A4 BAKER CITY HERALD • THURSDAY, MARCH 10, 2022
BAKER CITY
Opinion
WRITE A LETTER
news@bakercityherald.com
Baker City, Oregon
EDITORIAL
Judge right to
block real estate
‘love letter’ law
S
o-called real estate “love letters” aren’t ex-
actly a major free speech issue.
But it’s not surprising that Oregon’s
unique new law partially banning these mes-
sages quickly ran into trouble on First Amend-
ment grounds.
U.S. District Judge Marco A. Hernández last
week issued a preliminary injunction blocking
the law, which the Oregon Legislature passed in
2021 and Gov. Kate Brown signed. It took effect
Jan. 1, 2022.
Hernández made his ruling in a lawsuit filed
in November 2021 by the Pacific Legal Foun-
dation on behalf of the Total Real Estate Group
of Bend.
Oregon State Rep. Mark Meek, a Democrat
from Clackamas County and a real estate agent,
promoted the law. It deals with letters that
hopeful buyers sometimes send to a seller, us-
ing real estate agents as intermediaries, as a way
to try to entice the seller to choose the letter
writer’s offer.
The law doesn’t prohibit prospective buyers
from writing such letters, or from sending them
directly to a homeowner. The law prohibits real
estate agents who represent a seller from pass-
ing on such letters to the seller.
Meek and other supporters said they were
concerned that such letters could include per-
sonal details about the prospective buyer, such
as race, gender or sexual orientation, that might
influence the seller’s decision about which offer
to accept.
Proponents of the law contend this situa-
tion would violate the federal Fair Housing Act,
which prohibits discrimination in housing based
on factors such as race and sexual orientation.
This is a legitimate concern, to be sure.
But the notion that such letters would truly
lead to discrimination is difficult, if not impos-
sible, to prove. In any case, the mere potential
for a letter to contribute to discrimination is
not sufficient to meet the appropriately high
threshold that the First Amendment sets to en-
sure Americans have the right to freely express
themselves, regardless of the topic or the forum.
Daniel Ortner, an attorney for the Pacific Le-
gal Foundation, made that point in a statement
about the preliminary injunction.
“Love letters communicate information that
helps sellers select the best offer,” Ortner said.
“The state cannot ban important speech be-
cause someone might misuse it.”
Hernández acknowledged in his decision that
the purpose of the new law is worthwhile. The
judge cited Oregon’s “long and abhorrent his-
tory of racial discrimination in property own-
ership and housing” that in the past explicitly
blocked people of color from owning property.
But the judge also rightly concluded that the
law is too broad, prohibiting this type of letter
in general rather than outlawing specific sub-
jects. Oregon lawmakers, Hernández wrote,
“could have addressed the problem of housing
discrimination without infringing on protected
speech to such a degree.”
That’s an interesting point. However, it’s
hard to imagine that any such restriction on
this type of letter, even one with a narrower
focus than the current law, would pass consti-
tutional muster.
The preliminary injunction will remain in ef-
fect until Hernández makes a final decision on
the lawsuit.
Oregon officials, including Attorney General
Ellen Rosenblum and Real Estate Commis-
sioner Steve Strode, both named as defendants
in the lawsuit, should concede that the new law,
however well-intentioned, is too general in its
restrictions on free speech to stand.
There’s no reason to spend public money de-
fending against a lawsuit that stands on a legal
foundation as formidable as the First Amend-
ment.
— Jayson Jacoby, Baker City Herald editor
OTHER VIEWS
Sanctions: Best of bad options
Editorial from The Chicago Tribune:
Two broad perspectives have emerged
as the civilized world tries to figure out
how to respond to the inhumanities per-
petrated on Ukraine by the war criminal
Vladimir Putin.
One argument counsels restraint and
containment in any NATO or other West-
ern action against Putin. Localized ag-
gressors have created bloody massacres
before in Yemen, Syria and the Demo-
cratic Republic of the Congo (to name
but three) this thinking goes. What mat-
ters most here is negotiation and contain-
ment, especially given the Russian pres-
ident’s aggressive state and his military’s
formidable arsenal of nuclear weapons.
No-fly zones, boots on the ground and
other forms of direct military interven-
tion, while tempting in the face of human
suffering and pleas for help, risk cata-
strophic escalation that could destroy
much of the planet.
The counterargument often draws on
the analogy of the early years of Adolf Hit-
ler, when the world failed to act quickly
enough to stop his fascist rout of Europe,
thus failing to stop unconscionable subse-
quent loss of life, including the victims of
the Holocaust. If Putin is not stopped in
Ukraine, this thinking goes, he likely will
be emboldened to encroach on other sov-
ereign nations and, perhaps even worse,
other authoritarian regimes, such as China,
watching Putin’s success, will be tempted to
follow his model in other disputed territo-
rial regions, such as Taiwan.
