Advertisement

Letters to the Editor: There’s no reversing the harm that will come from Supreme Court’s unexplained decisions

The Supreme Court building under a stormy sky, with an American flag flying in front
The Supreme Court building, pictured on June 30, 2024.
(Susan Walsh / Associated Press)

To the editor: Contributing writer Erwin Chemerinksy’s excellent piece will hopefully wake more people up to the fact that we not only have a rogue Supreme Court, but “the king” now has his personal enforcer (“The Supreme Court owes you an explanation,” July 23).

The Supreme Court majority’s silent, unsigned decisions ignored and made a mockery of the “irreparable harm” the deported plaintiffs and fired employees will suffer. That harm was expressly cited by the district courts in granting their preliminary injunctions. The Supreme Court majority irrationally, in effect, concluded that it is the U.S. government that will suffer “irreparable harm” by granting the plaintiffs a trial on the merits before taking such extreme action. You can’t make this stuff up.

Appeals in these two cases are very likely fools’ errands, even if they are successful on their merits in the trial courts. The wrongfully deported immigrants may be killed, imprisoned or unfindable before they can even get their due process rights.

Advertisement

The fired federal employees cannot have their previous lives restored in any meaningful way. Even back salaries will not make up for the many financial, emotional and relationship losses that will have been suffered as a result of losing their jobs.

How very cruel of the six conservative Supreme Court justices. How do they sleep at night?

Les Weinstein, Los Angeles

This writer is an attorney and former U.S. Department of Justice trial and appellate lawyer.

..

To the editor: Chemerinksy’s assertion that “because I said so” isn’t justification for the Supreme Court’s recent unexplained rulings rings true. It brings to mind former Justice Robert Jackson’s observation that “We are not final because we are infallible, but we are infallible only because we are final.”

Advertisement

Now that the majority of the Supreme Court seemingly no longer rules on the merits of a case, but rather on their loyalty to President Trump, Jackson’s opinion is scarier than ever.

Spencer Grant, Laguna Niguel

Advertisement
Advertisement