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

•••

It is painful to watch the current Supreme Court majority destroy one of the greatest concepts created by our country's founders. As conservative members of the court decry questions of the court's legitimacy, they continue to take actions showing that there is more than a crisis — it has become illegitimate already. In the latest move, conservatives issued an unsigned opinion ordering that a policy of the executive branch, Title 42, remain in place despite being nonsensical in content and devoid of reason ("Justices keep asylum limits," Dec. 28). This action was so extreme, even Justice Neil Gorsuch protested, stating that this was nothing less than Republican policymaking by the judiciary, outside of the bounds of the court's power and purview. This was not an interpretation of the law by a neutral umpire but the establishment of an administrative policy of the executive branch by the judicial branch — a raw exercise of power because they had the votes.

The Supreme Court is called the least dangerous branch because it relies solely on respect and goodwill to enforce its dictates. This, it has clearly lost. The court is undeserving of the respect that would prevent its expansion and reconstitution at the earliest opportunity. At the very least, the musings of the current majority should be met with doubt and skepticism, and ultimately a paraphrase of the words of Andrew Jackson: They have issued their opinion, now let them enforce it.

Kelly Dahl, Linden Grove Township, Minn.

I applaud the editorial staff for their comments in "A needed safeguard on future elections" (Dec. 29). The act specifically mandates obvious and previously unquestioned election guardrails for lawful, ethical and moral political behavior in our democracy. Despite this mandate, there will be no pause in the will or actions of the enemies of democracy to assault elections in smaller and more pernicious measure. Politicians are currently advocating to erect all manner of barriers to voter participation under a vague and unsupported allegation that our elections are somehow insecure. Allegations are not evidence, and any politician advocating for restrictive action on voting access prior to providing actual evidence of any meaningful corruption occurring should be voted out of office at the next available opportunity.

Peter Rainville, Minneapolis

Noted author and environmentalist Edward Abbey is often quoted as saying, "Growth for the sake of growth is the ideology of the cancer cell." Before asserting that continued population growth is necessary, we should look at matters more holistically and try to understand the consequences of growth. We should try to answer the question of how many humans can live sustainably on Earth, and we should seek to live in greater harmony with the rest of creation. The Earth is finite, and we must live within its limits. The existence and significance of these limits were the conclusions of a 1972 report by acclaimed scientists Donella (deceased in 2001) and Dennis Meadows and co-authors commissioned by the Club of Rome (see "The Limits to Growth" and "Beyond the Limits"). Initially criticized, their analyses have stood up over time. The Meadowses have a Minnesota connection, graduating from Carleton College in the 1960s.

Gregory Pratt, Minneapolis

•••

The Hilton Hotel in Minneapolis will soon be available at auction. The state of Minnesota should consider buying it and turning it into ground zero for housing citizens who currently lack it.

With the coldest major metropolitan area in the nation, Minnesota ought to declare an emergency about people experiencing homelessness. The state, rather than individual cities, should take charge for several reasons: Minnesota has a significant budget surplus, the team of Gov. Tim Walz and Lt. Gov. Peggy Flanagan has led Minnesota with a steady hand, especially during the difficult times of the pandemic, and the electorate has given the DFL the power to govern for at least the next two years. Devoting significant resources to this problem involves tremendous risk, but the state must be willing to take risks at this time. We are already witnessing, and people are experiencing, what happens when lack of action and leadership has been the rule. Give it a go, Gov. Walz. Consider naming Lt. Gov. Flanagan to head up an emergency that you declare. The time to act for our fellow citizens experiencing homelessness is now.

A recent article described the efforts of local Jewish community organizations, such as the Jewish Community Relations Council of Minnesota and the Dakotas and Jewish Community Action, to educate and push back against rising antisemitism in the United States ("With hate on rise, Minnesotans push back," Dec. 21). Similar to almost any article on American Jews or antisemitism, there is a reflexive rejoinder in the comments from indignant Minnesotans: "What about Israel/Palestine?!"

Setting aside that geopolitical conundrum, I have several questions for you all: Why do you immediately link all Minnesota or American Jews to Israel? Why do you flatten us by implying that we are all responsible for a sovereign state, and that we are all in agreement (ha!) about another country's policies? Further, do you do this with other ethnic or religious groups in America, many of which have lived here as citizens for generations? Do you call out Americans of Chinese descent for China's policies? Russians? Descendants of Arab/Muslim theocracies that chased their Jewish populations out of "their lands" a long time ago, and that currently restrict women's rights to live as what Americans would consider full citizens? How about Americans? Do you support violence against random Americans because of human rights abuses in our criminal justice system? Obviously, this is absurd, except, it seems, when it comes to American Jews.

The Israel/Palestinian question is complicated and requires thoughtful conversation. To use it as an excuse to dismiss violent words and actions against American Jews is being complicit in the racism and bigotry you probably claim to despise, in reference to other minority groups. It's also intellectually lazy.

Finally, if you're reading this, you are probably living on Indigenous land. So, maybe check for hypocrisy, too.