LETTERS
Contrasting views on Scalia

---

A fellow alumnus was disappointed that you published a piece about Justice Scalia without excoriating him for his support of democracy and the rule of law ("Letters," June/02); I am pleased to see, at least once in a while, a report on a government figure that is not tendentious and is willing, in the tradition of the University, to report respectfully on a viewpoint with which some may disagree. The notion that the U.S. Constitution does not forbid bad laws-if it did, it could be much shorter, if more ambiguous-is actually not an extremist position, nor is it antithetical to anything I learned at the University; indeed, shutting off legislative debate by the ukase of a small, unelected elite is antithetical to the spirit of free inquiry that the University promotes. I'm glad Justice Scalia picked up these values.

Dean Jens, AB'96
Chicago

---

I am appalled at the arguments used by Justice Scalia to support his view that the death penalty is morally acceptable. I consider his bible-quoting justifications to be primitive atavistic nonsense, and feel truly thankful to be living in a society that outlawed state-sponsored murder in 1957.

Rupert J Wood, SM'68
Wellington, New Zealand

---