLU that provides unbiased protection for people unjustly accused.
I would urge you not to be so judgmental of the ACLU; while you might not 'approve' of some of its victories, you should feel secure in the knowledge that you live in a country that allows such judicial prudence. It's better that hundreds of criminals go free than that we allow one innocent citizen to rot in jail for a crime he didn't commit. If YOU were that one person, you would probably have a different opinion of the ACLU and its "defending nothing but criminals". -RKO- 08/25/07
2007-08-25 09:03:24
·
answer #4
·
answered by -RKO- 7
·
5⤊
1⤋
"The ACLU has stood foursquare against the recurring tides of hysteria that from time to time threaten freedoms everywhere."
Chief Justice Earl Warren
Do I agree with every client or cause they choose to defend? Of course not - sometimes their clients are outright sickening and their causes are revolting and seem counter productive - and other times they seem downright anti-American. But I think the opposite is true - I think they couldn't be more pro-American / pro-freedom.
Who is to choose what to censor or what civil rights are OK to violate just because someone finds someone elses actions disgusting or revolting? If the causes they champion seem ridiculous at times, perhaps the law(s) regarding the alleged violation(s) should be changed so that the government doesn't have to tramp on someones rights to try and get a conviction.
The government is a huge, complex entity and our best defense to assure we stay free is make damned sure that they first and foremost obey the law - especially laws concerning our civil rights.
2007-08-25 09:08:19
·
answer #5
·
answered by LeAnne 7
·
2⤊
2⤋
No, that distinction goes to the UN. The ACLU is merely the most anti-american organization.
2007-08-25 09:10:13
·
answer #6
·
answered by Anonymous
·
2⤊
2⤋
I help the 'rule of regulation' and any and all regulation enforcement companies that uphold the regulation to the proper possible of their skills. besides, I help ALIPAC and different communities that help the 'rule of regulation' and are bringing the unlawful immigrant subject to the vanguard the place it belongs. ATTRITION by way of ENFORCEMENT IS the proper coverage!
2016-11-13 09:42:22
·
answer #7
·
answered by blaylock 4
·
0⤊
0⤋
The ACLU (American Civil Liberties Union) defended even Rush Limbaugh. There is nobody left to protect your constitutional rights. I'm particularly surprised that conservatives are so willing to let the government take over their lives.
2007-08-25 08:48:26
·
answer #8
·
answered by Middleclassandnotquiet 6
·
7⤊
3⤋
Check!
Bravo! Job well done!
The ACLU are nothing but Criminal enablers.
2007-08-25 11:56:25
·
answer #9
·
answered by Jeremiah Johnson 7 7
·
0⤊
1⤋
A person answered that the ACLU is for everyone and that we need them. BULL! They have not been interested in constitutional law in quite some time. They occasionally take an honest case to appear to be fair, but they have become and are financed by far left interests. Read 'Brave New World'. That is what the ACLU has in mind for the USA.
2007-08-25 08:56:11
·
answer #10
·
answered by ? 6
·
5⤊
6⤋