Thread: ACLU Concerned Over Who Is Enforcing Immigration Law

http://www.ktsm.com/story_news.sstg?c=2234

ACLU Concerned Over Who Is Enforcing Immigration Law
More concern over the role of the El Paso County Sheriff's Office in enforcing immigration policy.


Tuesday, June 20, 2006 — The El Paso County Sheriff's Office is once again under fire. This time, the American Civil Liberties Union, or the A.C.L.U., says the Sheriff's Office took federal law into their own hands after getting a tip about a group of undocumented immigrants.

"Sheriff's went to the house and went into the house to get undocumented immigrants out. They went into a hotel, and got undocumented people out. That is a very, very serious violation of what they're been claiming not to do, which is enforce immigration law," says Ray Ybarra, ACLU of Texas.

That was the topic of an email dating back to April of 2006, obtained by the ACLU through an open record request. The email walks through the bust, that took Sheriff's Deputies to several locations looking for the immigrants. It says that one Border Patrol agent was "disturbed" over deputies being at the location with the immigrants. It goes on to say that Sheriff's Deputies were told to "call Border Patrol who would in turn call ICE if they deemed it necessary." Finally, the email stated that the Border Patrol agent seemed visibly upset over the Sheriff's Office involvement in the case, by following up on information without first contacting federal law enforcement.

"This Sheriff is engaging in immigration enforcement, and then as an after thought calling in the INS," says Will Harrell, Executive Director, ACLU of Texas.

The ACLU says this type of incident has a long lasting effect on the community.

"People are afraid to walk their kids...because they think the sheriff's deputies will be out asking for documents...and if people are afraid to leave their houses then that's a huge human rights issue," says Ybarra.

The spokesperson for the Sheriff's Office was not available for comment.

"People are afraid to walk their kids...because they think the sheriff's deputies will be out asking for documents...and if people are afraid to leave their houses then that's a huge human rights issue," says Ybarra.

They wouldn't be afraid if they were LEGAL. They have human rights.....go home and go for a walk. With RIGHTS comes RESPONSIBILITY and one of those is obey the law.

Being afraid, because you are a law-breaker is a HUMAN RIGHTS issue??!! Just how much more insane can this get???? They should be afraid, very afraid. It is not undue fear.

The mission of the ACLU is to usurp the constitution and undermine public law. They have defended illegal aliens accused of child molestation saying their rights were violated. They defend illegal aliens that continuously break laws who engage in welfare fraud and id theft. The ACLU supports militant groups whose political agenda is the overthrow of the U.S. government and creation of Aztlan. I am surprised they aren't defending that sick POS that had sex with a dog saying his rights were violated as he is a Latino.

If they were worth anything to this country they'd be concerned about WHO ISN'T ENFORCING IMMIGRATION LAWS !!

Can someone get us some information on who funds the ACLU. I'd really like them to stop. How are these traitors getting the money for these efforts?

W

This ticks me off, because law enforcement officers take an oath to uphold all laws, Federal, State and local and shouldn't pick an choose.

Interesting discussion:

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1548713/posts

ACLU Funding from Wikpedia

Funding
The ACLU receives funding from a large number of sources; the distribution and amount of funding for each chapter varies from state to state. To take one particular example, the ACLU of New Jersey reported $1.2 million in income to both the ACLU-NJ and its affiliated tax-exempt foundation in the 2005 fiscal year. Of that income, 46% came from contributions, 19% came from membership dues, 18% came from court awarded attorney fees, 12% came from grants, 4% came from investment income and the remainder from other sources. Its expenses in the same period were $800,000, of which 12% went to administration and management. Smaller chapters with fewer resources, such as that in Nebraska, receive subsidies from the national ACLU [18].

The ACLU and its affiliated tax-exempt foundation receive annual support from the Ford, Rockefeller, Carnegie, Field, Tides, Gill, Arcus, Horizons, and other foundations. However, recently the ACLU rejected $1.5 million from both the Ford and Rockefeller Foundations because it viewed a clause in the donation agreement stipulating that "none of the money would go to underwriting terrorism or other unacceptable activities" as a threat to civil liberties. The ACLU also withdrew from a federal charity drive, losing an estimated $500,000, taking a stand against the attached condition that it would "not knowingly hire anyone on terrorism watch lists." Other key donors include Peter B. Lewis (an insurance magnate) [19].

It is sometimes asserted that the ACLU collects legal fees in the event that they are involved on the winning side of a legal judgment [20]. As described in greater detail below, while there are restrictions on how fees may be collected, the ACLU has in a number of cases indeed received substantial monetary awards.

The awarding of legal fees to groups like the ACLU in civil rights cases remains highly controversial for some. The Public Expression of Religion Act of 2005, for example, introduced by Representative John N. Hostettler, seeks to alter prior civil rights legislation to prevent monetary judgements in the particular case of violations of church-state separation [21], and groups such as the American Legion have taken stances opposing the ACLU's right to collect fees under such legislation [22]. On the other hand, the recovery of legal fees by non-profit legal advocacy organizations is common practice across the political spectrum; the pro-life Thomas More Law Center, for example, generally seeks, and is successful in, recovery of legal fees in the same manner as the ACLU [23], [24].

