The news story May 31 about Linda Lusk's heartbreaking experience is yet another example of what I call "malicious compliance."
Basically, the judge threw out her appeal to attend her daughter's high school graduation "because she filed her appeal too late." Nothing was said about the merits of the situation, the feelings of a mother or those of an innocent child. Nothing was said about the harmlessness of attending a significant family life event where no inappropriate action can be imagined.
The judge is of course "blameless" because he is "only following the rules" on timely filing of lawsuits.
This is classic malicious compliance.
And, why does this particular situation occur? Because the school superintendent has refused to grant Ms. Lusk an exception from the rule barring her from school grounds. Again, a case of blamelessness for the superintendent based on malicious compliance with a "rule."
There ought to be some way to hold practitioners of malicious compliance accountable, but apparently they are bullet proof.
The only option we have is contempt. Here's mine: Shame on these arrogant and thoughtless cowards.
JOHN F. WILLIFORD, Richland