Contributor: The tension between overestimating risks and ignoring them
I suddenly went cold. I had just published a book in which I cited assessments concluding that the death toll from the accident was surprisingly low. According to the World Health Organization, in the two decades after the accident, fewer than 50 people had died because of radiation exposure, almost all of them rescue workers. (I did note that some estimates were higher.)
The discrepancy between these different claims posed a familiar dilemma. As a journalist covering nuclear power and the debate over its role in the fight against climate change — and as a Californian closely following the San Onofre and Diablo Canyon nuclear plant controversies — I have been constantly in the position of trying to assess risk. I've been navigating between the Scylla of overestimating risk and the Charybdis of underestimating it.
If we underestimate the hazards of nuclear power, we risk contaminating the environment and jeopardizing public health. If we exaggerate them, we could miss out on an important tool for weaning ourselves off fossil fuels. If I were sanguine about the dangers of nuclear, the anti-nuclear side would consider me a chump, perhaps even an industry shill. If I emphasized the dangers, the pro-nuclear side would consider me alarmist, accuse me of fearmongering. More consequential than what activists might say, of course, was the possibility of misleading readers about these high-stakes issues.
My dilemma also intersected with another question. When should we believe the authorities, and when should we distrust them? In the case of nuclear power, this question has a fascinating history. The anti-nuclear movement of the '70s grew out of a deep suspicion of authority and institutions. Nuclear power was promoted by a 'nuclear priesthood' of scientists and government bureaucrats, who came across as opaque and condescending. Protesters carried signs with messages such as 'Hell no, we won't glow' and 'Better active today than radioactive tomorrow.' To be anti-nuclear went along with the 'question authority' left-wing ethos of the era.
Today, much has changed. In recent years, scientists have been telling us that we need to decarbonize our energy system, and in left-leaning circles, scientists and experts have become the good guys again (in no small part because many MAGA voices have become loudly anti-science). Institutions such as the International Energy Agency and the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change have said that nuclear power can play a key role in that decarbonized system. The official estimates of deaths from nuclear accidents are quite low, and meanwhile the suffering aggravated by climate change is ever more apparent. For these reasons, many environmentalists and progressives, including me, have grown more supportive of nuclear power.
Yet I am always uncomfortably aware of the extent to which I am taking the experts' word for their conclusions. If we never question authorities, we are credulous sheep; if we never trust them, we become unhinged conspiracy theorists.
Although these quandaries are particularly salient for a journalist covering nuclear power, they are essentially universal in our modern world. When deciding whether to wear a mask or vaccinate our children, or what to make of the threat of climate change, or how worried to be about 'forever chemicals' in our cookware, we are all perpetually trying to gauge risks. Unable to be experts in every field, we must decide whom to trust.
Recently, matters have become even more complex. As President Trump eviscerates federal agencies and cuts funding from the National Institutes of Health and universities, it raises new concerns about how well-equipped these institutions will be to provide reliable information — both because of their diminished capacity and because we increasingly must wonder to what extent their work is influenced by a fear of further funding cuts.
I've learned a few lessons to help navigate the dilemmas we all face. Don't consider risks in isolation; put them in context. Take both expert assessments and anecdotal evidence with a grain of salt. Resist allying yourself with any particular tribe or team. Be honest, with yourself and others, about your own biases and predispositions.
Even in today's chaotic and degraded information ecosystem, we can find people who share our values who know much more about a given subject than we do. Listen to those who share your concerns and who consistently address them using solid data and reasoning.
Following these guidelines led me to the conclusion that nuclear power certainly poses risks and challenges but that, if managed properly, it is one viable low-carbon energy source that can complement others.
Yet we must also recognize that our knowledge will never be perfect. Our understanding of the world is ever evolving, as is the world itself. I came to accept that occupying the position between chump and alarmist is simply part of the modern condition. And I'll keep trying not to veer too far in either direction.
Rebecca Tuhus-Dubrow, a journalist based in Orange County, is the author of 'Atomic Dreams: The New Nuclear Evangelists and the Fight for the Future of Energy.'
If it's in the news right now, the L.A. Times' Opinion section covers it. Sign up for our weekly opinion newsletter.
This story originally appeared in Los Angeles Times.
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles

Wall Street Journal
5 hours ago
- Wall Street Journal
Washington Struggles to Rein In an Emboldened Israel
TEL AVIV—Israel has emerged from a string of stunning military successes with nearly unchecked power in the Middle East. Now Washington is struggling to adjust. The Trump administration in recent days has expressed frustration with Israeli actions in Syria and Gaza. President Trump's MAGA supporters, in particular, are growing more critical of his support for Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, who they fear will drag the U.S. deeper into a morass of regional wars.

