I have no problem with people who wish to stand by their principles. As a matter of fact, I often think that too few people are willing to do so these days. But this whole de-linking party seems rather excessive to me in light of the Stop The ACLU's past willingness to allow those who disagree with their assessment of the ACLU to post comments to Stop the ACLU's blog.
After all, it is not as if Mr. Reynolds expressed his unquestioning loyalty to the ACLU and all of its causes. And Mr. Reynolds did not even criticize Stop The ACLU, but rather the practice of demonizing the ACLU, which Stop The ACLU has allowed dissenting commenters to do on their blog — albeit never without swift and firm counterarguments (thus making for fascinating discussions).
However, let's not omit any potentially important back stories or other details. Mr. Reynolds, who is a law professor at the University of Tennessee, has worked with the ACLU in the past, and has written that he will probably do so again.
Most recently, Mr. Reynolds worked with the ACLU on a legal brief for the New Orleans rave case, in which the Department of Justice and the Drug Enforcement Administration (D.E.A.) tried to prosecute three New Orleans concert promoters under the federal "crack house law."
The "crack house" law makes it a felony to maintain a facility in which illegal drugs are consumed. In the past, the law had been applied to traditional crack houses and "shooting galleries" (places where heroin users inject their illegal drug of choice) until former U.S. Attorney Eddie Jordan reasoned that since some of the people who go to "rave" parties sometimes use illegal drugs at them, that concert promoters must know of the illegal drug use (especially in light of the presence of "drug paraphernalia," such as bottled water and glow sticks) and therefore a "rave" must be an event that takes place "for the purpose of drug consumption," under the federal crack house law.
The federal district court dismissed the charges, calling them a violation of the First Amendment. And this was likely due, in part, to the work of the ACLU and Mr. Reynolds.
Of course, most of the folks over at Stop The ACLU are prohibitionists, but they also acknowledge that Mr. Reynolds and others are entitled to their opinions. However, it might just be that the people of Stop The ACLU only respect peoples' right to informed opinions.