Meese’s Challenges of Supreme Court Rulings

Prof. Yale Kamisar of the University of Michigan (Editorial Pages, Sept. 3) could not have been more accurate in his assessment of the recent public pronouncements of Atty. Gen. Meese. Kamisar properly notes that the attorney general may place himself anywhere along the political spectrum and is even entitled to advocate fundamental changes in well established constitutional law.

I would venture to say that if more people were aware of the radical and frankly dangerous opinions of our attorney general, they would become more critical of and invest less confidence in the Administration under which this attorney general serves.

But as Kamisar implies, the real embarrassment for this Administration is the fact that Meese is so deficient in his understanding of basic constitutional law. There is just cause for concern whenever someone in the position of Meese questions generally accepted Supreme Court decisions regarding police interrogation, right to counsel and the application of the 14th Amendment to the individual states. But one cannot help but be alarmed when such a public official attempts to sway public opinion by misrepresenting the state of the law.

One wonders if the members of the Senate who confirmed Meese are now beginning to have second thoughts. The attorney general’s recent public statements clearly indicate that he should be removed from the important office he presently occupies.

GARY N. STERN

Los Angeles