Readers Write (March 29): Air travel, the Trump administration on Russia and climate change, cancellation of New Prague school play, vocational training, immigration and rights

The March 28 Business section article about Delta's boarding changes, which went so far as to use the term "gate lice," ignores the basic problem: that airlines do not enforce their own carry-on rules. If you watch enough of the loading circuses at airports, you can add your observations to the many reasons not to fly. You will see: (1) people rolling stacked luggage onto the plane, obviously unworried about any rules, (2) people filling up overhead bins many rows away from their seat, (3) people hoisting their jackets, hats, etc., to the overheads, taking up as much room as possible, and (4) many other violations of etiquette and rules.

People are gate lice because if they are one of the last on, there will be no space to stow their luggage, through no fault of their own. To start to repair this mess, the airlines need a rule that passengers are allowed to put one article overhead. If it does not fit in the direction it is supposed to fit, it will need to come down and be checked. Heaven knows, there are attendants standing there watching people abuse their privileges. The attendants should not be afraid to confront these people. If somebody is rude and obnoxious enough, they should be escorted off the plane, offered a full refund and sent on their way.

Respectable news outlets report that White House lawyers have sought to suppress public testimony by former Department of Justice head Sally Yates on the Trump-Russia ties. This is worse that Watergate. For what valid reason would Trump resist testimony from an expert whose "privilege" was limited and waived, whom Trump fired over an immigration ban later found unconstitutional, and who has material knowledge of the events?

Devin Nunes, head of the House Intelligence Committee, is proving to be a White House shill; Congress needs an independent committee on campaign collusion with indisputable Russian efforts to tilt our election in favor of Trump. Whether or not the election would have gone this way anyhow (given the popular vote, that seems unlikely), any collusion in the attempt is somewhere between a federal crime and outright treason. Federal criminals, as in Nixon's day, go to prison.

Without such an independent inquiry — without checks, balances and, above all, accountability — we are little more than a banana republic. The world knows it, and we will all suffer as a result in civil liberties, economically, and in reputation. The damage already is incalculable.

• • •

So, President Trump signed a sweeping executive order Tuesday at the Environmental Protection Agency to curb the federal government's enforcement of climate regulations. Take a deep breath, Americans! The question is: How long can you hold that breath?

The article about the former site of Minneapolis' Vocational High School ("Century Plaza could be demolished after sale," March 26) speaks volumes about the unfortunate decline of vocational education in our public schools. Our society will always need workers with vocational training — people to fix our cars, electricians, painters, plumbers, roofers, mechanics, construction workers. We will do well to keep this in mind as we raise our children and work with our educational systems to value and keep this kind of training available.

A March 26 letter writer states: "Someone needs a refresher in high-school government class. 'Everyone' doesn't apply to the rights guaranteed by the language of the U.S. Constitution. Those inalienable rights are reserved for lawful citizens of the United States of America."

Yes, clearly someone needs a refresher class; unfortunately for the letter writer, it appears to be him. He seems to think that people are criminals even if they've not been convicted (they're not!); that criminals don't have rights (they do!), and that the Constitution doesn't apply to everyone in the U.S. (it does!).

Would it be OK to deny noncitizens the right to trial? Counsel? OK to use torture and other cruel punishments? Legitimate to confiscate their property without trial? Can they be owned as slaves, since they don't have constitutionally protected rights?

Of course not. Here's a very good column by Glenn Greenwald that lays it out: http://bit.ly/2o3LlYF

"The rights of the petitioners, as affected by the proceedings of which they complain, are not less because they are aliens and subjects of the Emperor of China. … The Fourteenth Amendment to the Constitution is not confined to the protection of citizens. It says: 'Nor shall any state deprive any person of life, liberty, or property without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.' These provisions are universal in their application to all persons within the territorial jurisdiction, without regard to any differences of race, of color, or of nationality, and the equal protection of the laws is a pledge of the protection of equal laws. … The questions we have to consider and decide in these cases, therefore, are to be treated as involving the rights of every citizen of the United States equally with those of the strangers and aliens who now invoke the jurisdiction of the court."

As a vet myself, I thank the letter writer for his service. However, he should spend some time getting familiar with that document to which he swore his oath.