A Majority for Tax Evasion

July 8, 2004

With country club indifference, the Supreme Court has protected the “rights” of terrorists...and left you, the taxpayer, holding the bill. To be fair, Justices Scalia, Rehnquist and Thomas can still be counted as real Americans.

From the Rasul vs. Bush decision of June 28^th, six of the court's benchwarmers evaded the issue of barbarians murdering Americans and decided, “The question now before us is whether the habeas statute confers a right to judicial review of the legality of Executive detention of aliens in a territory over which the United States exercises plenary and exclusive jurisdiction, but not ‘ultimate sovereignty’."

That’s funny...I thought the question was an issue of detaining radical Islamites wilding through the dung heaps of Afghanistan and tying to kill Americans by any available means.

But, then again, I’m not a revered justice...I’m just a confused American footing the bill for these al Qaeda crazies to be tortured by: “warm showers; toiletries; water; clean clothes; blankets; regular, culturally appropriate meals; prayer mats and the right to practice their religion; modern medical attention ...; exercise; quarters ... eight-by-eight and seven-and-a-half feet high; writing materials; and visits by the International Committee of the Red Cross”. Hey...nothing to lose my head over.

Fearing that the President might seek “indefinite detention of individuals (spelled al Qaeda murderers) who claim to be wholly innocent of wrongdoing”, six judicial cowards decided to “reverse the judgment of the Court of Appeals and remand for the District Court to consider in the first instance the merits of petitioners' claims.” That means that U.S. taxpayers now have the privilege of footing the court expenses for these “individuals”...which, no doubt, includes paying for their ambulance chasing “attorneys”.

Oh...if you think that calling six justices (Stevens, O'Connor, Souter, Ginsburg, Breyer and Kennedy) cowards is a bit harsh, try this out. Sanctimoniously, they dump these al Qaeda “victims” into the U.S. judicial system, but then the “majority” goes to afternoon tea...” Whether and what further proceedings may become necessary after respondents make their response to the merits of petitioners' claims are matters that we need not address now.” The court actually said to do “it” but they never said how to do “it”! What a field day for the attorneys that will be fleecing the taxpayer.

And speaking of fleecing...who are these “attorneys”?

The driving force behind the lawsuits for the Guantánamo Bay detainees is, according to the New York Times, “The Center for Constitutional Rights, the scrappy left-leaning public-interest group....” “The Center for Constitutional Rights” (CCR) sounds like such a wholesome name...until you peel the banana.

From CCR’s website we learn that, “The Center for Constitutional Rights (CCR) is a non-profit legal and educational organization dedicated to protecting and advancing the rights guaranteed by the U.S. Constitution and the Universal Declaration of Human Rights.” Of course the U.S. Constitution and the Universal Declaration of Human Rights are, in many ways, mutually exclusive...but that’s for another day.

Just understand two things about CCR: (1) It is a non-profit corporation organized under the IRS section 501(c)(03) public charity code and (2) CCR has nothing to do with “normal” America. The Council on Economic Priorities describes CCR as “a Tax-Exempt litigation group...representing...Castroite parties and support groups for foreign terrorist movements.” As a 501(c)(03), they are subsidized by the U.S. taxpayer.

Section 1.501(c)(3)-1(c)(3)(iv) of the IRS code disallows a 501(c)(03) tax exemption if the organization, “has the following two characteristics: (a) Its main or primary objective or objectives (as distinguished from its incidental or secondary objectives) may be attained only by legislation or a defeat of proposed legislation; and (b) it advocates, or campaigns for, the attainment of such main or primary objective or objectives as distinguished from engaging in nonpartisan analysis, study, or research and making the results thereof available to the public."

Here is a sampling of some CCR action alerts: (1) “The Center for Constitutional Rights urges all groups and individuals ...to vigorously oppose the nomination of Judge Clarence Thomas to the Supreme Court”; (2) “We...write to urge you to oppose the Domestic Security Enhancement Act (DSEA), legislation”; and (3) “Center for Constitutional Rights...launched the People vs. Ashcroft Campaign -- a web based initiative calculated to spark a massive grassroots movement to demand the resignation/removal of Attorney General John Ashcroft from office as a danger to democracy.” So much for a public charity...at least in “normal” America.

On June 21^st, the Washington Post reported that “In the wake...of scandals and controversies involving charities and nonprofits, Congress's tax-writing committees are launching an effort this week to crack down on fraudulent activities and tighten laws governing tax exemptions for those groups.” Senate Finance Committee Chairman Charles E. Grassley (R-Iowa) believes that, “It's obvious from the abuses we see that there's been no check on charities. Big money, tax free, and no oversight have created a cesspool in too many cases”. CCR smells like just such a case.

Instead of supporting al Qaeda terrorists and the attorneys licking their chops for more of your tax dollars, the Supreme Court should have asked CCR what they are doing with a 501(c)(03) tax exemption while they are acting like an "action" organization (which cannot qualify for exemption as a 501(c)3 organization). But these justices don’t really care. They live in that rarified world where airheads discuss the quality of a truffle in the midst of a famine.

Sure enough, the LA Times reports that “Sen. John F. Kerry of Massachusetts...applauded Monday's rulings...He also faulted the administration for not giving accused terrorists a lawyer and a hearing.” Just what we need...a presidential candidate who supports cowardly jurists, more lawyers, tax evaders and terrorists. Oh...and he also wants to raise your taxes.

return to column archives