To the editor: This column is basically appropriate (“The ‘greatest threat’ to rule of law in decades. That’s how lawyers, judges see Trump,” Could 24). Mark Z. Barabak trenchantly describes President Trump’s newest menace to the rule of regulation. The “anti-weaponization fund” would divert $1.776 billion drawn from the judgment fund, which Congress licensed a long time in the past for the fully totally different goal of compensating victims whom the Justice Division really harmed, and as a substitute doubtless reward miscreants (and different Trump allies), such because the mob that attacked the Capitol on Jan. 6, 2021, and assaulted regulation enforcement officers.
Barabak’s prescription for this abuse is the voting sales space in the course of the November midterm elections. Nevertheless, the Home and the Senate should expeditiously go payments that may remove the fund earlier than the DOJ wastes taxpayer {dollars} on this corrupt scheme.
Carl Tobias, Richmond, Va.
This author is a regulation professor on the College of Richmond.
..
To the editor: It’s a destructive model of the “trickle-down” principle.
On the prime is a president who believes that he’s the only arbitrator of proper and improper. Legal guidelines don’t exist for him.
On the backside is the growing variety of drivers who suppose {that a} purple gentle is merely an avoidable nuisance.
In between are the enablers. The members of Congress who ignore the constitutional mandates setting their duties and obligations. The Supreme Court docket which, by a lot of its rulings, appears to behave because the president’s “fixer” moderately than the dispenser of authorized knowledge. The one-percenters who deal with the remainder of us as disposable.
On the poll field we, the 99%, should cease the “rule of the jungle” from eradicating hope for a civilized society.
Betty Rome, Culver Metropolis
