To the editor: This column is essentially correct (“The ‘greatest threat’ to rule of law in decades. That’s how lawyers, judges see Trump,” May 24). Mark Z. Barabak trenchantly describes President Trump’s latest threat to the rule of law. The “anti-weaponization fund” would divert $1.776 billion drawn from the judgment fund, which Congress authorized decades ago for the entirely different purpose of compensating victims whom the Justice Department actually harmed, and instead likely reward miscreants (and other Trump allies), such as the mob that attacked the Capitol on Jan. 6, 2021, and assaulted law enforcement officers.
Barabak’s prescription for this abuse is the voting booth during the November midterm elections. However, the House and the Senate must expeditiously pass bills that would eliminate the fund before the DOJ wastes taxpayer dollars on this corrupt scheme.
Carl Tobias, Richmond, Va.
This writer is a law professor at the University of Richmond.
..
To the editor: It’s a negative version of the “trickle-down” theory.
At the top is a president who believes that he is the sole arbitrator of right and wrong. Laws don’t exist for him.
At the bottom is the increasing number of drivers who think that a red light is merely an avoidable nuisance.
In between are the enablers. The members of Congress who ignore the constitutional mandates setting their duties and obligations. The Supreme Court which, by many of its rulings, seems to act as the president’s “fixer” rather than the dispenser of legal wisdom. The one-percenters who treat the rest of us as disposable.
At the ballot box we, the 99%, must stop the “rule of the jungle” from eradicating hope for a civilized society.
Betty Rome, Culver City
