To the Editor:
Re “Adversaries Gird as Battle Brews Over Court Seat” (front page, Sept. 21):
President Trump may think his move to fill Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg’s seat signals his strength and reinforces his appeal to evangelicals. Actually, though, it reveals his fear that he won’t be re-elected. If you’re confident of winning, why rush the process?
And Mr. Trump the transactionalist should realize that once the evangelicals get their Supreme Court justice, they may abandon their thrice-married, pay-off-the-porn-star president. Watch out!
William Hoelzel
Weatogue, Conn.
To the Editor:
Democrats are howling that it would be immoral to name a new Supreme Court justice before the election. Is there anyone who doesn’t believe that if the roles were reversed, the Democrats would be doing the same thing?
Michael Quane
South Hempstead, N.Y.
To the Editor:
In the unseemly political fight already underway over the vacant seat, there is an important consideration regarding the composition of the Supreme Court that should not be overlooked.
Of the eight justices currently on the court, there are five Catholics, six if you include Justice Neil Gorsuch, who was raised Catholic but attends Episcopal Church services. The remaining two justices are Jewish. It is said that President Trump may nominate Judge Amy Coney Barrett; she is also a Catholic. Surely there should be more diverse religious representation on the court?
How can any of the Catholic justices convincingly claim that they can rule objectively on Roe v. Wade or other abortion-related issues when their religion specifically outlaws such a procedure?
Arnold J. Clift
Saxtons River, Vt.
To the Editor:
“Abortion is not the only sin.” These are the recent words of my 93-year-old Catholic mother, who raised 12 children in near poverty rather than defy the church’s teachings on birth control. She has often voted on an anti-abortion basis, but recent times have refocused her on the other precepts of her faith.
It is also a sin to destroy the Earth, reject anguished immigrants, mistreat our Black and brown neighbors, deny access to health care, reward the greedy and ignore the poor. A firmly right-wing court will permit if not encourage all of these other sins.
Judith Neumann
Auburndale, Mass.
To the Editor:
Re “Can Mitch McConnell Be Stopped?” (column, nytimes.com, Sept. 19):
Michelle Goldberg is misguided in trying to impede efforts to nominate and confirm a new justice for the Supreme Court. Democrats should focus all our efforts on winning the White House and the Senate, rather than divert efforts to fight the Supreme Court nomination. If we succeed in winning the elections, we will be able to correct Trump wrongs over the next four years. If we lose, we will be able to do nothing!
Furthermore, Democrats believed in 2016 that it was right for President Barack Obama to nominate a justice and believed that Republican senators should consider the nomination. If that principle was correct in 2016, it is correct today, regardless of Republican hypocrisy. What is the point of winning if we don’t hold true to what we believe to be constitutionally (and morally) correct?
Lucia Halpern
London
Source: Read Full Article
Home » Analysis & Comment » Opinion | The G.O.P. Push for Quick Confirmation of a New Justice
Opinion | The G.O.P. Push for Quick Confirmation of a New Justice
To the Editor:
Re “Adversaries Gird as Battle Brews Over Court Seat” (front page, Sept. 21):
President Trump may think his move to fill Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg’s seat signals his strength and reinforces his appeal to evangelicals. Actually, though, it reveals his fear that he won’t be re-elected. If you’re confident of winning, why rush the process?
And Mr. Trump the transactionalist should realize that once the evangelicals get their Supreme Court justice, they may abandon their thrice-married, pay-off-the-porn-star president. Watch out!
William Hoelzel
Weatogue, Conn.
To the Editor:
Democrats are howling that it would be immoral to name a new Supreme Court justice before the election. Is there anyone who doesn’t believe that if the roles were reversed, the Democrats would be doing the same thing?
Michael Quane
South Hempstead, N.Y.
To the Editor:
In the unseemly political fight already underway over the vacant seat, there is an important consideration regarding the composition of the Supreme Court that should not be overlooked.
Of the eight justices currently on the court, there are five Catholics, six if you include Justice Neil Gorsuch, who was raised Catholic but attends Episcopal Church services. The remaining two justices are Jewish. It is said that President Trump may nominate Judge Amy Coney Barrett; she is also a Catholic. Surely there should be more diverse religious representation on the court?
How can any of the Catholic justices convincingly claim that they can rule objectively on Roe v. Wade or other abortion-related issues when their religion specifically outlaws such a procedure?
Arnold J. Clift
Saxtons River, Vt.
To the Editor:
“Abortion is not the only sin.” These are the recent words of my 93-year-old Catholic mother, who raised 12 children in near poverty rather than defy the church’s teachings on birth control. She has often voted on an anti-abortion basis, but recent times have refocused her on the other precepts of her faith.
It is also a sin to destroy the Earth, reject anguished immigrants, mistreat our Black and brown neighbors, deny access to health care, reward the greedy and ignore the poor. A firmly right-wing court will permit if not encourage all of these other sins.
Judith Neumann
Auburndale, Mass.
To the Editor:
Re “Can Mitch McConnell Be Stopped?” (column, nytimes.com, Sept. 19):
Michelle Goldberg is misguided in trying to impede efforts to nominate and confirm a new justice for the Supreme Court. Democrats should focus all our efforts on winning the White House and the Senate, rather than divert efforts to fight the Supreme Court nomination. If we succeed in winning the elections, we will be able to correct Trump wrongs over the next four years. If we lose, we will be able to do nothing!
Furthermore, Democrats believed in 2016 that it was right for President Barack Obama to nominate a justice and believed that Republican senators should consider the nomination. If that principle was correct in 2016, it is correct today, regardless of Republican hypocrisy. What is the point of winning if we don’t hold true to what we believe to be constitutionally (and morally) correct?
Lucia Halpern
London
Source: Read Full Article