Readers Write: James Comey indictment, stereotypes, human rights, Target, the Epstein files

Opinion editor’s note: Strib Voices publishes letters from readers online and in print each day. To contribute, click here.

•••

Former FBI director James B. Comey, the target of a presidential vendetta, was not in fact indicted by a grand jury (“Attorneys in Comey case are grilled,” Nov. 20). U.S. Attorney Lindsey Halligan failed to present the written indictment to the grand jury for its review and approval. She presented the indictment to the foreman for signature. He signed it.

This is no minor mistake. The Fifth Amendment requires that at least 12 grand jurors approve the written indictment before the foreperson signs it. The leading case, even today, is Gaither v. United States (1969).

My law firm (Williams & Connolly) was appointed counsel in Gaither. In ruling in our client’s favor, the U.S. Court of Appeals showed that, going back to the earliest reported case (1809), an indictment required actual approval by at least 12 grand jurors, not just the foreperson. The U.S. Attorney’s Office in the District of Columbia had deviated from required constitutional practice. The court wrote: “We conclude then that ... the grand jury as a body [must] pass on the actual terms of an indictment.”

Thirty-five years later, I was called to serve on a homicide grand jury in the District of Columbia. The assistant U.S. attorney stated that the whole grand jury would review the final words of all indictments. She specifically noted that this was required by the Gaither decision.

So, it is not enough to say that the new U.S. attorney in the Eastern District of Virginia made a “rookie error.” It is incumbent upon all attorneys to understand and respect basic constitutional rights. This did not happen in the Comey case.

The writer is a retired partner at Williams & Connolly LLP.

As a Somali and a social worker, I am deeply concerned about the recent public comments by Minneapolis Police Chief Brian O’Hara referring to “groups of East African kids” involved in youth crime. These remarks have had a harmful impact on the Somali community. Even if they were intended to describe specific incidents, the language used creates broad and negative associations between Somalis and criminal activity. Because “East African” is commonly understood to refer to Somalis in the Twin Cities, such statements reinforce stereotypes that already burden the community.

This framing strengthens existing racial biases and risks fueling Islamophobia by portraying Somalis as outsiders or threats rather than valued members of Minneapolis. At a time when Islamophobia is rising in Minnesota, these kinds of generalizations can heighten fear, suspicion and unfair judgment toward Somalis who are simply going to school, spending time with friends or moving through public spaces.

The consequences also affect how Somalis interact with law enforcement. When they are collectively described in the context of crime, officers may consciously or not scrutinize Somali people more closely. This increases the risk of profiling, unnecessary stops and tense encounters that further erode trust between police and the community. Over time, these patterns can discourage Somali families from reporting crimes, participating in prevention efforts or engaging positively with law enforcement.

Too often, when a Somali individual makes a mistake or is involved in a crime, the focus shifts to their ethnicity rather than the individual’s actions. This is a common experience for many communities of color, an experience our white counterparts are not subjected to.

Nasteha Mohamed, Minnetonka

On Nov. 7, the U.S. was scheduled to meet with the United Nations Human Rights Council for its Universal Periodic Review (UPR). The UPR is conducted every four years with each member country of the U.N. to analyze that country’s progress in human rights for its residents. The U.S. didn’t show up, the only country to ever do this, and did not submit its report due last August.

The Trump administration routinely violates human rights: extrajudicial killings; unlawful deportations; escalating violence against women, girls and gender-expansive people; discrimination against people of color; the widening economic chasm between the top 1% and everyone else; no health care for millions; and more.

Although the U.S. didn’t submit a report, we did. Civil society organizations can write a “shadow report,” documenting concerns that the country omitted or presented inaccurately. World Without Genocide organized a coalition of organizations. We focused on the right to bodily autonomy, the ability to make decisions about one’s own body that include health choices, safety from violence and control over one’s own reproduction. As a cornerstone of gender equality and a fundamental human right, bodily autonomy is safeguarded by international treaties, laws and global human rights mechanisms. U.S. policies have eroded these protections.

Read the report: worldwithoutgenocide.org/shadowreport.

Ellen Kennedy, Minneapolis

The writer is executive director of World Without Genocide.

How tone-deaf can the leadership of Target be? As its sales continue to plummet, leadership blames job insecurity and general economic unease and now is suggesting a possible third cause: messy aisles and dull merchandise (“As holidays loom, Target steps up plans,” Nov. 20). Nothing like ignoring the elephant in the room. Target sales and customer loyalty flew out the window when it decided to side with the MAGA agenda at the expense of social and cultural diversity. Decisions to do away with DEI (diversity, equity and inclusion) hiring and refusing to stock items that were accepting of the LGBT community because they offended some of their noninclusive shoppers have kept me and other former customers away.

While I’m sure the current economic climate may have impacted Target’s bottom line some, I’d be willing to bet it’s not as much as the pain they are feeling from the loss of former customers like me. Target claims the economic turndown as the cause of flagging sales, but it’s been my experience that when money is tight, budget-friendly stores like Target often do better. I’m not sure how Walmart is currently faring as I’ve never shopped there, but I can tell you that my local Costco store appears to be doing very well indeed (I couldn’t find a parking spot recently on a weekday afternoon). The reason I no longer shop at Target is the same reason I no longer buy on Amazon — social politics.

Michael Farnsworth, Minneapolis

Do dogs bark?

More seriously, he won’t need to. The agreement with the House, signed by Speaker Mike Johnson and various other toadies, even including Democrats, is that parts will be “redacted.” Which means, in what is released publicly, large sections will be blacked out. Guess what will be in those sections!

It has been pointed out that Trump could unilaterally release the Epstein files. He’s not doing that, in my view, because he wants Johnson and colleagues to take the blame for the censored versions.

John Connett, Roseville

•••

Not just every Minnesota Republican but every Republican congressperson (save one) just voted to release those files.

What a turnaround! For weeks and months, Republicans in lock-step refused to allow the matter even to come to the House floor for a vote. But as soon as President Donald Trump announced it was time to rip the Band-Aid off the Epstein question, every single Republican (save one) individually changed their formerly made-up minds.

I wish my dog were that obedient.