To the Editor:
After I practiced regulation, I all the time believed that the Supreme Court docket, as the very best court docket within the land, offered a security web to guard the fundamental rights of the poor and the downtrodden in our society.
Lots of the current opinions of the court docket have turned the protection web right into a noose, choking the life out of the rights of girls, minorities, and many others.
The ultraconservative justices on the court docket make a mockery of the rule of regulation to serve their political agenda. Disgrace on them. The American folks deserve higher.
Shel Seligsohn
Philadelphia
To the Editor:
Selecting and selecting among the many expressed functions of the Structure, the Supreme Court docket majority constantly dismisses the general public welfare and undoes a extra excellent union, all within the identify of the blessings of (anarchic) liberty.
Douglas McIlroy
Etna, N.H.
To the Editor:
Please don’t name the activist members of Supreme Court docket conservatives.
Conservatives respect the principles by which authorities works. They respect precedent. They handle points that come to them, quite than discovering excuses for radical change. They don’t dissemble to Congress. They don’t disguise their previous actions.
They’ve the integrity to not take one thing of worth (a seat on the court docket) that they know was stolen. They recuse themselves when applicable.
These should not conservatives. They’re reactionaries.
Chava Casper
Teaneck, N.J.
To the Editor:
That the Supreme Court docket consists of legal professionals is dangerous sufficient, however within the final month the court docket’s conservative majority has flaunted its astounding experience as historians, linguists, obstetricians and climatologists. With each ruling they assume a brand new occupation.
Chief Justice John Roberts as soon as famously stated, “It’s my job to name balls and strikes, and to not pitch or bat.” However is there any enviornment left wherein he and his universally professional colleagues haven’t inserted themselves as hitter in addition to umpire, as participant and coach as a lot as referee?
Aaron Goode
New Haven, Conn.
‘Disturbing’ Views of Younger Anti-Abortion Activists
To the Editor:
Re “The Younger Ladies Who Struggle Abortion Rights” (entrance web page, July 3):
As a high-risk labor and supply nurse, I discovered the views expressed by these younger ladies to be deeply disturbing. Even wholesome younger folks threat morbidity and mortality as a direct results of being pregnant. To pressure folks to hold undesirable pregnancies, even with emotional and monetary help, is traumatic; to make them lose their lives and livelihoods due to problems of involuntary childbirth is inhumane.
There isn’t a feminist perspective that features forcing an individual to endure everlasting organ injury, incapacity or dying. I’ve seen ladies die on working room tables and in birthing suites. And extra will die due to the actions of Kristin Turner, an anti-abortion activist, and folks like her.
Meghan Thompson-Wilda
Chicago
To the Editor:
Oh these younger ladies who’ve the posh to be anti-choice, even anti-contraception. They didn’t reside within the earlier than occasions. They didn’t battle for the best to regulate our personal our bodies. They didn’t escort ladies via the yelling mob at clinics.
And their optimism that someway the nation will present assets for ladies compelled to hold an undesirable being pregnant to time period! Wow. Properly, I hope they don’t be taught the exhausting means what it’s wish to not have management over one’s fertility. However I concern they’ll.
Anne Brock
Brush Prairie, Wash.
We Have to Ban AR-15s. What Can I Do?
To the Editor:
Re “Residing in Worry of a Hid Gun,” by Patti Davis (Opinion visitor essay, July 6):
Thanks, Patti, to your phrases. I’m an American who’s sickened by the violence that our nation experiences on a routine foundation. We now have normalized it, and our political leaders can solely ship out “ideas and prayers” to the sufferer’s households.
What’s mistaken with us as a those who we will’t ban AR-15s? Writers of the Structure by no means had this weapon in thoughts for self-defense.
I applaud all who’ve labored tirelessly after Columbine, Sandy Hook, Parkland — the checklist goes on. I’m an unusual citizen who desires to do extra to ban this weapon of mass destruction. I’m in your group, Patti! Inform me how I can do extra.
Carol Josefowicz
Fennville, Mich.
Shedding Australian Slang
To the Editor:
Re “Compiling a Dictionary Is Exhausting Yakka … Er, Work” (information article, June 20):
The documentation of Australian slang is a “ridgy-didge” (trustworthy) try, but it surely’s most likely too late. A number of the rural areas should use colloquialisms sometimes, however most suburban areas at the moment are too multicultural for his or her use and they’re now heard primarily on Australian cleaning soap operas.
What we at the moment are going through isn’t just the lack of these expressions but in addition the “Americanization” of our language and accent because of our TV viewing, with the primary transgression being the pronunciation of Z going from “zed” to “zee.”
Language is changing into extra common and accents are blurring, and if all of us talk extra it needs to be a greater world.
Dennis Fitzgerald
Melbourne, Australia
The author is a retired trainer.
Supply: NY Times
