To the Editor:
Re “The Supreme Court, Weaponized,” by Linda Greenhouse (Opinion, Sunday Review, Dec. 19):
Dismissing today’s Supreme Court justices as drones doing the bidding of politicians is a cheap shot. Critics of Supreme Court decisions said the same thing of the justices who signed off on many divisive opinions, including Roe v. Wade.
Agree or disagree with deeply politically divisive decisions, they were written by justices doing their level best to do right by the law. Of course decisions such as these carry political implications. Of course they were written by humans with political leanings. But that does not turn Supreme Court legal reasoning into a political charade.
There are plenty of politically charged legal issues that politicians want decided their way. But justices root their decisions in legal reasoning, not political favoritism. Donald Trump knows that all too well: Justices he nominated to the bench did not lift a finger to help his election fraud claim.
Luke L. Dauchot
Palos Verdes Estates, Calif.
The writer is a lawyer.
To the Editor:
As a retired lawyer, I totally agree with Linda Greenhouse’s essay “The Supreme Court Gaslights Its Way to the End of Roe” (Opinion, Dec. 4). It raises the question: Why do these (admittedly) very smart conservative justices have to resort to gaslighting rather than rigorous legal analysis to reach their decision?
The answer, of course, was given by Justice Sonia Sotomayor: They are acting as partisans, not judges. The conservative justices — at least the last three — were “hired” because of their previous anti-abortion views, and now is the time to “bring home the bacon.”
Their only real struggle, as Ms. Greenhouse notes, is how to explain their decision to overturn Roe, which gives rise to their gaslighting. Only by laying the thickest of smoke screens will they be able to convince themselves (but not us) that they are acting as judges, not as politicians in robes.
Source : https://www.nytimes.com/2021/12/31/opinion/letters/aiding-afghan-refugees.html375