Equal justice under law, more or less?
I am writing to urge you to join me in supporting the Keep the Nine Amendment and to express my concern about the many attempts to undermine the authority of the Supreme Court. As a fundamental part of our judicial system, one that protects our rights and upholds democracy, an independent judiciary system is crucial to our democracy.
Court-packing poses a serious threat to our democracy. By tampering with the composition of the court, it damages the credibility of the court, allowing for political opinions to influence decisions. Such actions will have significant consequences that could undermine the integrity of the court.
The Keep the Nine Amendment, proposed in Congress by Rep. Dusty Johnson, R-S.D., aims to address this fundamental issue, and it has gained support from over 200 members of Congress and 800 state legislators who are committed to preserving the current Supreme Court composition.
I hope your audience will participate and show support for the effort to address this crucial issue. By supporting the Keep the Nine Amendment, we can uphold the ideals of democracy, protect the rights of all Americans, and maintain the credibility of our court system.
Thank you for your consideration, as your efforts will help protect the integrity and credibility of our democracy.
Sarah Goudjil, Parker
Re: “Don’t pack the Supreme Court, reform it with transparency and ethics rules,” July 9 editorial
It has never been clearer that this rogue, regressive Court is in dire need of reform, but The Denver Post Editorial Board would have us believe that simply applying a code of ethics will result in a Court that is “fair,” “unbiased,” and “independent.”
As egregious as some justices’ conduct has been, the absence of ethics rules is clearly not the reason for those justices’ lack of impartiality. This Court is the result of a decades-long project to install far-right judges in federal courts to advance a conservative agenda. Enacting an ethics code would do little to deter justices hand-picked for their personal politics from furthering unpopular Republican policies under the guise of judicial review.
Without significant reform, the Supreme Court is predicted to have a conservative majority until 2065. In only two terms, this Court has already reshaped U.S. civil rights and governance — imagine what it could do with 42 more.
The only serious proposals to prevent further erosion of our rights are significant structural reforms. Voters support Court expansion by a seven-point margin, as well as term limits and age caps by even wider margins. There is also a growing movement to disempower the courts, recognizing that the U.S. system of judicial review is an oddity among peer nations that puts significant power in the hands of unelected judges.
Coloradans have already acted to protect rights that the Court has attacked. Unless we act on court expansion, our hard-won rights will remain under threat for decades to come.
Charlotte Goodenow, Louisville
When did it happen that some citizens thought they had the unquestioning privilege to deny rights to the majority? When did it happen that people thought they had the right to attack and threaten librarians, teachers, neighbors, judges, election officials, newscasters, journalists, book and news publishers and even meteorologists because you don’t agree with them? When did some people decide that their beliefs meant that the rest of the population was supposed to conform to them, that they had the right to tell everyone else what to believe, what to think, what to hear, what to see, who to marry, when and if to have a child? When did some people decide that it was Christian to attack and threaten others? When did it become common practice for the courts of the land to no longer protect the freedoms of the majority?
Hank A. Cozzi, Denver
In some cases, incarceration may be the right answer
Re: “Jailing unhoused people for sleeping in public is no solution to homelessness,” July 16 commentary
I’m disappointed that The Denver Post chose to include LZ Granderson’s commentary last Sunday lamenting the incarceration of homeless people. While I agree that compassion has a place in policy on public loitering and camping, Granderson’s argument is overly simplistic. Of course, we can agree in a broad sense with his assertion that “the law must protect individuals whose only crime is having no place to sleep.”
If the unhoused indeed are those who are going through a rough patch — and taking steps toward a solution — then they deserve compassion over incarceration. However, it seems that many individuals observed sleeping on sidewalks and hoisting tents in parks fall outside the “compassion” category. Is there truly no alternative shelter? Some are choosing to live on the streets rather than comply with rules allowing admission to shelters. Perhaps they are not capable of compliance due to addiction or illness. In these instances, I support measures to force them into custodial care such as jail.
Robin C. Pittman, Denver
Losing sleep under the noisy Colorado sky
Re: “Stop providing leaded gasoline at Colorado airports” July 12 editorial
I thank The Denver Post’s editorial board for recognizing the lead emissions problem created by the operations of Rocky Mountain Metropolitan Airport (RMMA). However, the lead issue is only half of the problem for which a greater call to action is required by our local, state and federal officials.
RMMA is home to several flight schools whose planes fly in low-altitude, oval-shaped “touch and go” training paths to train aspiring pilots. I usually hear these flights start as early as 5 a.m., but it is not uncommon for them to start as early as 3 a.m. These “touch and go” loops repeat approximately every five minutes, and when additional planes also participate in these loops over my community, the noise repeats as many as 20 times per hour. This is not merely aggravating. It is a hammering, repetitive, 85-decibel, sleep-depriving assault that can only be experienced to be fully understood. Like lead pollution, there is an emerging body of medical evidence that noise pollution like that created by RMMA’s operations can lead to severe negative health impacts.
RMMA is on the border of Jefferson County, which owns RMMA and where RMMA is located, and Boulder County. Jefferson County has conveniently dumped the noise and lead pollution created by RMMA’s operations on the citizens of Boulder County while keeping the bulk of the financial benefit associated with RMMA to itself. Although RMMA purports to have a “Fly Quiet” voluntary noise abatement program, the flight schools’ compliance with the “Fly Quiet” program is near zero. Simply put, Jefferson County is more than content to make money at the expense of the health and sanity of its next-door neighbors in Boulder County. And the flight operations at RMMA continue to increase.
