ACLU? No, ACL F-U!

You know how much we loves our ACLU but here's an article from the NY Times on some recent infighting at the ACLU between it's board of directors and Anthony D. Romero, executive director since September of 2001. In addition to the ongoing disputes, there are some interesting situations mentioned in the article where the organization is seemingly violating it's core principles - things that make you go "hmmmmm...."

Citing a need for efficiency, the organization now often insists that board members who want to question Mr. Romero or other senior staff members first get approval from the executive committee.

The restriction is similar to one the A.C.L.U.'s Michigan affiliate is challenging on behalf of a board member at a small university.

Several staff members are complaining about a new requirement that they sign an agreement by Jan. 6 never to disclose information broadly defined by the group as confidential. They contrast it with the A.C.L.U.'s record of defending whistle-blowers, most recently an F.B.I. analyst who complained about faulty translations.

Some critics wonder whether Mr. Romero would today defend the right of neo-Nazis to march through the heavily Jewish city of Skokie, Ill. - a 1997 action that strained the A.C.L.U.'s financial resources.

When asked, Mr. Romero said he would make the same decision.

"The reason why today we have credibility to argue for the rights of antiwar protesters or choice protesters is the fact that we have argued for those same rights on behalf of Nazis and antichoice protesters," he wrote in an e-mail message.