Cease Public Funding of the ACLU

We the supporters and friends of the Stop the ACLU Coalition urge Congress to promptly act and pass legislation clarifying issues of standing as to who may bring suits under claims to the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment.

The Coalition strongly supports HR 2679 by Congressman John Hostettler of Indiana. This bill would prohibit groups like the ACLU and Americans United from receiving taxpayer funds in the event of adverse court rulings regarding the 10 Commandments and religious symbols in the public square. It addresses the reform of U.S. Section Code 1988 which, when enacted in 1976, was not intended for the use it currently is used for today.

The Coalition also strongly backs the petition of Court Zero which can be found at www.ipetitions.com/campaigns/ACLU and urges signers of our petition to sign Court Zero's as well.

However, the one area Congressman Hostettler's bill fails to address is the penalty phase of any such adverse rulings. While groups like the ACLU would not be able to collect under his bill, a court order to remove the 10 Commandments or crosses would still be in effect. As such, America's religious liberty would still be under assault.

Since "being offended" by viewing a posting of the 10 Commandments or a cross is the crux of such lawsuits, since "being offended" is not permitted in any other area of law and since tangible harm cannot be demonstrated by the existence of such displays, the issue here is who has the authority to bring such suits, according to Mat Staver, head of Liberty Counsel of Florida.

Precedent to pass such legislation currently exists under our laws. In 2004, Michael Newdow's lawsuit to thwart the recital of the Pledge of Allegiance in public schools because he was "offended" was dismissed due to lack of standing. Similar suits by the ACLU in our courts should likewise be dismissed. Better yet, such suits should be blocked from being presented.

The Coalition calls upon Rep. Hostettler and Congress to either amend the current bill to include issues of standing or to reintroduce legislation to address it. While we are fairly content with the current bill, we firmly believe a modification of it to include matters of standing will close a loophole that otherwise exists in the current piece of legislation and thus would make it an even stronger law.

We urge Congressional action on this matter pronto.