To the Editor:
Re “I’m Unconvinced Franken Should Quit” (Op-Ed, Dec. 12):
I wholeheartedly agree with Prof. Zephyr Teachout’s view of zero tolerance for sexual harassment, coupled with due process and proportionality. I am also of the opinion that the group of Democratic senators who called for Al Franken’s resignation are using the Senate as a political arena.
As I write this letter, I don’t know who will win the Alabama Senate race. But if the people of Alabama elect Roy Moore, then the Democrats can claim to be the party of higher moral ground as they initiate an ethics investigation. Why should Mr. Franken be denied the same procedural right that may be given to Mr. Moore?
BETH HERMELIN, BROOKLYN
To the Editor:
Zephyr Teachout is absolutely correct that zero tolerance should go hand and hand with due process and proportionality when public officials are accused of sexual assault or sexual harassment. However, I part company with her observation that the firings by private companies are their “choices” and need not be subject to the same considerations.
The consequences for the Charlies Roses and Matt Lauers of the world (and individuals of lesser renown) are the same as for lawmakers: loss of reputation, loss of livelihood and humiliation. Any person — public official or private citizen — facing such penalties ought to be entitled to a fair process before being punished.
ALAN MEISEL, PITTSBURGH
The writer is a professor of law at the University of Pittsburgh.
To the Editor:
Re “The Great Al Franken Moment” (column, Dec. 9):
Gail Collins asks, “Ten years from now, do you think we’ll be talking about where we were when Al Franken announced he was resigning from the Senate?” I will, because it was the same moment I left the Democratic Party.
Continue reading the main storyJENNIFER CABRAL
PROVINCETOWN, MASS.
To the Editor:
Re “Several Trump Accusers Renew Allegations as Attitudes on Harassment Shift” (news article, Dec. 12):
I’d like to thank Senator Kirsten Gillibrand for calling on President Trump to resign. More important, as he certainly won’t resign, will be for the Senate to hold him accountable for the multiple charges against him of sexual harassment and abuse.
I’d also like to know why Senator Chuck Schumer, the minority leader, hasn’t yet endorsed this position. It is unconscionable for men to stand aside and treat this as a “women’s issue” that only female members of Congress can address. Sexual offenses are a human rights issue, and men should take their share of responsibility.
Finally, I strongly urge both senators and their colleagues to object vehemently to the notion that because the presidential election is over, this issue is now moot. An election is not a litigation of the charges.
DONNA LAMB, NEW YORK
To the Editor:
Republican defenders of President Trump, including his press secretary, have regularly resorted to the claim that since voters knew of his sexual misconduct before voting and elected him anyway, the issue has been adjudicated by voters in Mr. Trump’s favor.
The fallacy in these justifications is that Mr. Trump was not elected by the majority of voters but rather by the Electoral College. Almost three million more people voted against Mr. Trump, and thus a majority of voters and public opinion rejected Mr. Trump and his misconduct. Therefore, this defense is not valid.
ROBERT D. RIFKIN, ST. LOUIS
Continue reading the main story