In many cases however, due to the nature of its legal work, the ACLU is involved in litigation against governmental bodies, which are generally protected from adverse monetary judgements: i.e., a town, state or Federal agency may be required to change its laws or behave differently, but not to pay monetary damages except by an explicit statutory waiver [25]; [26].

In some cases, the law does permit plantiffs who successfully sue government agencies to collect damages. In particular, a 1976 Federal law, the Civil Rights Attorney's Fees Awards Act, among other similar laws, does leave the government liable in some civil rights cases. In many cases where the ACLU represents plantiffs, the case is handled not by ACLU attorneys, but by sympathetic law firms who provide their services pro bono. In these cases, the law firm may sue for legal fees; in such circumstances the money would be awarded to the firm, and not the ACLU. [27]

These caveats aside, the ACLU and its state chapters do, in cases where they provide legal services and laws permit government liability, share in monetary judgements against government agencies. It shared, for example, with other plantiffs in a $156,960 judgement against the State of Nebraska in a gay marriage case now on appeal [28].

A separate example involves a string of church-state cases. The Georgia chapter was awarded $150,000 in fees after suing a county courthouse for the removal of a Ten Commandments display [29]; a second Ten Commandments case in the State, in a different county, led to a $74,462 judgment [30]. Meanwhile, the State of Tennessee was required to pay $50,000, the State of Alabama $175,000, and the State of Kentucky $121,500, in similar Ten Commandments cases [31], [32].

The State of Kentucky was in fact required by courts to pay the ACLU nearly $700,000 in legal fees in the years 1994-2003, mainly for passing abortion and state religion-related laws later struck down by courts [33]. Ref. [34] is a partial list of various judgments awarded to the ACLU and its state chapters over the years, which cover a wide variety of cases including judgments involving creationism, internet pornography, church-state and free speech cases, and total approximately $2.9 million. Usually, judgements are made against states, although Operation Rescue was required to pay the Union $111,000 in fees in a San Diego case.

When taking on highly contentious cases the ACLU leaves itself liable to potentially damaging judgements against it if it were found to be filing a "frivolous" suit, regardless of whether the government may be liable. [35]

http://charityreports.give.org/Public/R ... rityID=227

Return to List of Charity Reports

American Civil Liberties Union Foundation, Inc.


American Civil Liberties Union Foundation, Inc. February 2006
also known as: ACLUF
also known as: ACLU Foundation
formerly known as: The Roger Baldwin Foundation of ACLU, Inc.


125 Broad Street, 18th Floor
New York, NY 10004

212-549-2500

www.aclu.org Expiration Date: February 2008


Year, State Incorporated: 1966, New York

Affiliates: 915 15th Street LLC (915); American Civil Liberties Union; affiliates and chapters in all fifty states, the District of Columbia, and Puerto Rico


Stated Purpose: "to preserve and promote individual civil rights and liberties as guaranteed by the Constitution of the United States."




--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Evaluation Conclusions

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

The American Civil Liberties Union Foundation (the ACLU Foundation) does not meet the following 3 Standards for Charity Accountability:

Standard 6 : Board Policy on Effectiveness - Have a board policy of assessing, no less than every two years, the organization's performance and effectiveness and of determining future actions required to achieve its mission.


The ACLU Foundation does not meet this Standard because its board of directors does not have a written policy stating that, at least every two years, an appraisal be done assessing the organization’s performance and effectiveness and determining future actions required to achieve its mission.


Standard 16 : Annual Report - Have an annual report available to all, on request, that includes: (a) the organization's mission statement, (b) a summary of the past year's program service accomplishments, (c) a roster of the officers and members of the board of directors, (d) financial information that includes (i) total income in the past fiscal year, (ii) expenses in the same program, fund raising and administrative categories as in the financial statements, and (iii) ending net assets.

The ACLU Foundation does not meet provision (d)(iii) of this Standard because its annual report does not include financial information concerning its total end of year net assets.


Standard 17 : Web Site Disclosures - Include on any charity websites that solicit contributions, the same information that is recommended for annual reports, as well as the mailing address of the charity and electronic access to its most recent IRS Form 990.

The ACLU Foundation does not meet this Standard because its website, www.aclu.org, does not include all of the recommended information for those charity websites that solicit for donations. Specifically, it does not include a board roster or financial information on the organization's total end of year net assets. The website also does not provide electronic access to the ACLU Foundation’s most recent IRS Form 990.



Charity Response:

In response to the Alliance's evaluation conclusions, the ACLU Foundation responded in part, that

"Standard 6: The ACLU Foundation's Board of Directors reviews the programmatic achievements of the prior year and establishes the organization's programmatic goals for the coming year, as part of its annual budget process. Furthermore, the Board of Directors continues to monitor the organization's effectiveness in meeting its programmatic goals throughout the year at each of its eight board meetings.

