violations of the campaign laws happen to be groups on the left. so that is a problem. so that was a problem then and some are arguing it a problem now as well. out of all of this do you see more tax reform that addresses whether any of these groups should be tax exempt? it s not whether you have to go back 25 years to find a quote. what we have seen here is an effort on the part of the government to make it difficult for citizens to get organized and to express themselves. there s an effort here also to make sure that you can get their donor list or their membership list. it s reminiscent of naacp versus alabama back in 1958 where the state of alabama tried to get the membership and donor list of the naacp. the supreme court said under the first amendment freedom of association you can t have it. there s an of the here in congress called a disclose act to try to get at the donors of these groups. i was wrong 25 years ago, i ve been right for the last two decades. the government sh
the membership list or the donor list of the naacp. the supreme court said under the first amendment freedom of association you can t have it. there s an of the here in congress called a disclose act to try to get at the donors of these groups. ip was wrong 25 years ago. i ve been right for the last two decades. the government should not be trying to intimidate citizens who criticize the government from exercising their first amendment rights. and that s what is at the heart of this and that s what the irs apparently was doing by making it difficult for citizens to get a legitimate tax exempt status. but i m saying, should these groups, if they re that politically involves, and that s what you identified 25 years ago if they re that politically involved, they shouldn t have tax exempt status. should the tax code be simpler in this arena to eliminate these questions? no. i don t think so. i think the citizens groups have a right to organize, express themselves and not have their don
student groups they cannot force members to practice the same beliefs. what? but does that policy actually violate the u.s. constitution? and we will talk to anchor of freedom watch, judge napolitano. judge, so, they do not want to discriminate. they had a problem this last year and they are saying, essentially, an atheist could lead a bible class. judge napolitano: vanderbilt is a private university but it accepts federal funds for a variety of sources and that requires it to behave as if it were the federal government. the first amendment says no government may interfere with the free exercise of religion so, vanderbilt cannot interfere with the free exercise of religion so if jewish group wants only jews in that group they can do it and the same for any religious organization and it is protected in the first amendment freedom of association, that also is the freedom not to associate.