Judges who voted for lying must go

Regarding the Friday article, “Split Supreme Court protects campaign lies as free speech”:

Wow! The dictionary definition of “slander” is, “An oral statement of a false, malicious statement tending to damage another’s reputation.” The Washington state Supreme Court, in a 5-4 decision, said that it is OK to lie and slander another’s character because it is free speech. Does this mean that we should do away with our laws that protect our reputation from being damaged by liars?

We need to replace (immediately, if it was possible), the immoral judges who think like this. I would venture to say that if the matter was put to a vote by the people, 99.9 percent of us would say that it is wrong to lie, the other 0.1 percent would be those five judges.

Roy Anderberg

Arlington