Letters

Reparations are unconstitutional

One would think a first-year law student like Dan Hernacki would
know the meaning of the term “ex post facto” and its
bearing upon law and politics in the United States. But, in his
letter (“Reparations
suits not baseless,” Viewpoint, April 3), he seems to
have forgotten this very important constitutional principle.
Additionally, he goes on his letter to attack Bruin columnist Ben
Shapiro using shaky comparisons and fallacious logic.

Literally, “ex post facto” means “after the
fact” in Latin. Applied to the field of law, it means that
one cannot be punished for an action which at the time committed
was not illegal. The Constitution actually offers a guarantee
against this, decreeing that the national government cannot pass ex
post facto laws.

The complaint the reparations suit makes is one that asks for an
ex post facto judgment. CSX, FleetBoston, and Aetna were acting
completely within their legal limits at the time when they
participated in the slave trade. To punish them now for actions
that were made legal after the fact is a clear violation of the
Constitution. Perhaps Hernacki slept through that lecture.

In addition to this, Hernacki seems to be grasping at straws
with his Hitler analogy. The situation was completely different.
The Nazis were punished on an international level for crimes
against humanity that they were unwilling to halt, and were even
proud to commit. The United States government voluntarily halted
the slave trade, and this was an action which almost cost the
ultimate solidarity of the Union. At its base, Hitler’s
crimes were carried out with the endorsement of the national
government, but slavery in the United States was essentially the
action of individuals or groups of individuals.

In conclusion, Hernacki may be correct when he argues that
slavery is the basis and cause of the problems in the black
community. But isn’t throwing money at them simply pandering
to their basest desires? If Hernacki is truly the bleeding-heart
liberal he’d like to portray himself to be, shouldn’t
he be in favor of government programs and the like, instead of
trying to correct discrimination through monetary means?

Gail Mootry Second-year Political science

Bruin wrongly deters students

I’d like to offer my congratulations to the Daily Bruin on
its propaganda machine for successfully deterring students from a
sensible option when they voted down the Newspaper Readership
Program Tuesday (“Approving
proposal hurts student media,” Viewpoint, April 2).

The NRP offered a variety of different opportunities and
advantages. USA Today, I’ll grant, is quite worthless. It is
merely the equivalent of the Daily Bruin on a national
level. However, publications like the Wall Street Journal
offer a real world look into the nation’s economic status as
well as a more centered/conservative view on the world that the
ultra-liberal Bruin could not tolerate, lest they wake some of
the Bruin’s mindless left-wing readership.

Some of us may have stocks or other economic information
that we want to read about that ““ oh, my ““
doesn’t pertain to UCLA. Shocking, isn’t it? Buying a
subscription to a paper such as the WSJ is very expensive if
it is not subsidized. And I don’t want to sit here and
read through the mindless drivel that you people come up with
at The Bruin. The mere fact that the editorial attacked the
readership program as being
“mainstream”Â on Tuesday shows the extremist
nature of your staff. There was a time when journalists had
some dignity and integrity that commanded respect. You have
none.

That program would have cost us pennies on the day. There
is never any harm in letting other opinions be heard. What is
The Bruin afraid of?

I hope you know that you have slit your own
throats. Conservatives may have been willing to sit by on the
sidelines reading the WSJ, but now without that there will be an
even stronger movement toward a second paper here at UCLA; a more
fair and balanced paper. I guarantee it. You can only drive
people into the wall for so long. It’s time conservatives
started being given the rights of every other UCLA student. We
have just as much to contribute, if not more. Where is the
representation for this minority, you worthless tabloid rag?

Brent Barrett First-year Aerospace
engineering