As British Prime Minister Boris Johnson
wrote over the weekend: “Vladimir Putin’s
act of aggression must fail and be seen to
fail.” Otherwise, consequences will be dire
for the whole world.
Most politicians are vacillating between
these two points of view. This is unsurpris-
ing, since they cannot read the future, and
both theories risk consequences that would
have been unfathomable just weeks ago.
Most Americans are doing the same as
they talk around the dinner table. This is
an agonizing dilemma for decent people, as
it is for editorial boards. It is easier to grab
an oligarch’s yacht, source your vodka from
Finland or fire the Putin-sympathizing
diva from the Metropolitan Opera.
Sanctions on an epic level are tricky,
complicated and can cause collateral dam-
age. But in the face of what is going on in
Ukraine, they are the world’s best option.
The danger, of course, is that the cancel-
ing of Premier League soccer, the closing
of designer stores and the general, sudden
de-Westernization of Russia and its people
sends that country into the hands of China,
which has not joined with the West in ob-
jecting to the “special military operation
in,” aka the invasion of, Ukraine.
That’s already happening with cred-
it-card processing. After Visa and Mas-
tercard announced they would no longer
guarantee Russian cards working abroad,
many of the affected rushed to replace
the contents of their wallet with a Chi-
nese card.
Then there is the unpleasant spectacle
of trying to discern which Russian indi-
viduals deserve to be personally punished
because of their views. The opera world
currently is consumed with this thorny
debate, arguing over the morality of be-
coming the thought police in determin-
ing who is or is not a Putin sympathizer
and, yet worse, insisting on Orwellian
statements of repudiation before the first
aria is sung. Not an attractive job for the
general director of an opera company,
and no fun for those in the crosshairs.
Better though, let’s remember, than be-
ing holed up in a bunker in Ukraine with
your kids. Or lying dead on the ground
while attempting to evacuate.
Still, while the broad insistence in Lon-
don that the Russian billionaire Roman
Abramovich divest himself from owning
the soccer powerhouse Chelsea has re-
ceived little opposition, it’s important to
remember that he didn’t work alone. Oli-
garchs have employees, their yachts have
non-Russian crews, their Manhattan real-
tors have bills to pay and myriad other in-
nocents suffer.
This situation is the sole responsibility of
Putin, not the West. Period.
Sanctions cannot be cancellations. The
sanctions must not be viewed through the
same lens as the performative congressio-
nal “freedom fries” debacle in 2003 after
France opposed the U.S. invasion of Iraq.
That was mere posturing. And there is no
logic to covering up the abstract work of
Wassily Kandinsky, refusing to listen to the
symphonies of Pyotr Ilyich Tchaikovsky,
throwing Anton Chekhov plays out of the
theater, or demanding of ordinary Rus-
sians, living under an authoritarian regime
with long tentacles, that they publicly state
their politics on pain of personal ruin.
But, no, cruise ships should not now
be calling in St. Petersburg. Washington
should move ahead with banning Rus-
sian oil from coming into America. Netflix
should not be filming comedies in Russia.
Aeroflot should not be allowed to land at
O’Hare International Airport, nor should
any of the big international consulting
firms be working for Putin or his pals. And
who can drink Russian vodka in good con-
science right now when other options are
available that taste much the same?
Sanctions are imperfect and imperfectly
targeted. If and when Putin is gone, they
should be removed. The post-invasion eco-
nomic recovery of a Russia without Putin
will be in everyone’s interest.
But that is not the situation now. This is
not an ordinary military incursion or ter-
ritorial dispute: Putin is targeting civilians
and killing children in Ukraine. Strategy is
important but so is our basic morality as
human beings. We cannot merely stand by
as the people of Ukraine suffer.
Sanctions are the very least we can do to
help end this brutal period of global his-
tory. Russians must understand we mean
them no harm and that we are always at
the negotiating table alongside the brave
people of Ukraine.
But end it, we must. Together.
equal in duties and pay apart from the
Chair Position 3 having slightly increased
duties and pay to match. In the proposal
also is to have the chair position elected
by the three commissioners, not cho-
sen by the vote of Baker County citizens.
In this your voice, your vote, would be
taken away.
Nichols also stated as part of this new
system the chair would possibly be ro-
tated annually. I see this as a possible
strain placed on the staff assisting each
position as the change would happen
each year instead of working for four
years with the commissioners in a solid
position. Along with increased stress,
tighter deadlines and rushed initiatives
this change could incur, could this also
spur an increase in the cost of the com-
missioners? Why is Mr. Nichols push-
ing for this change during an election
year and before two new commissioners
are seated?
