Letters: Supreme Court’s decision on voting by mail is clearly political

Submit your letter to the editor via this form. Read more Letters to the Editor.

Court decision on voting by mail is clearly political

Re: “Court backs Trump order” (Page A1, Aug. 25).

In spite of courts throughout the United States concluding that fraud played no role whatsoever in the outcome of the 2020 election, the conservative majority of the U.S. Supreme Court is now buying into Donald Trump’s entirely unfounded claims of fraud.

How else to explain the court’s recent decision to (for now) allow the executive order on mail-in voting. Of course, the obvious real purpose of the order is to disenfranchise millions of registered, lawful voters who disapprove of the current administration, a result the court seems content to allow.

Chief Justice Roberts adamantly asserts there are no Republican or Democratic judges. This decision is yet one more that proves otherwise.

Kevin Cody
San Jose

Supreme Court threatens state control of elections

Re: “US Postal Service issues new rule for mail ballots, but its impact on the midterms is uncertain” (Aug. 24).

Now that the Supreme Court has approved the Post Office’s ballot-handling regulations, state and local election officials must craft a workaround to avoid them.

Other ways to distribute and collect ballots exist — drop boxes for completed ballots are common in Santa Clara County. Ballots could be distributed by private delivery contractors, such as FedEx or perhaps even precinct workers who have been screened.

The conduct of elections is assigned to the states by our Constitution. The states need to retain control and avoid voter suppression efforts by the Trump administration.

John Ryan
Santa Clara

JFK speech applies to environmental laws

Re: “How Trump is trying to crush California’s environmental policies” (Page A1, Aug. 22).

California has a stunning coastline, mostly unmarred by big, ugly oil rigs, and we can see Bay Area mountains on most days, an achievement hard won by mpg standards, smog tests and air pollution limits. Donald Trump wants to change the “California effect” in favor of Big Oil.

John F. Kennedy’s moonshot speech inspires resistance. We choose a clean energy future. We choose a clean energy future by 2045 and do the other things, not because of virtue, but because they are hard and necessary to sustain life on planet Earth as we know it, because that goal will serve to organize and motivate the best of our energies and skills, because that challenge is one that will unleash a new age of prosperity, justice and cooperation, a future we are unwilling to postpone and one which we intend to realize for the sake of our children, the natural world and for posterity.

Lisa Oliver
Milpitas

Republicans abandon fiscal responsibility

Re: “U.S. debt reaches $40T as borrowing binge persists” (Page A1, Aug. 20).

What has happened to the Republican Party?

They used to be for balanced budgets and debt reduction. However, the national debt has doubled since Donald Trump’s first term.

Shame on them.

Joseph Rizzuto
Los Gatos

Lincoln crew cleaned up act for superior’s visit

The U.S. Central Command admiral who visited the USS Abraham Lincoln assured the politicians that everything was hunky-dory.

Of course it was. The visit was probably announced beforehand, so all the sailors were likely directed to get everything shipshape. And not to speak out. This is common in the military, and doesn’t really show the facts.

I’ve been there, done that. The term “whitewash” comes to mind. Frankly, it’s a disservice to our hard-working military who often serve in less-than-ideal situations.

George Badger
Soquel

US should pull out of costly disaster in Iran

Donald Trump states that “I’m not in a hurry” to end the war. Well, that’s our money that is being spent.

Trump should be in a hurry, as the U.S. debt is accumulating and we pay for that too. Time to cut our losses and stop spending our money on this disaster.

Joe Margevicius
Palo Alto