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

•••

The lawyers on the various networks are making a point that the Manhattan venue will not permit a fair trial for former President Donald Trump because of the overwhelming Democratic Party majority in the district. It seems to me they are missing the argument. I suspect most judges will want to steer away from an inquiry into the politics of potential jurors as a matter of policy. There is, nonetheless, a powerful argument to change the venue of this case. The chief prosecuting attorney, Alvin Bragg, ran for office making the promise to voters that, if elected, he would "get Trump." Bragg was elected by a substantial majority. It seems beyond question that former President Trump cannot get a fair trial in a venue populated by a large majority of residents eligible for jury duty who elected their district attorney on his promise to get Trump. The voters — potential jurors — in Manhattan are part of the scheme to use the prosecutorial power to nullify opposing political voices.

On this basis a change of venue is a basic right of Trump's. The second question remaining is whether Bragg's pre-election conduct should disqualify him and his office on ethical grounds from prosecuting the charges against Trump.

Phil Cole, Eden Prairie

•••

Much was published over the weekend in printed, televised and social media about Trump's indictment. Perhaps most notable were his chances of winning the Republican nomination over Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis, which had grown to 26 percentage points from 8 points, depending on which poll you prefer to use. However, the same poll showed Biden besting Trump 45% to 43% among registered voters.

I seriously doubt these numbers hold up. I'm no pollster, but so many of my Republican friends have grown increasingly disgusted with Trump, all the baggage that comes with him and his constant boorish and crass behavior that they tell me they'd never vote for him again. I would simply ask Trump supporters, whether identified as MAGA or just Republicans, do they want their sons or daughters to emulate Trump or fashion their behavior after him? I say this as a lifelong Republican who voted for him twice. Whether you agree with the charges brought by Alvin Bragg, and I don't, it's still going to suck a lot of energy out of what's really important to govern this country. Sen. Joe Manchin alluded to this on the Sunday morning talk shows, not to mention the deep divisiveness in our country.

On the flip side, can the U.S. take four more years of such an incredibly inept administration as President Joe Biden's? Even my Democrat friends find it difficult to defend his policies on immigration, energy, inflation and the huge debacle in Afghanistan. Add to that his senseless comments about Saudi Arabia and most recently Israel, our closest ally in the Mideast. Is it any wonder OPEC is cutting back on production again? Indeed, a recent poll among Democrat voters indicated about half prefer Biden not to run again.

America has lost so much prestige on the world stage in the last two administrations, I doubt we could take four more years of Trump or Biden again. We are so devoid of good leadership in this country it's truly pathetic. Hopefully Americans will come to this realization well before we choose our candidates for the next election.

Steve Hayden, Eden Prairie

MINING

Get needed minerals here

President Joe Biden's Minnesota visit this week focused on "investing in America" ("Biden touts investment in Minn.," April 4). This came after his recent trip to Canada to discuss sourcing the critical minerals we need for clean energy technologies, not here, but from our neighbor to the north.

Sourcing these minerals from allies ignores the vast supply of metals right here in Minnesota. Our environmental standards are among the most stringent in the world, and we're home to thousands of skilled union workers eager to responsibly extract the minerals needed for a clean energy future.

We shouldn't look beyond our borders because permitting a mine is next to impossible in the U.S. The administration should instead focus on fixing the issue rather than looking to a neighbor to fix a problem in our backyard. If they can do it in Canada, we can do it in America.

In January, the administration took a massive portion of our country's nickel, cobalt and copper resources off the table by enacting a 20-year mining ban in northeast Minnesota. It's a slap in the face to the region to see this administration go out of their way to throw taxpayer dollars at Canadian mining projects within months of the ban.

If President Biden truly aims for continued investment in our country, his administration should allow proposed mining projects in Minnesota to be fairly evaluated so we can invest in and strengthen our communities through mining within our own borders the same way the Iron Range has already been doing for 140 years.

Ryan Sistad, Duluth

The writer is executive director, Better In Our Back Yard.

CIVICS

Sorely needed, long overdue

Both the Minnesota House and Senate have wisely included the requirement for teaching civics (as well as classes on personal finance) in Minnesota's schools ("Bills address big school funding gaps," front page, March 30). Attendance in the civics classes will be a requirement for graduation. These provisions are contained in the bills delivering a significant amount of new funding for our public schools. As the conference committees resolve the differences in the two bills, three things should be kept in mind.

The present system is not working on a statewide basis. Some districts currently do a good job of teaching civics. But as poll after poll shows, most people fail to understand even the basic understanding of the role and function of our federal, state and local governments. The knowledge of the role and function of judges, prosecutors and public defenders in our judicial system is even more abysmal.
Civics courses should be developed by teachers and administrators who know students best. The courses should be prepared in consultation with the Department of Education in accordance with appropriate state standards. "Modern civics" should be an exciting and lively class dealing respectfully with current topics to keep students interested and engaged. Boring classes such as those that focus only on how a bill becomes law with charts and arrows showing the movement of a bill no longer work.
Civics courses must be taught in the higher high school grades. Grades 11 and 12 are best. These students are beginning to think about voting, military and volunteer service, and other obligations of citizenship. Most juniors and seniors are ready and eager to put their knowledge to work.

As former Supreme Court Justice Sandra Day O'Connor said about teaching civics: "You don't inherit that knowledge through the gene pool."

Tom Berg, Minneapolis

The writer is a former state legislator and U.S. Attorney.

MARCH MADNESS

Trash talking is part of the game

The Star Tribune editorial praising the advancement in women's sports shown by Sunday's NCAA tournament was ironic ("A Madness Milestone," April 4). While acknowledging the increased TV viewership and improved facilities for players, the Editorial Board stepped deep into the poo-poo (thanks, Nancy Pelosi) of racism and misogyny that followed. Angel Reese, a Black athlete, made John Cena's "you can't see me" sign, a taunt the editorial said we could have done without. Caitlin Clark, a white athlete, made the exact same taunt on March 26 during Iowa's romp over Louisville in the Elite Eight, without being tarred as a poor sport.

Which raises the question of why trash talk and, yes, taunting isn't considered appropriate in women's sports. I have yet to see anyone clutch their pearls when men engage in the same.

These women are fierce competitors whose incandescence is not diminished by smack talk, but it is diminished by racism and misogyny.

Teri Bentson, Minneapolis