Majority versus minority rights

This is in response the Andy PostâÄôs column about Sheriff Joe Arpaio. In his recent column Post stated that Arpaio should not be investigated by the federal government and various civil rights groups for his questionable tactics in law enforcement and immigration policy because he is merely acting out the will of the local people. Post clearly advocates that the will of the people should reign supreme. However, the real conclusion that can be drawn from this statement is that the will of the majority, not the people as a whole, should reign supreme. While it is important that the majority opinion be heard, it is even more important that the rights of the minority be protected. This is especially true if the will of the majority would inflict any unjust harm upon the rights of the minority. This is one of the founding principles of democracy that often is ignored. Overlooking the minorityâÄôs rights in the name of border security is completely unacceptable. This was the premise for the Japanese internment camps used in World War II and no one considers those to have been just. The rights of the Latin community in Arizona are being violated by the majorityâÄôs will through the use of racial profiling. Interestingly, in 2001 the Attorney General John Ashcroft under President George W. Bush, a Republican, condemned the use of racial profiling. Post would do well to remember this before he claims âÄúObama croniesâÄù have better things to do than investigate Arpaio. If the majority is allowed to inflict harm upon the minority at will, our nation will become little more than a violent mob. Benjamin Boor University student