Letters for July 22, 2023

Supreme Court just upholds Constitution

In response to, “Radical Supreme Court” (July 10): Karen Dorn Steele is a long-time leftist who has advocated for liberal policies for years and her letter is as one-sided as is she.

She begins with a wonderful quote from Martin Luther King Jr., so I was interested in her letter, but it went downhill from there. Karen is disappointed by recent court decisions like affirmative action in college admissions. Again, the majority of citizens are against using race in deciding who gets accepted (ABC News). This is a perfect opportunity for me to paraphrase Martin Luther King Jr. as did Karen … he wanted people to be judged by the content of their character and not the color of their skin. I personally feel this is one of the greatest things MLK Jr. said. Karen calls the court “radical” when decisions don’t go her way and then they want to change the rules, such as in this case, like the affirmative action decision. She is also upset about the student loan decision, but if it was a great idea Biden should let Congress decide. That’s how spending is determined in our system … not some elder man thinking he can do it on his own.

I’m amused how white liberals feel Black Americans or citizens with student loans just can’t succeed without the help of white liberals like herself. If you took out the loan, then pay for it.

There are hugely successful and brilliant Black Americans both liberal and conservatives. Is there racism? Of course, and speaking out against it is the right thing to do. But Karen doesn’t give our country credit for the gains we have made in our society or for Black Americans’ ability to succeed. I remember a two-term Black president. And Karen needs to see that Supreme Court decisions are based on the Constitution and the affirmative action decision was based on its violation of part of the 14th Amendment.

Greg Schuster

Spokane

Supreme Court corruption requires solution

The best solution to the corruption and dishonesty of the current Supreme Court is as simple as it is politically impossible.

The Constitution clearly states in Article III, Section 1, that Congress has the authority to set the terms and conditions of judicial appointments, even Supreme Court justices.

Supreme Court justices have lifetime appointments, but Congress can impose term limits even there.

Legal scholars have suggested new rules that after every presidential election, the two justices with the most seniority are automatically promoted to senior status. They would keep their lifetime appointment, salaries and benefits. They just wouldn’t hear Supreme Court cases or vote on decisions.

If this solution were enacted this year, the next president would be able to replace the two most blatantly corrupt and dishonest judges, Clarence Thomas and Sam Alito.

But this solution is politically impossible because Republicans in Congress believe they benefit from the current corruption and dishonesty. If the recent Supreme Court decisions on abortion, guns or voting rights make you angry, electing candidates who will support term limits for Supreme Court justices is the best possible way to move forward.

Bart Preecs

Spokane

Decisions aren’t really extreme

Reading some recent opinions regarding the Supreme Court, and how “extremist” those were regarding abortion, school choice, student loan forgiveness, just to name a few, that are regarded as “extreme.” I would like to comment on one: Roe v. Wade.

In 1973, the court handed down a ruling that legalized abortion nationally. Many were disappointed by the ruling, but did you ever hear from those objecting that the court should be packed with more likeminded judges? Not that I can remember. Those who disagreed worked hard to build cases over 50 years, until finally in 2022, Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization reversed Roe v. Wade.

This is how federalism works. Basically two layers of government in which the national government is responsible for issues like national security, and states and cities govern the issues of local concern. That’s all that Dobbs did: return the issue of abortion to the states to decide. What’s “extreme” about that?

If you live in a state where you disagree with that state’s decision, you can either work to change the law or simply move to a state that accommodates your belief. To denigrate judges for this decision is reckless and dangerous. It was just over a year ago that someone threatening to kill Justice Kavanaugh was arrested near his home.

A recent poll shows the massive migration of people moving from California to Texas, and from northeast states to Florida, Georgia and Tennessee which have far more restrictive laws regarding abortion than those states they are leaving. Seems like economic opportunity is the most driving factor and not abortion as their main reason.

Steve Hintyesz

Spokane

Kerry does crucial work

I wondered what nefarious activities James Comer, R-Ky., might be investigating as climate envoy John Kerry meets with representatives of other governments, so I read an account, albeit reluctantly, from Fox News. The most damning case they can make is that Kerry has likely had some preliminary exploratory talks in the interest of saving the world from further climate catastrophes. How evil!

This appears to continue a tradition of tireless and often thankless public service in which Kerry has worked to reduce the number and risks of nuclear weapons and, going way back, help the public learn the truth about the Vietnam War.

It is perhaps informative to note that Comer’s environmental scorecard is basically on par with that of Cathy McMorris Rodgers, at the bottom of the barrel. Of course, both of them voted against Biden’s Inflation Reduction Act, which contains imaginative provisions to help spur emerging technologies to help reduce carbon emissions (Cailley Lapara, The Spokesman-Review, July 7).

By the way, as I write this, Earth is experiencing its hottest week.

Ron Doyen

Spokane

Who needs driving rules anyway?

We see the government overreach: mandating masks and vaccines by claiming there’s a highly contagious, lethal disease; indoctrinating sensitive kids – and sensitive parents – about things like sex, identity and unpleasant, historical tidbits on race. I could go on about the naïve, politically correct, socialist, no-nothing snowflakes who argue only with labels and nutty assertions but who really hate America. Enough! Time to stop a leftist government from imposing mandates on our lives! We can start with elitist traffic rules overriding our local values. We need ordinances in keeping with Spokane’s sensibilities:

1. Traffic lights should be relegated to their proper place, with their red, green and gold colors for neighborhood beautification! Stop lights override common-sense choices! Remove excessive police enforcement!

2. Turn signals are utterly useless if you already know where you’re going! Others know of our plans by watching what we do next. Remove turn-signal nonsense.

3. Safe driving distances are an assault to friendly greetings where full-size pickups can cram in from behind as if to mate with compact sedans. Omit petty guidelines!

4. Posted speed limits are all right if suggested for senior drivers. Others may use their discretion based on the road, the weather and our moods and inclinations.

By implementing the above, we stop government meddling and restore our God-given rights to the people. The cost savings alone can help police push the homeless back into their homes. Simple! Small steps, maybe, but ones to help Make America Great Again!

Bruce Higgins

Spokane