 |
Posted on 10/01/2006 5:14:44 PM PDT by Checkers
Special to washingtonpost.com
With little public attention or even notice, the House of Representatives has passed a bill that undermines enforcement of the First Amendment's separation of church and state. The Public Expression of Religion Act - H.R. 2679 - provides that attorneys who successfully challenge government actions as violating the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment shall not be entitled to recover attorneys fees. The bill has only one purpose: to prevent suits challenging unconstitutional government actions advancing religion.
A federal statute, 42 United States Code section 1988, provides that attorneys are entitled to recover compensation for their fees if they successfully represent a plaintiff asserting a violation of his or her constitutional or civil rights. For example, a lawyer who successfully sues on behalf of a victim of racial discrimination or police abuse is entitled to recover attorney's fees from the defendant who acted wrongfully. Any plaintiff who successfully sues to remedy a violation of the Constitution or a federal civil rights statute is entitled to have his or her attorney's fees paid.
Congress adopted this statute for a simple reason: to encourage attorneys to bring cases on behalf of those whose rights have been violated. Congress was concerned that such individuals often cannot afford an attorney and vindicating constitutional rights rarely generates enough in damages to pay a lawyer on a contingency fee basis.
Without this statute, there is no way to compensate attorneys who successfully sue for injunctions to stop unconstitutional government behavior. Congress rightly recognized that attorneys who bring such actions are serving society's interests by stopping the government from violating the Constitution. Indeed, the potential for such suits deters government wrong-doing and increases the likelihood that the Constitution will be followed.
(Excerpt) Read more at washingtonpost.com ...
Now we can tell Kerry to go take a flying leap!!
|
....what I do know....is that Erwin is definitely not a male model.
That one is a delemma, want him to hop on one foot across the page, lol, tumble like Murtha? Do a split with pom poms in his hands??
I've read many of his opinions since 1995. I don't think he's very bright. But what he knows how to do is focus upon a particular set of wordings and base an entire platform upon his interpretation of a wee point. And write VOLUMES about his interpretation. This then, markets him up into the prime-time media venues, and permits his allied coalition socialist groups something to "hang on to" and bang their pots about". He's usually wrong. And despite the fact that his opinions and intepretations turn out wrong, doesn't seem to matter to those who vaunt Erwin Chemerinsky.
Probably from too many years trying to keep one eye on signals from the ACLU and the other eye on signals from the DNC while standing in the spotlight. It happens, I hear...
I think he was one of the lawyers involved in the Wilson/Plame civil suit against Rove, Cheney and Libby.
He prefers male models. I wonder if he's done any instant messaging recently.
There is NO way Kerry could be any gayer.
Forcing anyone to take part in activity that violates their code of ethics is a religion in and of itself. More accurately a bullying cult.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.