It wasn’t always this way. Three years ago, I barely knew there was an airport nearby. At three this morning, I was reminded about the airport’s existence every three minutes.
Jason Abair, Superior
Re: “Busy metro airspace: ‘It’s ridiculous’,” July 9 news story
John Aguilar’s excellent piece about the impact of regional airports on Colorado communities exposed the hidden threats of their expansion. The day and night noise, particulate pollution and, worst of all, the leaded aviation gas used by most piston engine airplanes are real health threats for everyone along the front range. The Post followed with an editorial focused on the dangers of lead exposure, particularly for children. All of this has great timing.
The FAA Reauthorization Act is now going through Congress and Colorado’s federal delegation has a key role to play in enacting protections for communities. Special interests have loaded both the House and Senate versions with language that would delay the transition to unleaded fuels almost indefinitely. Now is the time to call/email/write your representatives and ask them to protect local communities. Speed the transition to unleaded fuels (Santa Clara, Calif. did it in four months). Allow local control so communities can enforce local standards for nighttime operations, noise levels, air pollution and other environmental guidelines.
Sen. John Hickenlooper plays a special role here as a member of the Senate Commerce Committee, where the provisions of the FAA Reauthorization Act are hammered out and finalized.
Charlene Willey, Westminster
A different street view of Hancock’s legacy
Re: “Wondering what Hancock did in 12 years? Look at Brighton Boulevard,” July 16 editorial
When I saw the headline, I thought that The Denver Post and I had the same opinion of Mayor Michael Hancock’s time in office. I quickly realized the Brighton Boulevard that the Denver Post calls a success, I see as a lost opportunity to create a real boulevard lined with grass and trees and medians. A real sense of place. Instead, we got a miniature Colorado Boulevard with no character.
Another lost opportunity for a nice boulevard was along the Interstate 70 ditch alignment. A visionary mayor could’ve insisted that I-70 through traffic go around the city on I-76 and I-270, with a boulevard leading from the I-70/I-270 interchange into the city for local traffic.
A visionary mayor would have used sales tax funds dedicated to park acquisition and development to acquire the Park Hill Golf Course property, already encumbered by a perpetual preservation easement owned by the city. Instead, Hancock made the citizens of Denver vote twice just to keep the easement. So, no park.
Bill DeGroot, Denver
Equity in college admissions
Re: “Affirmative action outlawed,” June 30 news story
As a proud Asian-American student and recent survivor of college applications, I self-identified race on the Common Application and wrote essays on my heritage. Unwise, perhaps; my family half-jokingly urged a name change or discussing something else, anything else that seemed less likely to mar my chances at highly ranked schools. I was waitlisted and rejected from the two Ivies I applied to — mildly disappointing but unsurprising.
Harvard’s alleged scoring of Asian Americans as lower on personality manifested as an especially tempting culprit. But affirmative action effectively scaffolded increased campus diversity, abating some inequities. I agree that pulling it down does not necessarily benefit Asian applicants; instead, minorities are pitted against each other in the already vicious arms race to selective schools.
America should take a long, hard look at its college admissions and realize that unless we give state schools the support and esteem they deserve, equity is virtually impossible. We miss the forest for the trees.
Katie Ly, Colorado Springs
When “woke” became a negative
What’s the opposite of “woke?” How about “asleep?” People who are woke are aware of problems that have been swept under the rug for many years and are trying to remedy them. People who use the term as a pejorative, like Rep. Kevin McCarthy and Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis, continue to ignore those problems, thereby opposing any remedies. They are worse than asleep; asleep people can usually do no harm.
David Wolf, Lakewood
A deterrent to signing up
Re: “Recruiting woes are national security crisis,” July 5 commentary and “House votes to limit abortion access in military,” July 14 news story
Recently in The Denver Post, we read about “Recruiting woes…” and about the House voting to limit abortion access in the military. How does that add up for attracting young people today?
Roberta Hissey, Denver
Alter your life, not your birth record
Re: “Anti-trans law doesn’t prevent birth certificate changes,” July 15 news story
To me, there is something inherently wrong with changing any original birth certificate. Whether you believe in God, merely the laws of nature, or have no thoughts about how we began life, we were all born as a particular gender.
I am not questioning the choices people make regarding their futures and how they want to continue their journey; however, in my opinion, there should be a formal record as to how we started out, and that record should not be tampered with to suit those of us who decide they would prefer to live otherwise.
Diane Silver, Broomfield
A deadly war of words
Re: “U.S. sets record for deadliest six months of mass killings,” July 15 news story
I was angered by NRA spokesman Billy McLaughlin’s statement: “Joe Biden and Kamala Harris’ constant efforts to gut the Second Amendment will not usher in safety for Americans; instead, it will only embolden criminals.”
I say to you and your beloved NRA: How’s that working for you? Because, sir, there are a lot of victims, and family members, including those of us sitting in our homes, going to the grocery store or just driving down the street, where it’s not working.
Peggy Caughlan, Windsor
Sign up for Sound Off to get a weekly roundup of our columns, editorials and more.
To send a letter to the editor about this article, submit online or check out our guidelines for how to submit by email or mail.
