Paula Jones

Re “Jones Will Get Day in Court--but Not Immediately,” editorial, May 28: I agree with your assessment that allowing sitting presidents to become defendants in civil trials may damage the presidency. However, I don’t think that existing law should be twisted to let President Clinton off the hook. Your key argument is “if a president was confronted by a stream of frivolous or politically motivated litigation,” he would be rendered ineffective.

The answer lies not in giving Clinton a pass until his term as president ends but rather in legislators finally taking serious measures to stem the rising tide of egregious civil litigation in this country.

MICHAEL McININCH

Arcadia

* Sexual harassment is that behavior that puts an employee in an uncomfortable situation due to sexual advances from an employer in a supervising position, and at the risk of losing a job. It is not when a person out of that order of command may act like a jerk or behave improperly. Accordingly, Paula Jones’ claim against President Clinton is somewhat odd, as he was not supervising her. She did not lose her job, but rather found herself in a position with better pay. A payoff? Maybe. Naive? Definitely. Either way, as long as Jones has the financial backing of known political opponents to the president, it is hard to see this suit to be anything but a political move.

As a feminist I hope that the president does not buy himself out of this situation, but instead fights back in the courts. Because that way we can make our minds up for ourselves when all the facts are out in the open. This is the only way to weigh the facts versus that which is made up.

MARIE TAGENIUS

Los Angeles

* Every first-year law student knows that the cardinal rule of English common law is: Even the king is under the law. The Supreme Court affirmed this by 9-0. Despite what your editorial says, Clinton has plenty of time to go to trial. If he devotes days and hours to party fund-raising, he, as chief executive, can surely find a few hours to fulfill the requirements of the law. Or does he have something to hide?

MICHAEL P. RIVES