Supreme Courts needs a constitutionalist
President Obama will no doubt make a nomination to the U.S. Supreme Court, as the Constitution provides. He should nominate a constitutionalist who would maintain the original intent of our founding.
However, when Justice Samuel Alito was nominated, then-Sen. Obama (who filibustered Alito) said that the Constitution calls for “meaningful advice and consent that includes an examination of a judge’s philosophy, ideology and record.” That demonstrates he supports political nominees.
So Obama will nominate an ideologue rather than a constitutionalist. The Republicans should not confirm an ideologue for the good of the country.
Premium content for only $0.99
For the most comprehensive local coverage, subscribe today.
It’s possible that Obama will try to make a recess appointment before leaving office, if the position is not filled. A recess appointment may be a good thing. The Constitution provides the appointee will serve until the end of the session for which he is appointed. That would give the country, Senate and new president a period of time to evaluate the appointee. The next president can nominate that person or a new one and, in either case, the Senate may then ratify the appointment with a suitable constitutionalist.
James Kilpatrick Jr., Wichita
Originalist on guns?
Perhaps it is not extremist to be an originalist on the U.S. Supreme Court (“Someone like Scalia,” Feb. 27 Letters to the Editor), unless the originalism is variable.
Historian Joseph Ellis reminds us that the reason for the Second Amendment was that the American populace of the time would not tolerate a standing army. Therefore, a militia was needed for emergencies, and the only way was for citizens to retain their guns. “Militia” is written into the amendment, of course.
Now we have both a standing army and militia (National Guard). So where was originalist Justice Antonin Scalia regarding the Second Amendment? Wasn’t he on the side of the guns, rather than on the side of the history, origins and letter of the amendment, when it last came up?
Harv Hiebert, North Newton
Trump and KKK
I am 83, and I never thought I’d I see a political campaign like the current one. To have a former Ku Klux Klan leader endorse a major party candidate blows my mind. Donald Trump initially didn’t reject this support. To support Trump, when a former KKK leader supports him, says something about the voter.
We need to unite our voters, not divide them. Take a second look at Trump.
Jerry Haney, Wichita
Letters to the Editor
Include your full name, home address and phone number for verification purposes. All letters are edited for clarity and length; 200 words or fewer are best. Letters may be published in any format and become the property of The Eagle.
Mail: Letters to the Editor, The Wichita Eagle, 825 E. Douglas, Wichita, KS 67202
For more information, contact
Phillip Brownlee at 316-268-6262, firstname.lastname@example.org.