My concern is for the five candidates
who are currently running for the two
open positions. I find it unbelievable that
a position can be changed during an elec-
tion year and that ultimately, the position
could be different once seated in January
2023 than the position that we filed for.
I am dedicated to the people of Baker
County and my campaign for Position
2. I will not back down in fear of the un-
known future of the position; instead I
am more determined than ever to make
sure your voice is heard.
Christina Witham
Baker City
YOUR VIEWS
Candidate concerned about
possible change to Baker County
commissioner duties
Commissioner Nichols recently pro-
posed a change in the way the Baker
County Commissioners are seated. As
a candidate for Baker County Commis-
sioner Position 2, I am concerned. I fear
the other candidates and Baker County
voters have not given enough thought to
this and could need more information to
consider this fully. As of today, this is not
up for a vote and is not on the commis-
sioner agenda. Nichols stated he would
try to push for a vote on the Novem-
ber ballot.
As far as I have researched, Nichols
wants the three commissioners to be
CONTACT YOUR PUBLIC OFFICIALS
President Joe Biden: The White House, 1600
Pennsylvania Ave., Washington, D.C. 20500; 202-456-
1111; to send comments, go to www.whitehouse.gov.
U.S. Sen. Jeff Merkley: D.C. office: 313 Hart Senate
Office Building, U.S. Senate, Washington, D.C., 20510;
202-224-3753; fax 202-228-3997. Portland office: One
World Trade Center, 121 S.W. Salmon St. Suite 1250,
Portland, OR 97204; 503-326-3386; fax 503-326-2900.
Baker City office, 1705 Main St., Suite 504, 541-278-
1129; merkley.senate.gov.
U.S. Sen. Ron Wyden: D.C. office: 221 Dirksen Senate
Office Building, Washington, D.C., 20510; 202-224-5244;
fax 202-228-2717. La Grande office: 105 Fir St., No. 210,
La Grande, OR 97850; 541-962-7691; fax, 541-963-0885;
wyden.senate.gov.
U.S. Rep. Cliff Bentz (2nd District): D.C. office: 1239
Longworth House Office Building, Washington, D.C.,
20515, 202-225-6730; fax 202-225-5774. Medford office:
14 N. Central Avenue Suite 112, Medford, OR 97850;
Phone: 541-776-4646; fax: 541-779-0204; Ontario office:
2430 S.W. Fourth Ave., No. 2, Ontario, OR 97914; Phone:
541-709-2040. bentz.house.gov.
Oregon Gov. Kate Brown: 254 State Capitol, Salem, OR
97310; 503-378-3111; www.governor.oregon.gov.
Oregon State Treasurer Tobias Read: oregon.
treasurer@ost.state.or.us; 350 Winter St. NE, Suite 100,
Salem OR 97301-3896; 503-378-4000.
in Council Chambers. Councilors Jason Spriet, Kerry
McQuisten, Shane Alderson, Joanna Dixon, Johnny
Waggoner Sr. and Dean Guyer.
Baker City administration: 541-523-6541. Jonathan
Cannon, city manager; Ty Duby, police chief; Sean Lee,
fire chief; Michelle Owen, public works director.
Oregon Attorney General Ellen F. Rosenblum: Justice Baker County Commission: Baker County Courthouse
1995 3rd St., Baker City, OR 97814; 541-523-8200. Meets
Building, Salem, OR 97301-4096; 503-378-4400.
the first and third Wednesdays at 9 a.m.; Bill Harvey
Oregon Legislature: Legislative documents and
(chair), Mark Bennett, Bruce Nichols.
information are available online at www.leg.state.or.us.
Baker County departments: 541-523-8200. Travis Ash,
State Sen. Lynn Findley (R-Ontario): Salem office: 900 sheriff; Noodle Perkins, roadmaster; Greg Baxter, district
Court St. N.E., S-403, Salem, OR 97301; 503-986-1730.
attorney; Alice Durflinger, county treasurer; Stefanie
Email: Sen.LynnFindley@oregonlegislature.gov
Kirby, county clerk; Kerry Savage, county assessor.
State Rep. Mark Owens (R-Crane): Salem office: 900
Baker School District: 2090 4th Street, Baker
Court St. N.E., H-475, Salem, OR 97301; 503-986-1460.
City, OR 97814; 541-524-2260; fax 541-524-2564.
Email: Rep.MarkOwens@oregonlegislature.gov
Superintendent: Mark Witty. Board meets the third
Baker City Hall: 1655 First Street, P.O. Box 650, Baker
City, OR 97814; 541-523-6541; fax 541-524-2049. City
Council meets the second and fourth Tuesdays at 7 p.m.
Tuesday of the month at 6 p.m. Council Chambers, Baker
City Hall,1655 First St.; Chris Hawkins, Andrew Bryan,
Travis Cook, Jessica Dougherty, Julie Huntington.