Standard 16: The ACLU Foundation has...decided to include this information in future annual reports. Additionally, [both] the ACLU Foundation's IRS Form 990...[and] audited financial statement, which includes its end of the year net assets, [are] available on request.

Standard 17: The ACLU Foundation uses its website primarily to educate the public about civil liberties issues, the ACLU Foundation's involvement in specific civil liberties cases, and the organization's programmatic goals."

The American Civil Liberties Union Foundation meets the remaining 16 Standards for Charity Accountability. Please note that as of the date of this report, 1 of the 20 Standards for Charity Accountability is not currently effective. As a result, this standard has not been applied to this evaluation.



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Programs

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

The ACLU Foundation publishes reports, treatises, essays, addresses, and other research and literary works in the field of civil liberties and individual rights. The ACLU Foundation also conducts litigation on behalf of and supplies legal counsel to persons involved in activities where their civil rights and liberties are infringed upon or threatened. In addition to free speech and separation of church and state, other basic issues that the ACLU Foundation promotes includes responding to education inadequacies in public schools, protection of affirmative action programs, and challenging overburdened public defender systems. The ACLU Foundation also gives grants to support program activities by its network of affiliates and chapters in dealing with issues ranging from due process, capital punishment, and drug policy reform to voting, women's, immigrants', prisoners' and lesbian and gay rights.

For the fiscal year ended March 31, 2005, the ACLU Foundation's program expenses were:


Education 15,828,477
Legal 14,178,624
Affiliate support 4,128,040

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total Program Expenses:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
$34,135,141




--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Governance

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Chief Executive Officer: Anthony Romero, Executive Director
Compensation*: $304,329

Chair of the Board: Nadine Strossen

Chair's Profession / Business Affiliation: Professor of Law, New York Law School

Board Size: 12

Paid Staff Size: 169




*April 1, 2004 - March 31, 2005; compensation includes annual salary and, if applicable, benefit plans, expense accounts, and other allowances. Compensation is paid by the ACLU Foundation's affiliate, American Civil Liberties Union.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Fund Raising

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Method(s) Used:

Direct mail, grant proposals, planned giving, and Internet appeals.

Fund raising costs were 8% of related contributions. (Related contributions, which totaled $48,095,704, are donations received as a result of fund raising activities.)



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Tax Status

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

The American Civil Liberties Foundation is tax-exempt under section 501(c)(3) of the Internal Revenue Code. It is eligible to receive contributions deductible as charitable donations for federal income tax purposes.

The ACLU Foundation's subsidiary 915th 15th Street LLC is a real estate company established to hold title to and manage a property purchased in Washington, DC.

The American Civil Liberties Union is tax-exempt under section 501(c)(4) of the Internal Revenue Code. Contributions and membership dues are not dedcutible as charityable donations for federal income tax purposes.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Financial

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

The following information is based on the ACLU Foundation's audited consolidated (with real estate subsidiary) financial statements for the fiscal year ended March 31, 2005:

Source of Funds
Grants and contributions 40,604,700
Investment income 13,826,113
Bequests 7,491,004
Legal expenses awarded 1,601,613
Other income 63,906
Adjustment to pension liability -447,881


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total Income
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
$63,139,455







Uses of Funds as a % of Total Expenses

Use your mouse to place the cursor over the the Pie Chart to see each value
Programs: 82% Fund Raising: 9% Administrative: 9%


Total income $63,139,455
Program expenses $34,135,141
Fund raising expenses 3,974,478
Administrative expenses 3,747,443


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Total expenses $41,857,062

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Income in Excess of Expenses 21,282,393
Beginning net assets 175,909,869
Changes in Net Assets (1,115,015)

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Ending net assets 196,077,247
Total liabilities 59,698,063

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Total assets $255,775,310

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------



Note 1: In the above financial summary, the line "changes in net assets" stems from change in value of spilt interest agreements.

Note 2: The ACLU Foundation's ending net assets of $196,077,247 include unrestricted net assets of $109,808,749. As a result, the ACLU Foundation meets the BBB Standard calling for unrestricted net assets available for use not to be more than three times the size of the past year's expenses or three times the size of the current year's budget, whichever is higher.



An organization may change its practices at any time without notice. A copy of this report has been shared with the organization prior to publication. It is not intended to recommend or deprecate, and is furnished solely to assist you in exercising your own judgment. The name Better Business Bureau is a registered service mark of the Council of Better Business Bureaus, Inc.

This report reflects the results of an evaluation of informational materials provided voluntarily by the organization. A copy of this report has been shared with the organization prior to publication. It is not intended to recommend or deprecate, and is furnished solely to assist you in exercising your own judgement. The name Better Business Bureau is a registered service mark of the Council of Better Business Bureaus, Inc.

This report is not to be used for fund raising or promotional purposes.