Dear Editor,

After reading Nat Hentoff’s article (“Has our attorney general ever read the Constitution” Nov. 19), I am left wondering if Mr. Hentoff himself has ever read the Constitution. He notes that people are detained without being charged with a crime, or being denied the right of habeas corpus. However, the Constitution most clearly states in Article I, Sec. 9 that this right may be suspended “when the public safety may require it.” That is, I believe, what Mr. Hentoff and others in agreement with him fail to understand. As a nation we have been attacked, and our present situation certainly rises to the level of being a national emergency. With increasing reports of anthrax and the possibility of other terrorist attacks, we must find those terrorists who operate within the United States and guarantee the safety of our citizens.

We live in extraordinary times, but situations have arisen in the past when the US has faced both internal and external threats. At these regrettable times, civil liberties become tightened, and now is no exception; rights are never absolute and without limitation. As Mr. Hentoff himself suggests, one does not need a law degree to understand the essence of American justice, but clearly a difference exists between legal protections during peace than in wartime. Perhaps Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes said it most accurately when delivering the High Court’s opinion in Schneck v. United States (a free-speech case involving organized opposition to America’s role in World War I): “When a nation is at war many things that might be said in time of peace…will not be protected by any constitutional right.” To me, Justice Holmes makes a more convincing argument than the lessons, which as Mr. Hentoff points out, are seen weekly on “Law & Order” and “NYPD Blue” about lawyer-client confidentiality.

On a final note, the purpose of our constitutional rights is of course to provide a check on the government’s power over citizens. Indeed, the Fourth Amendment intends to keep us “secure in [our] persons, houses, papers, and effects” from unreasonable government searches. But tell me what good is this constitutional right, or any right for that matter, under the context of terrorism in which we live today? I wonder how secure the postal workers, airline crews, and all Americans whose lives have been touched by the evil hand of terrorism are in their persons, houses, and effects.

Eric Egger

Abbottstown, PA