The Issue: Democrats taking vacations and attending “No Kings” rallies during the government shutdown. A long, long time ago, Sen. Chuck Schumer worked for the people (“Pols are a flyin’ shame,” March 31).
That Schumer is nowhere to be found, as Americans go without pay, travel is jeopardized and government workers leave civil service to pay their bills (creating a long-term shortage).
Schumer and Rep. Hakeem Jeffries are hellbent on making ICE totally ineffective while destroying the lives of over 200,000 DHS families not once, but twice within a year.
It’s obvious they don’t care about American citizens at all and will personally inconvenience anyone using air travel to achieve their goal of preventing any deportations, including criminal immigrants.
Keep it up and there will be no TSA agents at airports to provide safety to the public. Do we really need another 9/11 during this geopolitical climate?
Government shutdowns would quickly be solved and wouldn’t take so long if the law was changed so that members of Congress don’t continue to get paid during a shutdown. See how quickly negotiations would continue and issues would be overcome.
Once again, the Democrats are causing trouble for the American people. They don’t care about anyone and look every which way to stick it to President Trump and the Republicans.
Remember this when the elections come up. Especially the countless people and hours waiting in lines to board their planes. Funny that these politicians don’t have to wait.
Isn’t it wonderful to know that members of the Congress of the United States are enjoying a two-week paid vacation in different parts of the world?
Some of them appeared at “No Kings” rallies. Judging from pictures posted of people marching, it very well could have been called “No Tsars Day” with the ready-made signs and many red flags of the hammer and sickle.
Young people are stupid enough to believe money grows on trees, but seeing dumb seniors marching was a stomach-turner.
The argument on birthright citizenship should be grounded in whether a person is in the United States legally at the time of a child’s birth (“Supremely annoyed,” Ilya Shapiro, April 2).
The intent behind birthright citizenship can be viewed as applying to those who are legal residents or lawfully present in the country.
Thus, a case could be made for revising the system so that non-citizen legal residents must first obtain citizenship themselves before applying for citizenship on behalf of their children, even if they were born here.
The Supreme Court’s arguments about birthright citizenship did not go to President Trump’s liking.
His appearance in court was about as welcome as Maleficent at Princess Aurora’s christening in Disney’s “Sleeping Beauty,” and his departure was almost as dramatic.
Listening to some levity from the justices and who seemingly agree with the ACLU, I believe they will rule against the Executive Branch.
They won’t change 158 years of tradition, even if they know the 14th Amendment is outdated and in desperate need of change. The 14th amendment is a Model T Ford in a 2026 world of advanced technology.
Want to weigh in on today’s stories? Send your thoughts (along with your full name and city of residence) to letters@nypost.com. Letters are subject to editing for clarity, length, accuracy, and style.
