Above The Law---Part Two: The IRS's Scandalous Behavior

Yesterday, (Thursday, April 2, 2015), the Washington Times reported that a federal judge has ordered the IRS to turn over the list of groups who were targeted for scrutiny, as a class-action lawsuit by a group of Tea Party organizations progresses.  The IRS has, (until now), resisted releasing this list, insisting the information "is private":

Judge orders IRS to release list of tea party groups targeted for scrutiny
A federal judge ordered the IRS this week to turn over the list of 298 groups it targeted for intrusive scrutiny as the agency defends against a potential class-action lawsuit by tea party groups who claim their constitutional rights were violated. 

The IRS had argued it shouldn’t have to release the names because doing do would violate privacy laws, but Judge Susan J. Dlott, who sits in the Southern District of Ohio, rejected that claim and ordered the tax agency to turn over any lists or spreadsheets detailing the groups that were targeted and when they filed their applications. 

Judge Dlott also ordered the IRS to say whether a partial list of targeted groups reported by USA Today is authentic as a number of tea party groups try to win certification for a class action lawsuit against the IRS.

The information ordered by the judge is to establish "class certification", which is crucial to the plaintiff's case and will solidify the merits of the lawsuit.  Under Judge Dlott's order, this information [of the targeted groups] will resolve the issue of certification:

“The return information sought is directly related to the issue of class certification in this federal court proceeding,” the judge said. “The names of the putative class member organizations and their control dates — the date which the putative class member organizations submitted their applications for tax exempt status to the IRS — are directly related to the issue of class certification.”

From one other paragraph in the Time's story, I have submitted a few of my own "conclusions" and "opinions" of the IRS's probable liabilities by this agency:

“The scandal developed after the IRS acknowledged it singled out tea party groups for special scrutiny, and asked intrusive questions that agency executives later said were inappropriate. The IRS’s inspector general concluded that 298 groups were targeted, with all but a handful of them leaning toward the conservative side.”

When any branch of the United States government arbitrarily decides to purposely target a specific group for “special scrutiny“---effectively denying them the same privileges/status afforded to similar groups---this is NOT only inappropriate, it’s an egregious violation of the First Amendment’s clause that prohibits [the government] from “interfering with the right to peaceably assemble or prohibiting the petitioning for a governmental redress of grievances”. By their own admission/acknowledgement, it can be appreciably argued that the IRS, and/or the institutions within this branch of our government not only broke this Constitutional law, they did it with malicious intent. That the IRS’s inspector general found “a handful” of other groups singled out for special scrutiny, this does not in any way excuse their actions. 

While the liberal media and the progressive left have decided to “move on” and ignore this “inappropriate targeting”, (along with the DOJ, who will never pursue any legitimate grievances that may embarrass, or admonish this administration’s power structure), the IRS must not be allowed to inhibit, restrict, or obstruct any lawsuit that has legal standing.

“Standing: The legally protectible stake or interest that an individual has in a dispute that entitles him to bring the controversy before the court to obtain judicial relief. Most standing issues arise over the enforcement of an allegedly unconstitutional statute, ordinance, or policy. One may challenge a law or policy on constitutional grounds if he can show that enforcement of the law or implementation of the policy infringes on an individual constitutional right, such as Freedom of Speech.”

NO ONE, and especially, no government entity is above the law. Any collaboration or willful obstruction by the federal government, or the agencies within, must be met with indignation and resolve from the full weight of the People, individually and collectively. And make no mistake, (Mr. Obama, Mr. Holder, and Ms. Lerner), any other form of redress is a scandal.

(all bolds/emphasis's are mine)