To the editor: The Trump administration argument against judicial mandates nationwide with respect to the issue of birth law citizenship is, at best, thin of fabric (“Trump's skeptical judges plan to limit the citizenship of birth rights, but also the mandates that block it.” May 15).
The idea of the administration that all judicial decline cosaches (yes, plural) for the rewriting of the citizens of Trump's birth should be simply limited to the specific plaintiffs before federal judges, the district of those federal judges or the particular state in which the judges are, by necessity, preceded by the fucked of the 14th amendment to the US Constitution. That language of amendment 14 clearly confers not only a state citizenship to the natives, but also an American federal citizenship. Through this wording, any judicial order issued that prevents the attempt to rewrite from President Trump of the 14th amendment must necessarily carry the scope of the entire country.
This last appeal of Trump before the United States Supreme Court is nothing more than an obvious unconstitutional dodge and a betrayal of his office so that the laws are executed faithfully.
David L. Clark, Saticoy, California.
..
To the editor: Thomas Jefferson wrote to James Madison from Paris on March 15, 1789, when the delegates of the Constitutional Convention discussed the inclusion of a declaration of rights: “In the arguments in favor of a declaration of rights, you omits one that has a great weight with me, the legal control that puts in the hands of the trial.” The Supreme Court can hinder the Judiciary as a coeual branch of the Government.
The Judiciary has helped advance freedom when Congress refused. The lower courts advanced freedom in the United States vs. Wong Kim Ark (1898) by defending the citizenship clause of the 14th amendment. They decided that the approval of California proposition 14 in 1964, which would have allowed real estate owners and sellers to discriminate racially, violated the equal protection clause in the amendment 14. The lower courts began the release of interracial couples to live as a husband and wife in Loving vs. Virginia (1967).
I hope the future elections maintain the legal control of the Judiciary against the Mafia and the Monarchical Government as a threat to freedom.
Keith Estamger, Merced, California.
..
To the editor: The judges of the Supreme Court should have told the Trump administration that it is not possible to amend the Constitution by executive order. Amending the Constitution is a legislative function that requires many steps. Clearly, President Trump wants to avoid that long process because he sees himself as ruler of the United States. That in itself violates the Constitution, since there are no kings in this country.
Glenn Shockley, Winnetka
