|
Edited on Tue Mar-08-11 08:09 PM by speltwon
Recently, the ACLU has been involved in a couple of cases that have caused a lot of controversy here and elsewhere, especially amongst progressives and the left in general. There was the Citizens United Case and a recent case wherein the ACLU advocated against a teacher's union's stance in regards to their first-in/first-out hire/fire policy with the school district.
After the Citizens United decision many people said they had given up on the ACLU or how could the ACLU support these corporatist interests? Similarly, there is similar dismay in the recent case and teacher's union.
I am a proud union member. I recognize that my union is first, foremost, and nearly exclusively an advocate for my fellow employees and I. They are just as clearly a "special interest" as any corporation or any other group that has a fealty and duty to one cause or person or groups of persons over the common good. The ACLU should have no loyalty to any group, whether that be labor, any specific union, any gender, race, income strata, etc. Their adherence should be to principles - applicable to all- enshrined in our constitution, specifically our Bill of Rights.
The ACLU has a great record in supporting civil rights. I do not always agree with their position, just as I don't always agree with my union's position or actions. The ACLU's position always must come from their analysis of what the rule of law and what the bill of rights demands, not who will benefit. However, the ACLU has been pretty consistent in supporting principles over groups. The left will reflexively support a union over a(nother) corporation, just as the right will do the opposite, usually. I expect the ACLU to do neither. I expect them to look at constitutional principles and advocate for what the law demands EVEN IF the result may be detrimental to people or causes I generally support.
Just as the arc of history curves towards justice, I believe that their adherence to these principles does the same, even though on an individual case, it may seem otherwise.
I am confident that the ACLU does that and in good faith. And I see Citizens United and the recent teacher's union case as two good examples of this. What I always try to do is look at a case that the ACLU supports from a legal basis and process analysis instead of from a results based or associative (whose "side" are the ACLU on in this case?) analysis. When I do so, I can usually at least understand their position, even if I don't agree to it.
I liken them to defense attorneys, who sometimes have to defend odious people in order to support noble principles and who sometimes bring about a very unjust result, at least from a results (not process) analysis.
I see no reason to believe that the ACLU has abandoned their mission, and I will continue to support them.
|
Printer-friendly format
Email this thread to a friend
Bookmark this thread
(699 posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
