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

•••

The words "Nazi" and "fascist" have been appearing quite frequently. Until now, I couldn't see where such words had merit. This changed a few days ago with the decision of the Colorado Supreme Court to withhold Donald Trump's name from the state's primary ballot ("Colorado bars Trump from ballot," front page, Dec. 20). This action to limit my constitutional right to vote for the candidate of my choice is what happens in a real "Nazi" or "fascist" country. I don't want judges deciding for whom or what I can or cannot vote on. I don't care who the person is, his/her name should be allowed on the ballot for me decide their merit. On this issue I applaud the Minnesota Supreme Court for recently getting it right. The Colorado court did not.

Richard Burton, Ramsey

•••

Thank you, Colorado Supreme Court.

Unfortunately, the Minnesota Supreme Court punted on this issue by determining that it was not "ripe" — noting that political parties have the right to nominate a person who ultimately may be disqualified from office. But the opinion's effect is to deprive Minnesota Republican primary voters of information crucial to their nomination decision.

Jon Steinberg, Minneapolis

•••

We owe a debt of gratitude to the four justices of the Colorado Supreme Court who gathered the courage to rule that the former president is disqualified from inclusion on that state's primary presidential ballot by virtue of the provision of Article 3 of the 14th Amendment to the Constitution. Their judicial logic overturned the finding of a district judge who had determined that the former president had incited an insurrection for his role in the attack on the Capitol on Jan. 6, 2021, but asserted that the provisions of the 14th Amendment did not apply to the office of president. The specific constitutional language prohibits insurrectionists from holding "any office, civil or military, under the United States, or under any state." The Colorado jurists concluded that the position of president did, in fact, constitute an office.

Those who support the former president, and who object to the Colorado decision, argue that such a judicial ruling effectively removes the power of the people's votes to decide an election. It is painfully obvious to the astute observer that the former president did everything in his power, and then some, to deny, overturn and discredit those votes in 2020. The hypocrisy is palpable. Sadly, the case will now go before the Supreme Court of the United States, a body whose integrity has come under question since the appointments made by the previous administration. It is a frightening equation, but one with a simple solution: Vote!

Stephen A. Miltich, St. Bonifacius

R.M. Hall, Burnsville

•••

Many congratulations and a great big thank-you to the State Emblems Redesign Commission for presenting us two fantastic new state emblems.

Some have been critical of the flag, but it does capture succinctly the character of Minnesota with our venerable "star of the north," subtly suggested geographical shape and our many waters.

So maybe your 5-year-old could have drawn this. A good flag design should be reproducible by a child. But it's doubtful they could originate such a design.

So maybe it doesn't have green to represent our forests and land. There are forests and land in all 50 states.

You can't put everything on a flag. You have to pick the one, maybe two, most noteworthy characteristics and go with that. The greatness of this design is its simplicity and its ability to say so much with so little.

There are reasons for following design rules: They have proven to create successful designs that last, just like this flag will. Rep. Bjorn Olson objects that we need more time and testimony, but he should explain how more time would not just lead to "analysis paralysis." The many thousands of citizens who care about this effort knew about it and had their say. You already got great results; take the win and move on. I'm placing my order and will fly this new banner proudly even before May 11.

Dennis Fazio, Minneapolis

•••

Dianne Damman, Eden Prairie

What things are a bedrock of our social contract if not taxes and laws, some in the form of regulations? These are ways we take care of each other in our interdependence and interconnection.

I find the editorial "International trade boosts Minnesota" (Dec. 20) listing as a challenge "Minnesota's tax and regulatory burden" to be knee-jerk, self-serving and vague.

Considering everyone as part of society's organization, how do we decide who is burdened? Which specific regulations would you eliminate? What new regulations are needed?

Thinking of Minnesota's recent laws/regulations, the wage-theft law is going gangbusters. And every worker and their family will potentially benefit from the new paid family and medical leave law.

Gaye Sorenson, St. Paul

•••

Thank you to the Star Tribune for the continued coverage about free meals for all students. I am puzzled by lawmakers who want to cut taxes on high-income households objecting to cuts for families who can afford to pay. As a middle-class family who has seen grocery bills go up, we appreciate this "lunch box cut."

At the same time, I am happy to imagine the food that goes to kids who might not otherwise eat. Better to feed all kids than to make anyone feel bad for accepting food. And making sure all kids eat likely makes it easier for teachers to manage a classroom.

In my mind, this all seems like money well spent.

The Ford Model T was released in 1908. But suburbanization only accelerated in the 1950s when everyone had a car. And once suburbanization was well established, business started to capitalize on the trend. McDonald's IPO'd in 1965; Walmart in 1970.

The beginning of the internet can be traced to the 1970s. It wasn't until the smartphone that everyone had the internet, though. And our smartphone doesn't just give us access to the internet, it is continuous access. Just like the automobile reordered society, the internet is having the same effect now. Where does that take us? Unknown, exactly. But clearly we are moving in a new direction.

The Star Tribune has covered the angst around the future of downtown ("No one's to blame but us for fraying our urban fabric," Opinion Exchange, Dec. 19). But what is happening there is only part of a much larger trend. And based on how our downtown has recovered compared to the rest of the country, perhaps we are the leading edge of that trend. That would be the glass-half full view. Since no one knows where this all shakes out, we should see more viewpoints with the optimistic take, where Minnesota is leading the country.