In defense of editorials

Mr. Doerflinger last week accused the editor of this paper of “outrage and personal insults against some (Supreme Court) justices” (“More light, less heat on court,” letter, May 8). I looked back and could not find examples that would justify his accusations. Yes, the editor has found fault with the court, for good reason. Certain justices appear to have been influenced by gifts and associations. The taint of corruption has stained the image of the current court. Add to that the fact that, while president, Donald Trump appointed three of the justices, who seem to favor his conservative views in their decisions, and you have what seems to be a biased court.

Mr. Doerflinger closes by accusing the editor of being “ill-informed, generating more heat than light at a time in our history when more of the former is scarcely needed.” A troublemaker, in other words, or, rather, one who does not conform to Mr. Doerflinger’s beliefs.

I couldn’t agree less. Even more light needs to be cast on the gifts and lobbying that seem to influence the conservative majority of the court and they deserve the heat they get.

Jai Boreen

La Conner