Opinion editor's note: Star Tribune Opinion publishes letters from readers online and in print each day. To contribute, click here.

•••

I wonder if the U.S. Supreme Court majority that overturned affirmative action on Thursday appreciates the irony in using the equal protection clause of the 14th Amendment as the foundation of their argument. (Despite 300 years of slavery, 100 years of Jim Crow racism, 50 years of mass incarceration, thousands of lynchings and murders, redlining to prevent access to housing, etc., etc.)

Even with the equal protection presumably provided by the 14th Amendment, systemic racism has been the real determinant of the lived experiences of African Americans in our country. Affirmative action has been and should continue to be a tiny part of the reparations this country, my country, owes to Black Americans who have been brutalized for the duration of our country's existence.

And now the six justices who voted in the majority to end affirmative action want me to believe this is because they endorse equal protection? No, I don't think they appreciate the irony.

Vic Sandler, Plymouth

•••

So the Supreme Court has decided that using race as a factor in college admissions is no longer legal. Let's hope that the same fate awaits the very unfair practice of legacy admissions. Legacy admissions give a substantial preference to those whose relatives have attended a particular college. It results in a system that gives overwhelming preference to students based on nothing more than their relationship to prior graduates.

Douglas Wobbema, Burnsville

•••

Anyone who didn't vote for Hillary Clinton in 2016 is responsible for today's Supreme Court decision on affirmative action.

Also, it's a warning for those progressives who "aren't excited" by President Joe Biden in 2024.

Jim Piga, Mendota Heights

I read with interest "Justice for the tribes: Neil Gorsuch" (Opinion Exchange, June 29), wherein I especially appreciated the statement "It should instead serve as a warning against our tendency to essentialize the justices, to carve out categories of 'conservative' and 'liberal' to fit our prejudices."

I think this tendency applies broadly to all categories of elected and appointed leaders in this nation. With or without their consent, candidates gain entry into power by becoming caricatures of themselves and their party. By the end of a campaign season filled with sound bites and invective, I must make my best guess about which individuals are most likely to show up with calm wisdom in work that seeks to uphold justice for all. Thank you, Justice Gorsuch, for consistently standing up for justice and respect for the first nations of this land.

Kathleen McDonough, Richfield

It used to be standard practice that some wildfires were allowed to burn out rather than having forest firefighters work to contain and put out the fires. That practice has been changed in some places, but not everywhere.

The standard practice needs to be changed dramatically and right now. In Minnesota and across the U.S. and Canada, this summer's forest fires have spread smoke as never before. The smoke pollution is affecting hundreds of millions of people. It not only causes "haze" so thick that some days one can't see across Minneapolis lakes, but more importantly, the particulate matter in smoke can cause both immediate and long-lasting adverse health impacts for everyone.

Unfortunately, wildfires and forest fires are not just a North American phenomenon. In recent years, there have been major wildfires in France, Italy, Spain, Turkey, Russia, Australia and elsewhere. Smoke from this summer's fires is reaching Europe and elsewhere. The upsurge in such fires is a real, tangible consequence of global climate change. And they can be expected to occur even more frequently and widely in the future, as droughts cause vegetation to dry out and become even more susceptible to fires.

So, what can we do?

In the short term, the U.S. and Canada (at a minimum) need to mobilize forest firefighters and deliver them to the areas where the forests fires are raging. Both countries should also assign military personnel and equipment to join in the battles including aircraft to deliver the firefighters and equipment as well as water and fire-suppressing chemicals.

In the longer term, the U.S., Canada and other nations need to work together to create an international forest fire-fighting service whose mission is to immediately find, target and put out forest fires and other wildfires and that will eventually expand into a global fire service. Why global? Smoke from these fires can blow all across the earth.

James Uttley, Golden Valley

•••

The three seasons in Minnesota: winter, road construction and wildfires.

Sue Kruskopf, Minneapolis

For Minneapolis to make 60% of trips car-free as transportation planners hope (front page, June 26, and "Car-free utopia will collide with reality," Opinion Exchange, June 28), we need two major things, a comprehensive public transit system and walkable neighborhoods.

To create walkable neighborhoods, there need to be zoning changes so that residents can find a grocery store, hardware store, post office, library, etc., in their neighborhood. If you can walk down to the corner to get a gallon of milk and stop at the post office on your way, most people who are able to walk will walk. If they have to travel more than a mile or two to these amenities, most will drive.

I have been lucky to live near where I worked (one mile) for more than 20 years and could walk to work. I could also walk to the local garden store, gym, movie theater and pharmacy (just over a mile). But a trip to the post office or library required more of a time and effort commitment, especially in inclement weather.

The more foot traffic we have in our neighborhoods, the more we get to know our neighbors. And the more "eyes on the street," which deter crime, the safer our neighborhoods will be. Safe and connected neighborhoods provide greater enjoyment and livability. Sixty percent of trips could absolutely be car-free. But that would require zoning changes, planning and work, not just marketing.

Michelle Lee-Reid, Minneapolis

I applaud the Star Tribune for tackling burnout, a prevalent yet pervasively misunderstood subject (Business, June 26). Unfortunately, the complexity of the topic deters those who experience it from trying to understand it. I keep the definition simple for my exhausted and overwhelmed clients — burnout is the difference between your expectations and your reality.

Perhaps you expected to be assigned a workload for one person, but then three colleagues quit and now you're doing the work of four people. Maybe you expected exciting developmental opportunities, but then found yourself stuck in the same routine day after day. Perhaps you expected to be treated with respect at work, but then found yourself in a toxic work environment. The greater the difference between your expectations and your reality, the greater the opportunity for burnout.

While the subject may be complex, the solution isn't terribly sophisticated — change your expectations or change your reality.

Leah Phifer, Minneapolis

The writer is an employee engagement consultant.