Changes

The ACLU is the American Civil Liberties Union, which was run for its first 30 years by a American citizen named Roger Baldwin, who helped found it in 1920 in response to the [[Espionage Act]] and [[Sedition Act]].  Baldwin once declared being "for ''Socialism'', disarmament, and ultimately for abolishing the state itself... We seek the social ownership of property, the abolition of the propertied class, and the ''sole control'' of those who produce wealth. ''Communism'' is the goal." <ref>http://www.leaderu.com/real/ri9402/aclu.html</ref>

The ACLU is the American Civil Liberties Union, which was run for its first 30 years by a American citizen named Roger Baldwin, who helped found it in 1920 in response to the [[Espionage Act]] and [[Sedition Act]].  Baldwin once declared being "for ''Socialism'', disarmament, and ultimately for abolishing the state itself... We seek the social ownership of property, the abolition of the propertied class, and the ''sole control'' of those who produce wealth. ''Communism'' is the goal." <ref>http://www.leaderu.com/real/ri9402/aclu.html</ref>

==ACLU and the Establishment Clause==

==ACLU and the Establishment Clause==

A example of ACLU litigation regarding the Establishment Clause was ''Kitzmiller v. Dover Area School Dist.'', 400 F.Supp.2d 707 (M.D. Pa. 2005)<ref>http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/dover/kitzmiller_v_dover_decision.html</ref> , also known as the [[Intelligent design]] case. The ACLU prevailed in prohibiting teachers from even mentioning [[Intelligent Design]] to students.  At the end of this case the trial judge simply copied more than 90% of the ACLU's brief for his ruling.<ref>http://www.discovery.org/scripts/viewDB/index.php?command=view&id=3829&program=CSC%20-%20Views%20and%20News</ref> The judge then entered a judgment for $2,067,226.00 against the school board members for the legal fees and expenses of the ACLU's side. The judge's order also prevented any appeal of his opinion in the case.

A example of ACLU litigation regarding the Establishment Clause was ''Kitzmiller v. Dover Area School Dist.'', 400 F.Supp.2d 707 (M.D. Pa. 2005)<ref>http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/dover/kitzmiller_v_dover_decision.html</ref> , also known as the [[Intelligent design]] case. The ACLU prevailed in prohibiting teachers from teaching [[Intelligent Design]] to students, and forbade the school board from issuing a warning that evolution was "theory, not fact."<ref>''Kitzmiller v. Dover Area Sch. Dist.,'' 400 F.Supp.2d 707.</ref>

The judge relied heavily on the decision in ''Selman v. Cobb County Sch. Dist.'', 390 F. Supp. 2d 1286 (N.D. Ga. 2005). But that decision was later reversed on appeal in ''Selman v. Cobb County Sch. Dist.'', 2006 U.S. App. LEXIS 13005 (11th Cir. May 25, 2006).

In his opinion, Judge [[John E. Jones III]] heavily relied on ''Selman v. Cobb County Sch. Dist.'', which had previously invalidated "warning labels" placed on Cobb County textbooks, stating that evolution is "theory, not fact."  His Honor also relied on the [[Establishment test]], the [[Lemon test]], and the [[reasonable student standard]] that he applied in his analysis of the Dover case.<ref>''Kitzmiller,'' 400 F. Supp. 2d at 725 (coming to the conclusion reached in ''Selman'' by the Court's own reasoning), ''compare'' Selman v. Cobb County Sch. Dist, 2006 U.S. App. LEXIS 13005 (11th Cir. May 25, 2006) at *pincite needed*.</ref>  The Judge used this reasoning as one step towards his conclusion, and cites ''Selman'' and other Supreme Court cases as backing up his own affirmation of the ''Selman'' holding.<ref>''See Kitzmiller'', 400 F. Supp. 2d at 723-24.</ref>

 

[[Judge John E. Jones]] has been accused of copying 90% of his ruling from the ACLU's briefs by the [[Discovery Institute]], an institution that filed ''amicus curiae'' briefs in the case.<ref>http://www.discovery.org/scripts/viewDB/index.php?command=view&id=3829&program=CSC%20-%20Views%20and%20News</ref> The allegation is a partial truth.<ref>This is true with regards to Judge Jones' statements in the early parts of the opinion manifesting his agreement with the ACLU's briefs, but the legal reasoning of the case - constituting the bulk of the opinion - is all original.  ''See generally Kitzmiller'', 400 F.Supp.2d at 707.</ref>The judge also ordered costs for the plaintiff, in accord with [[civil procedure]] protocol, totalling over $2,000,000.<ref>''See'' 42 U.S.C. s 1988 (describing relief afforded victorious plaintiff of a 1983 action as including attorney fees).</ref>

ACLU chapters frequently sue to compel removal of the Ten Commandments from public property.  For example, in ''McCreary County v. ACLU'', 545 U.S. 844 (2005), the ACLU of Kentucky forced two counties to remove displays of the Ten Commandments from their courthouses.  In Utah, the ACLU even announced a scavenger hunt for anyone who could find a display of the Ten Commandments monument that the ACLU could demand be removed.  The ACLU typically receives substantial legal fees from the government in each of these cases.

ACLU chapters frequently sue to compel removal of the Ten Commandments from public property.  For example, in ''McCreary County v. ACLU'', 545 U.S. 844 (2005), the ACLU of Kentucky forced two counties to remove displays of the Ten Commandments from their courthouses.  In Utah, the ACLU even announced a scavenger hunt for anyone who could find a display of the Ten Commandments monument that the ACLU could demand be removed.  The ACLU typically receives substantial legal fees from the government in each of these cases.