6 ms·

The statement about voting rights is particularly rich, given that the ACLU just won a lawsuit in Seattle to remove Charter Amendment 29 from the ballot for thi

The statement about voting rights is particularly rich, given that the ACLU just won a lawsuit in Seattle to remove Charter Amendment 29 from the ballot for this fall's election. https://www.aclu-wa.org/news/transit-riders-union-seattleking-county-coalition-homelessness-and-aclu-washington-joint https://www.aclu-wa.org/news/transit-riders-union-seattlekin... Charter Amendment 29 is (was?) a popular measure concerning homelessness that polls at around 60% in Seattle, with only 20% opposed. The ACLU sued to remove it from the ballot on legal technicalities: they say that it conflicts with state law. The core thrust of their legal arguments had no civil liberties basis to them. But in their filing they stated their core opposition to the bill in this way: > While Plaintiffs agree with some of CA 29’s purported goals, these goals cannot be advanced by the local initiative process. Electioneering and soundbites are neither an appropriate nor a legal method for addressing a complex and evolving regional crisis. Moreover, allowing homelessness policy to be established by local initiative would open a floodgate to local initiative and referenda on homelessness, which could be used to further criminalize homelessness or derail action to address affordable housing and homelessness. (https://www.documentcloud.org/documents/21040873-20210811-1-complaint https://www.documentcloud.org/documents/21040873-20210811-1-...) The ACLU sued to prevent the people from voting on a popular initiative to address the homeless crisis, because in their opinion the people might fall prey to "electioneering and soundbites" and vote for the wrong thing. The lead council for the ACLU on this lawsuit, Knoll Lowney, uses local initiatives extensively in his own progressive advocacy. "Knoll has extensive experience in initiative law, and has authored dozens of statewide and local initiatives for the progressive community." https://www.smithandlowney.com/our-team https://www.smithandlowney.com/our-team In a previous lawsuit where Lowney was in the opposite position -- defending a local initiative to keep it on the ballot -- he argued that "All doubts should be resolved in favor of letting the people vote”, and “any challenges the [opponent] wants to raise will be fully preserved for post-election review”. (Those quotes are found in this filing): https://sccinsight.com/2021/08/31/compassion-seattle-changes-mind-appeals-ruling-after-all/ https://sccinsight.com/2021/08/31/compassion-seattle-changes... But that principle flipped this time, when he argued that the citizens of Seattle cannot be allowed to vote on a measure to address one of the region's most urgent crises. So I don't find it particularly convincing when the ACLU claims they will stand up for voting rights. They will fight against your right to vote on measures they do not agree with.

throwawaysea 5y ago
The ACLU has basically grifted vast sums of donations from people who believe in classically liberal values and foundational (to America) civil liberties while pivoting to a partisan progressive political organization in the Trump era. Their work now often resembles election campaigning more so than nonprofit work.
pseudalopex 5y ago
You're scandalized a civil liberties organization opposed putting a minority's liberties to a vote? > But in their filing they stated their core opposition to the bill in this way: "Moreover, allowing homelessness policy to be established by local initiative would open a floodgate to local initiative and referenda on homelessness, which could be used to further criminalize homelessness or derail action to address affordable housing and homelessness." > In a previous lawsuit where Lowney was in the opposite position -- defending a local initiative to keep it on the ballot -- he argued that "All doubts should be resolved in favor of letting the people vote”, and “any challenges the [opponent] wants to raise will be fully preserved for post-election review”. A lawyer's job is making the strongest case they can for their client. And tactics aren't principles.
- haberman 5y ago
  > You're scandalized a civil liberties organization opposed putting a minority's liberties to a vote? That is a very creative way of framing a charter amendment that proposed to build 2,000 units of emergency housing for the homeless who are currently sleeping on the streets and in parks. If there was a strong civil liberties argument here, why didn't the ACLU make it? Why did the entire legal argument rest on a claim that the measure conflicts with other state and local laws? The lawsuit did not cite any instances where this charter amendment actually violates any civil liberty of the homeless. The ACLU is part of a progressive establishment that believes that the homeless must be allowed to continue sleeping on the streets and in parks, even if shelter options are available. They believe that we must spend until the homeless are enticed to choose shelter, and if they do not choose it, the only option is to spend more. I am against sweeping homeless camps when no other option is available, but I do not think it is reasonable if parks are occupied by encampments of homeless who have decided not to take offers of shelter.

throwawaysea 5y ago

The ACLU has basically grifted vast sums of donations from people who believe in classically liberal values and foundational (to America) civil liberties while pivoting to a partisan progressive political organization in the Trump era. Their work now often resembles election campaigning more so than nonprofit work.

pseudalopex 5y ago

You're scandalized a civil liberties organization opposed putting a minority's liberties to a vote? > But in their filing they stated their core opposition to the bill in this way: "Moreover, allowing homelessness policy to be established by local initiative would open a floodgate to local initiative and referenda on homelessness, which could be used to further criminalize homelessness or derail action to address affordable housing and homelessness." > In a previous lawsuit where Lowney was in the opposite position -- defending a local initiative to keep it on the ballot -- he argued that "All doubts should be resolved in favor of letting the people vote”, and “any challenges the [opponent] wants to raise will be fully preserved for post-election review”. A lawyer's job is making the strongest case they can for their client. And tactics aren't principles.

haberman 5y ago
> You're scandalized a civil liberties organization opposed putting a minority's liberties to a vote? That is a very creative way of framing a charter amendment that proposed to build 2,000 units of emergency housing for the homeless who are currently sleeping on the streets and in parks. If there was a strong civil liberties argument here, why didn't the ACLU make it? Why did the entire legal argument rest on a claim that the measure conflicts with other state and local laws? The lawsuit did not cite any instances where this charter amendment actually violates any civil liberty of the homeless. The ACLU is part of a progressive establishment that believes that the homeless must be allowed to continue sleeping on the streets and in parks, even if shelter options are available. They believe that we must spend until the homeless are enticed to choose shelter, and if they do not choose it, the only option is to spend more. I am against sweeping homeless camps when no other option is available, but I do not think it is reasonable if parks are occupied by encampments of homeless who have decided not to take offers of shelter.