Readers Respond

Frosh's actions are guided by the law

It is the judiciary’s duty to “say what the law is,” declared Chief Justice Marshall in 1803. The lawsuits brought by Attorney General Brian Frosh in response to the questionable actions of the Trump administration further that bedrock principle (“Maryland attorney general joins suit against Trump administration over Census citizenship question,” April 3).

My colleague, Del. Kathy Szeliga, the minority whip, believes that these cases are “wasting taxpayer money on petty partisan politics.” The record demonstrates otherwise.


More than 40 attorneys general have the legal authority to sue the federal government without the approval of their governor. Under the law that the General Assembly enacted last year, when Mr. Frosh believes that “the federal government’s action or inaction … threatens the public interest and welfare” of the state’s residents, he must seek Gov. Larry Hogan’s input before going to court.

When Obamacare was challenged in 2010, 26 attorneys general filed a brief opposing the law. When Scott Pruitt was the Oklahoma’s attorney general, he frequently sued the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, which he now heads.


Among the cases that Attorney General Frosh has brought are legal challenges to the Muslim travel ban, a presidential decision on the Affordable Care Act that would skyrocket health insurance premiums in the private market and actions harmful to the Chesapeake Bay and climate change.

Before he took these actions, he did not examine the poll numbers, he researched the law.

Samuel I. "Sandy" Rosenberg, Baltimore

The writer, a Democrat, represents District 41, Baltimore City, in the Maryland House of Delegates and was lead sponsor of legislation expanding the authority of Maryland’s attorney general to bring legal actions against the federal government.