Donald Trump and American Justice

Re “Guilty: Jury Convicts Trump on All 34 Counts” (front page, May 31 ( Read more... )

Pre-internment

Re “Reliving a dark chapter in history,” Feb. 21 ( Read more... )

Improper Precedents

Regarding “Holding Court,” May, about the refusal to hold hearings on the nomination of Merrick Garland: The premise of Sen. Mitch McConnell’s “principle” is that the nearest election best reflects voters’ voice. The principle would apply in the third year of a president’s term, since at that point the nearest election is the ( Read more... )

A ‘Lame Duck’ President

Re “The Crippled Supreme Court” (editorial, May 17 ( Read more... )

Supremely just

Re: “Bad faith confirmed” (editorial, May 11): Bad faith on Merrick Garland was clear from the start, because the Republicans’ claimed principle - “the people should decide” - made no sense. The people did decide, when they elected the President, that he should fill any Supreme Court vacancies that arise; just as they decided, when ( Read more... )

Is the Senate’s role in appointments a right? A duty? A power?The Constitution’s framers clearly considered what would happen if one branch of government failed to act. Article I, Section 7 says: “If any Bill shall not be returned by the President within ten Days (Sundays excepted) after it shall have been presented to him, the Same shall be a Law ( Read more... )

Vetting Supreme Court nominees -- not the nominator -- is the Senate's job

While the mechanics may be ambiguous - as your Op-Ed states, “Both sides are acting as if advice and consent is a rule, but instead it is a standard” - its purpose is clearly to vet the nominees. (“Is stonewalling legit?” Opinion, March 30 ( Read more... )

Obama, the Senate and the Supreme Court

Had Justice Scalia lived, we’d have a justice reflecting an election outcome from 1984. Why, then, do conservatives object to a justice solely because he would reflect an election outcome from 2012?

Apple vs. Washington Over EncryptionThe Federal Bureau of Investigation is not asking for a way to remotely hack into your phone without your knowledge. The backdoor the agency wants Apple to enable still requires physical possession of the phone, as well as of special hacking equipment and deep expertise. It cannot be used for mass data collection ( Read more... )

Innocent people can fold under threat of mandatory minimums

Re "Repeal mandatory minimum drug sentences" (Editorial, June 7): How many innocent people plead guilty to avoid the chance of a long mandatory sentence? No matter how weak the evidence, a small chance of a long unjust sentence can coerce a guilty plea ( Read more... )