Readers Write: Pardon process, Kristi Noem, Burnsville dump spat, nuclear power

Opinion editor’s note: Strib Voices publishes letters from readers online and in print each day. To contribute, click here.

•••

In the commentary “How about pardoning at least 50 people in Minnesota by Juneteenth?” (Strib Voices, May 16), Jason Sole asked that the Minnesota Board of Pardons grant 50 petitions by Juneteenth and noted that he has waited seven months since filing his own petition. I share his desire for more clemency at all levels and have worked toward that for years. What wasn’t described in his op-ed was the progress Minnesota has already made in just the last few years.

Before 2024, all cases receiving a grant had to be heard personally by the three members of the Pardon Board: the governor, the attorney general and the chief justice of the state Supreme Court. That was a huge bottleneck, which was addressed in 2023 by creating a state Clemency Review Commission which could perform most of the hearings and make recommendations to the Pardon Board. It’s working. Between 2015 and 2019, the total number of grants per year averaged just 15.2 per year — pathetically low. In 2024, with the changes only partially implemented and building on an already-growing number of petitions, that number jumped to 64. So far this year, the Clemency Review Commission has already recommended 68 grants in less than five months.

Things are getting better. Sole’s impatience is understandable, but the trend is encouraging — and a stark contrast to the federal system, where pardon petitions sit for five years or more, even without a hearing requirement. The sad truth we must push back against is that too often retribution moves quickly and mercy moves slowly; the happy truth we should recognize is that Minnesota is moving in the right direction.

Mark Osler, Minneapolis

The writer is a law professor at the University of St. Thomas.

Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem has determined that refugees from Afghanistan, who were previously welcomed into the United States, no longer need temporary protected status because it is now safe for them to return home. The vast majority of Afghan refugees were evacuated by the U.S. government because they had been employees on U.S. military bases across Afghanistan, ranging from small checkpoints to large installations. When the Taliban took control in 2021, they immediately called for the deaths of these Afghan citizens and their families.

The U.S. State Department issued this warning on Jan. 13, 2025:

“Do not travel to Afghanistan due to civil unrest, crime, terrorism, risk of wrongful detention, kidnapping, and limited health facilities.”

Information included in the State Department’s summary:

May I ask: Where does Noem get her information?

Peggy Flaig, St. Paul

•••

When Noem was asked during a congressional hearing whether she had any prior knowledge of what the term “habeas corpus” meant, she couldn’t answer what it actually is, but said that she believed that the president had the authority to suspend it.

In Article I, Section 9 of the U.S. Constitution, it states that “The Privilege of the Writ of Habeas Corpus shall not be suspended, unless when in Cases of Rebellion or Invasion the public Safety may require it.” Habeas corpus ensures that every citizen has the right to inquire into the lawfulness of a person’s detention and imprisonment, as well as the protection against illegal imprisonment. Noem seems to have a talent for performing in front of the cameras of the news media, judging by an appearance by her in New York City, dressed in a flak jacket alongside ICE agents and searching for undocumented immigrants; riding on horseback with the border patrol in Texas; and standing outside of the gates of a notorious prison in El Salvador, wearing designer clothes and high-buck Rolex watch. After watching all of this, one has to wonder if this person has any ability to grasp the details involved in running a large department like Homeland Security. Was she given this high-level position in the U.S. government strictly on the basis of merit, or was this because of her undying loyalty to the president?

Gary Langendorf, Minneapolis

As a Burnsville resident, I write to express my appreciation to the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency for its commitment to protecting my drinking water (“Landowner, state at odds over dump plans,” May 20). And as a golfer, I already have good options close to my home, including Burnsville’s family- and nature-friendly par-3 course, Birnamwood Golf Course, and, for a full-course option, Valleywood Golf Course in Apple Valley, which features a recently renovated open-air driving range. Personally, I have zero interest in an out-of-the way facility built atop a dump with unresolved environmental issues and am highly suspicious of arguments put forth by someone with a profit motive.

Jim Kaufmann, Burnsville

The steady pro-nuclear drumbeat continues in the Star Tribune’s May 18 letters to the editor. In “Put the monitoring in perspective” the writer states that radiation from tritium “cannot penetrate human skin.” This is a classic obfuscation. Tritium is a kind of radioactive water that cannot be filtered from our water supply. When ingested as a liquid or a gas it does not have to go through the skin to irradiate our bodies. The tritium leaking from the Monticello Nuclear Generating Plant located next to the Mississippi River, which is the source of drinking water for the largest population of Minnesotans in the state.

An article in the Canadian Medical Association Journal quotes the Australian physician and longtime expert Dr. Helen Caldicott saying that no radiation is safe and that radiation becomes bioconcentrated as it moves up through the food chain. There’s no container that can hold radioactive waste for more than a hundred years. The article continues, “Caldicott argued that government should take the money spent on nuclear power — $12 billion to $15 billion per reactor — and use it to refit all homes and buildings with solar panels.”

As a practical matter, nuclear power generation is very expensive, as it includes storage of increasing amounts of toxic waste essentially forever without a permanent plan.

Contrary to the letter writer’s assertion, this is not “sensationalism.” It is factual.

Ronald Holch, Circle Pines

The writer is a former co-coordinator at Renewable Energy Task Force, Northern Sun Alliance.