Letters to the Editor: Why another Trump inauguration would be obscene
To the editor: UC Berkeley School of Law Dean Erwin Chemerinsky is correct that the U.S. Supreme Court must rule quickly on the Colorado Supreme Court decision disqualifying former President Trump from that state’s ballot.
The Colorado court was closely divided but did conclude that the 14th Amendment disqualifies Trump from holding office. The lower court it overruled had attempted the semantic equivalent of one-hand clapping in finding that its restrictions somehow did not apply to the office of president.
These rulings, however, agree that Trump engaged in insurrection.
Let’s consider the original intent of the 14th Amendment, ratified in 1868. Surely the Congress that passed it conjured up the macabre scenario of the disgraced Confederate president Jefferson Davis, a former U.S. senator, reelected to office and returning to the Capitol to be sworn in once again. Who could possibly believe such an oath?
Now imagine Trump taking the oath of office, again, in 2025.
John B. Ashbaugh, San Luis Obispo
..
To the editor: Two things should happen.
First, the Supreme Court, led by its originalists, must decide that the Colorado ruling was correct and applies to the whole country.
Second, if Trump is disqualified from running again, Biden should immediately announce he is not running for reelection either.
Kennedy Gammage, San Diego
..
To the editor: Colorado Supreme Court justices are facing threats across both mainstream and fringe social media platforms for their ruling disqualifying Trump from the ballot.
This alone underscores why Trump must not be excused from the rule of law. Fear must not diminish the Constitution and our democracy. Inciting insurrection and violence cannot go unanswered with a get-out-of-jail-free pass.
Be strong, my fellow citizens. Our democracy depends on it.
Eileen McDargh Evins, Dana Point
..
To the editor: I am struck by the letter writers who argued that barring Trump from the Colorado ballot conflicts with our country’s “sacrosanct” right to vote.
Unfortunately, this debate point is specious. History indicates that voting is not a right at all in this country. It certainly is not enshrined in the U.S. Constitution, with the exception that no one can be openly prevented from the ballot box on the basis of race or sex.
In the first world, America stands out as the only one with one of its two major political parties that actively engages in massive voter suppression. So one should presuppose that our vaunted advocacy about “the right to vote” is simply empty rhetoric.
Those who insist that Trump remain on the ballot need to find a more persuasive argument for allowing this insurrectionist to run for office.
Bob Teigan, Santa Susana
