Opinion editor's note: Star Tribune Opinion publishes letters from readers online and in print each day. To contribute, click here.

•••

Wherever you go, it is said, there you are. But does your uterus still, in the eyes of the law, remain behind in the place you left?

In the latest example of Republican politicians racing to out-extreme each other, many are calling for the prosecution of people who leave states like Texas in order to obtain safe, legal abortions. This raises questions I haven't seen fully explored in my daily paper or on the nightly news.

Several years ago, I visited my brother at his condo in Colorado. We smoked a joint or two. Upon my return to Minnesota, I wasn't prosecuted for doing something that was illegal in my home state. Neither was my brother when he went back home to Florida.

Let's say a New York resident spends a few weeks in Texas this fall fall (after New York's recently passed gun law takes effect). While there, she buys a gun and brings it to a church service — you know, in case of another Texas church shooting. When she returns home, should she be prosecuted for breaking the laws of New York while she was in Texas? I've never heard of something like that happening. Have you?

It appears we're fast approaching the point where a woman's body is deemed the property of the state in which she resides — regardless of where she may travel. And the current U.S. Supreme Court, which has become a branch of the Republican Party, will let it happen. The only solution I can see is mass civil disobedience to interrupt this looming perversion of "justice" in Republican-controlled states.

•••

The efforts by some states to prevent people from crossing state lines to have an abortion are similar in tone and substance to the Fugitive Slave Acts. In each case, the goal of the law is to assert bodily control over a person and prevent their free movement.

Under the Fugitive Slave Acts, private citizens, slave catchers, were empowered to seize individuals in free states and demand assistance from the federal government in doing so. Today, the mechanism is slightly different but the use, by private citizens, of the courts, to enforce the law is eerily similar. That these laws are likely to be used against people of color seeking abortions makes them even more damaging.

Enforcement of the Fugitive Slave Acts caused considerable controversy, riots and deaths, leading to Northern states passing "Personal Liberty Laws" to resist. In 1857, the Supreme Court inserted itself in the debate, attempting to resolve the issue nationally with the Dred Scott decision. That, of course, did not resolve the issue.

I certainly hope that both legislators and the courts take note that in the history of ideas, freedom won.

•••

Republican Rep. Jim Jordan, from Ohio, doesn't possess a fraction of the courage demonstrated by the 10-year-old rape victim from his state who had to travel to Indiana to receive an abortion.

Not only did his state forbid her by Ohio law from getting necessary medical treatment that would potentially preserve her health and life, but then Rep. Jordan noisily tweeted his belief that her story was fabricated. He didn't believe this little rape victim until her rapist was behind bars. When his beliefs about her were exposed, he quickly deleted his tweets in cowardice and issued no apology to this young child.

Rep. Jordan is 58 years old and as he continues to age, he will invariably encounter emergency health situations that threaten his health or life. When he has that big heart attack or stroke or whatever he may have, you can bet he'll seek and receive the treatment necessary to preserve his health and life, and right in his own state.

How pathetic that a 58-year-old man and many others like him would expect the best treatment for themselves but deny it to a 10-year-old victim of rape.

Regarding the article describing the early Thursday morning police-involved shooting in south Minneapolis, I read with increasing impatience to discover the context of the shooting ("Man killed in police standoff," July 15). Only in the 14th paragraph does the article lay out the circumstances of the tragic event, circumstances that would seem to indicate that the police response was justified, thoughtful and prudent. However, that description was preceded by angry criticism and a list of other police-involved shootings in recent history.

At a time when any police shooting is fraught, it's critical that you lead with facts, allowing citizens to make a considered judgment. Please save the reactions of citizens and the recounting of the history of police violence for later in the article. Your presentation seems prejudicial.

Dave McIntosh, Minneapolis

The Star Tribune's July 10 article "Boards at universities aren't listening, critics say" asserts that the Minnesota State board is "asleep at the wheel" for, in part, authorizing a tuition increase. Why didn't the story include the perspective of faculty and staff bargaining units, campus student senates and the association of university students? Why didn't the story provide readers a fair account of the full consultation process Minnesota State colleges, universities and the board actively engage in to determine the prudence of raising tuition?

Colleges and universities are subject to the same inflationary pressures that all of us face. Some cost increases are out of our control, such as labor agreements negotiated by the state. Faced with a funding gap of $25 million, we asked the Legislature — awash in a $9 billion budget surplus — to fund the gap, which would allow tuition to hold steady. But the Legislature failed to offer students any relief.

The Board of Trustees of the Minnesota State Colleges and Universities is not "asleep at the wheel," and takes its fiduciary responsibility and accountability to all its stakeholders very seriously.

This letter is submitted by Roger Moe and George Soule, chair and vice chair, respectively, of the Board of Trustees of the Minnesota State Colleges and Universities.

Regarding "Gawking in awe at the universe, together" (Opinion Exchange, July 14): When I was a high school freshman in 1957, I was excited to talk about what I continue to believe:

"We live in an unlimited universe that exists in unlimited time." You have no idea how excited I am that the James Webb Space Telescope is revealing new wonders of the cosmos.