Due process for civil disobedience

Our former attorney general exercised his freedom of speech disagreeing with Judge Hayes’ decision to allow Rev. Taylor a jury trial (“Personal views don’t excuse crimes,” Rob McKenna, Jan. 11), yet he argues against the legal rights of the accused. McKenna’s mischaracterization may lead readers to believe that Rev. Taylor is unwilling to accept the consequences of civil disobedience, but Rev. Taylor has not fled justice. On the contrary, he pleaded for his right to a trial by jury which, upon hearing the evidence, Judge Hayes allowed. This exemplifies judicial independence and the rule of law determining legal standing as allowed by our Constitution.

Throughout the history of our nation, civil disobedience has pressed forward the creation of a more just society. Global warming is an international injustice and an imminent threat. When the United States’ executive branch has negotiated, signed and quickly reneged on the Paris Agreement, and Congress has repeatedly failed to recognize, let alone act on, the dangers of climate change, it is not only an option but a duty of people of conscience to protest.

The courts are a vital and necessary avenue by which citizens of a free society may seek justice, not a mere “futile sideshow,” as Mr. McKenna surely should know.

Rebecca MacMullan

Spokane