Frivolous Suits Not Always So

By supporting limiting frivolous lawsuits by inmates, the Massachusetts Attorney General advocates legalizing discrimination based upon wealth ("Harshberger Releases `Top 10 Frivolous Suits,'" wire story, Jun. 27, 1995). The legal system as now constituted discriminates well enough.

If the Department of Corrections were given the power now held by the Judiciary to eliminate suits that have no factual or legal basis to support them, any hope of prisoners gaining relief through the courts would die. Many suits are filed simply because prison guards have denied inmates access to the courts in the first place.

If the Attorney General thinks that Pro se indigent inmate lawsuits get the same treatment as a suit by a prominent wealthy citizen he believes that Elvis lives.

Judges regularly throw out legitimate claims by indigent pro se litigants on the basis of frivolity. Many prison guards do not know what the word means. If the courts cannot handle their burden let them work 40 hours per week, or stay open 24 hours until they catch up as hospitals do Denying citizens the right to be heard, a First Amendment right because prison guards do not consider them important is a denial of due process based upon wealth discrimination and status prohibited by the law of the U.S. Supreme Court. Roy Bercaw   Cambridge, MA