Please refer to your editorial (May 22), "Injustice's Lack of Sanctuary."
You "found nothing surprising in the conviction of eight Sanctuary Movement activists for 16 felonies," as I found nothing surprising in your position thereon; I did, however, find myself in opposition to your view, a common occurrence.
The central issue here was, and is, the question of determining political refugee status. The defendants insisted that they were empowered to ascertain and declare such status in defiance of the law; they were simply tried for and found guilty of feloniously harboring undocumented aliens so identified. The federal judge was correct in precluding extraneous issues, as was the jury in finding them guilty of infraction of the law.
The notion that a court and jury can try the constitutionality of an odious federal law and set it aside at will seems deeply embedded in your philosophy. If the courts were empowered to make laws, we would at least have less use for Congress.