Reply #21: Restrictions, on who can compete for Federal funds, should be described by objective criteria: [View All]

[struggle4progress]

but the bill simply singles out ACORN. The suit won't argue that ACORN is entitled to Federal dollars; it will argue that it is unfair to single out ACORN by name as ineligible to compete

Here's a hypothetical: Suppose Congress authorized some Community Firearm Safety Training Grants, allowing groups or individuals to apply for Federal dollars to offer Community Firearm Safety Training programs in their states. Congress can certainly restrict the Grants to "qualified group or individuals" -- and it has considerable leeway in defining who is qualified or disqualified. However, Congress cannot simply write out certain groups or individuals: qualification or disqualification should be defined in rational and neutral language with an arguably relevant purpose. Congress can't make the grants available only to blue-eyed people and similarly can't disqualify people who refuse to eat shrimp, because those are not arguably relevant criteria. Similarly, Congress can't just make "Slackmaster's Save Your Children Foundation" or "Struggle4Progress's Save Our Children Foundation" by name ineligible to compete for Grant monies, because that involves an unfair particularity at law; proponents of not funding either group might argue that Slackmaster was stopped once on suspicion of running a stop sign or that Struggle4Progress had been ticketed for littering -- but such concerns could only be fairly addressed by disqualifying everyone who had ever been suspected of running a stop sign or who had been ticketed for littering, rather than by singling out a few individuals by name