Bill of Attainder: The Constitution prohibits laws that inflict punishment on specific individuals or easily ascertainable groups without a judicial trial.
A couple of years back we had a writer here, Steve Kelly, who had his own following and wrote about things unlike anything I do. I liked having him aboard for that reason, that he brought some breadth to this place that I cannot. He wrote about environmental issues, mostly about my home state of Montana. I won’t name the group he is/was a part of for reasons outlined below. When he left he told me he felt out of place here. I was sorry that bothered him, as it certainly did not me.
Back before that time I wrote of the group that Steve works for, naming it, praising the work they do, only to be chastised by its head honcho, and the tone was familiar to me. He did not want to be associated with this blog, as I go places that are untrammeled by man, where man himself is a visitor who does not remain. Not everyone likes that, and the leader of a group with a reputation for solid work in environmental causes did not want association with us. For that reason, I distanced myself, removed them from the blogroll, and have not mentioned them by name again since. It was not because I was chastised, but only because I respect their work and want to respect their wishes too., even when snubbed.
This link is to an article in the Billings Gazette, 4 environmental groups under congressional investigation, which is paywalled, unfortunately. I will quote as I currently have access to their stuff. That will end later this month.
There is currently an investigation in Congress by the House Natural Resources Committee, sponsored only by Republicans and targeting four groups: [Kelly’s group], Montana Environmental Information Center, Wilderness Watch and Native Ecosystem Council. These groups, according to the Natural Resources Committee, are “radical environmentalists” I suppose that is in the same sense that people like me, who see CO2 as a helpful and harmless fertilizer, even if backed by science, are considered “Climate Change Deniers”. In the propaganda game, short spiffy phrases are used to carry the day They are used as a hammer to stop or overcome thinking. In fact, I have played that game myself. When I was a wilderness warrior in the 90s in Montana, I came up with the slogan “Keep Public Lands in Public Hands”, which was used effectively to counter efforts by private groups acting through then-Senator Conrad Burns, and later Senator Jon Tester, to minimize or privatize public lands.**
There is a reason why these particular groups, especially Steve’s (which has achieved a national spotlight now and then due to support by Carole King and James Taylor, who split concert fees with them), have been singled out by the forces behind this move by HNRC … they win. Says the spokesman for Steve’s group, “We wouldn’t win so much if the Forest Service didn’t repeatedly break the law. It’s Congress’s job to oversee the administration. So Congress is not doing their job. The Forest Service is repeatedly found by courts — both judges appointed by both Democrats and Republicans — that they have broken the law.”
Its that simple. We are free to join any movement, hold any placard, support any candidate, or fight for any cause, so long as we are not effective at it. Then we are doing our citizenship bit as preferred by those in power, speaking like representatives and senators to an empty chamber, as done on CSPAN. Real power does not take kindly to effective opposition.
I suppose there is no point in writing this, as any bill coming out of this that targets specific groups is by definition a Bill of Attainder, and in violation of the First Amendment. But I will close with a memory of my work with the Montana Wilderness Association, since taken over by money from Pew Charitable Trusts and rendered into a flaccid dick now called “Wild Montana”. I sat in on council meetings for years, going back and forth to Helena from Billings. Fortunately, by girlfriend (now wife) lived in Bozeman. I looked forward to the long trips.
Part of The Wilderness Act of 1964, and another law in 1976, designated certain federally managed lands that possess wilderness characteristics—such as being roadless, natural, and offering solitude or primitive recreation—but which have not yet been designated as permanent wilderness by Congress, as “Wilderness Study Areas”. These places were to be treated as Wilderness until such time as they were otherwise designated by Congress. During my time with MWA, certain of these lands were being openly misused, including allowing biking and even laying down rubber tracks to assist bikes. I have no problem with biking, do it myself, but in its place, and the 1964 Act specificallly forbade their use in Wilderness areas.
However, the violation of the law was openly supported by the US National Forest Service.
I sat at a council meeting one time when the matter was discussed. There were probably fifteen people present, and round it went until it got to Executive Officer Bob Decker, who said “So sue ’em”. Phone calls were made, other groups joined, a lawsuit was initiated, and was very quickly won. Illegal activities were ended in Wilderness Study Areas.
That’s what the group representative above meant when he said ““We wouldn’t win so much if the Forest Service didn’t repeatedly break the law.” At MWA at that time, we broke no laws, and publicly interfered with illegal activities, putting a stop to it via the courts, as there would be no assistance from any other source including USFS, the perpetrator.
_____________
**Whether or not we should have federal public lands is a debatable point, me on the affirmative, and a debate I welcome here.
