Rejection of Rose Bird

The concern your editorial (Nov. 6) expresses at the rejection of three justices of the Supreme Court is not necessary.

Voters did not reject these justices because they upheld the Constitution, but because they violated it. They manipulated the Constitution so as to achieve their personal ends. The most apparent of these was the avoidance of the death penalty.

In last Tuesday’s election, those justices willing to interpret the Constitution in a fair manner were retained. In rejecting the other three, the electorate sought to protect the Constitution, not to damage it.

You expressed your hope that Gov. George Deukmejian will avoid the appointment of ideologues as he replaces the three departing justices; that he will appoint solid, fair-minded jurists as he has done in the past. In stating this sentiment, I am sure that you have expressed the hope of the governor himself, and the hope and expectation of the electorate. Past practices by Gov. Deukmejian suggest that this expectation will be fulfilled.

Three ideologues will make their departure, and three fair-minded jurists will take their places. Fair rulings by the new court will restore the faith of the electorate. Californians will have succeeded in their effort to protect the Constitution. Their faith in the Supreme Court will be restored. Thus, when voters next exercise their constitutional right to confirm or reject Supreme Court justices, confirmation will again prevail.

EDWARD J. GRASTORF

Pacific Palisades