LETTERS: Personal loyalties intrude on court’s final analyses

The Supreme Court of the U.S. was the only court established by the U.S. Constitution.

I think it was intended as an institution that would be staffed with justices who were meant to adjudicate the most significant issues of their epoch without political or personal bias.

The justices were appointed for life and given pensions and esteem such that they could resist the most egregious tendency to act in their personal interest.

The basis for their existence was the sworn allegiance to “… support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic …”

In the recent decision upholding Trump’s immigration ban, I think this court abandoned its oath and damaged the Constitution by enabling a presidential decree based on a religious and racial bias to become the law of this great nation.

If the Constitution is no longer a valid basis for adjudicating issues, have we unleashed a monster in which the U.S. has no final basis for adjudication?

Have we descended into a morass of authoritarian government rules without the safeguard of our Constitution?

Each term of the SCOTUS is rated by analyzing the impact of decisions on society to the presiding chief justice.

Justice John Roberts’ court will be marred by a legacy in which five Republicans placed personal loyalties above the U.S. Constitution.

The world functions best when yin and yang are in balance.

Republicans must not be allowed to steal another SCOTUS seat.

Tony Corrado,

Sequim

More in Letters to the Editor

Most Read