Miami Herald
9 hours ago
- Miami Herald
Maxwell and her Miami defense attorney in eye of Epstein storm. Trump, too
Miami defense attorney David O. Markus represents Jeffrey Epstein's infamous former girlfriend, a convicted British socialite who may hold the keys not only to her fate but that of President Donald Trump. Markus' client, Ghislaine Maxwell, found guilty of recruiting underage girls for the billionaire financier, was questioned on Thursday and Friday by the U.S. deputy attorney general about her insider knowledge of the Epstein sex-abuse case — a resurgent scandal threatening Trump's presidency as his MAGA base clamors for answers. What Maxwell might know about a long-speculated 'client list' of famous people possibly kept by Epstein, who authorities say killed himself in a New York jail cell in 2019 before his federal sex trafficking trial, could change the course of Trump's presidency. Trump and Epstein, both New Yorkers with mansions in Palm Beach, had socialized for years before falling out. In a dramatic development on Thursday, Markus and Maxwell, who is serving a 20-year sentence at a federal prison in Tallahassee, met with Deputy Attorney General Todd Blanche at the U.S. courthouse in Florida's capital. Markus called the meeting 'very productive.' 'He took a full day and asked a lot of questions and Ms. Maxwell answered every single question,' Markus told reporters after the meeting at the U.S. Attorney's Office in the courthouse. 'She never invoked a privilege. She never declined to answer. She answered all the questions truthfully, honestly and to the best of her ability.' The trio — Maxwell, Markus and Blanche — met again on Friday in the same location, in what many legal observers have called a highly unusual gathering. 'How many defendants turned witnesses does a deputy AG personally interview?' said a South Florida defense lawyer, who did not want to be identified. 'Get your popcorn.' Harvard law grad Markus, 52, a Miami native who went to Harvard Law School, heads his own firm and hosts a popular blog and podcast. Known as a top-tier defense attorney whose career started in the Federal Public Defender's Office in Miami, Markus has been thrust into the national spotlight along with his client, Maxwell. In late 2021, she was convicted in Manhattan federal court of sex trafficking minor girls for Epstein at his homes in Manhattan, Palm Beach, New Mexico and the Virgin Islands — over the course of a decade. Curiously, the closed-door meetings this week with the deputy attorney general come at a critical stage in the appeal of her conviction, which will be considered as a possible case by the U.S. Supreme Court in the fall. The Justice Department has opposed her challenge every step of the way, in the federal district and appellate courts in New York. Markus declined to comment about the meetings between his client and Blanche in Tallahassee. In their negotiations, Maxwell and Markus are walking a fine line, but so are Blanche and Trump. Before Blanche was appointed by Trump as second in command behind Attorney General Pam Bondi, he represented him in a criminal fraud trial in the Manhattan state court in 2024. Trump was convicted of 34 counts of falsifying business records, stemming from a scheme to conceal a $130,000 payment to an adult film star Stormy Daniels that was made to keep her quiet just before the 2016 presidential election about their alleged affair. After Trump won the 2024 election, the judge gave him no prison time, but Trump became the first U.S. president with a felony conviction. After the trial, Markus hosted Blanche on his Apple podcast, 'For the Defense,' which focused on his experience representing Trump. On a parallel track, Trump had hired Blanche to be his lead attorney in the 2023 classified documents case brought against him by the federal special counsel Jack Smith. Markus was among other lawyers approached by Trump's defense team, but he turned them down. Blanche and Markus' 'cozy' relationship, as some have described it, may have led the deputy attorney general to reach out to Markus this month to discuss how Maxwell might be a witness in the rekindled Epstein investigation. In early July, the Justice Department and FBI issued a memo shutting down the investigation, saying there was nothing more to report about Epstein's suicide or the existence of a client list — only to reopen it amid a bombardment of criticism by Trump's right-wing base. Adding fuel to the fire: Bondi had told Fox News in February that an Epstein client list was 'sitting' on her desk, but then changed her story after the FBI memo was released. Trump's MAGA supporters grew more enraged. They repeated all kinds of conspiracy theories on social media and in podcasts, suggesting without proof that Epstein didn't kill himself and that Democratic President Bill Clinton and other major public figures may have sexually abused the underage girls that Epstein recruited to his residences. They continued to fuel speculation about his client list and who might be on it, despite Trump's relationship with Epstein before he was convicted of soliciting minor girls in a state plea deal in West Palm Beach in 2008. Since then, the House Oversight Committee has voted to subpoena the Department of Justice for its files on Epstein, and issued a subpoena to interview Maxwell on Aug. 11. Reacting to backlash, Trump said he would continue to push for the release of relevant information in the case. This week, his Justice Department unsuccessfully asked a South Florida federal judge to release grand jury records in the original Epstein probe dating back almost two decades. Political storm escalates Most Americans believe that the U.S. government is concealing information, including about who else may have been involved in Epstein's abuse of the young girls at his residences, according to a recent Reuters/Ipsos poll. As the political storm escalated, Blanche announced earlier this week that he intended to meet with Maxwell, who has maintained her innocence and is appealing her conviction to the U.S. Supreme Court. Blanche said he had reached out to Maxwell's lawyer to see if she might have 'information about anyone who has committed crimes against victims.' On Tuesday, Markus issued a short statement, saying: 'I can confirm that we are in discussions with the government and that Ghislaine will always testify truthfully. We are grateful to President Trump for his commitment to uncovering the truth in this case.' Maxwell testimony Miami lawyer Joseph DeMaria, a former federal organized crime prosecutor, said the conversation between Maxwell, Markus and Blanche is very different from the typical effort by a prosecutor to gain the cooperation of a convicted defendant to testify against her co-conspirators. As a rule, prosecutors are very wary about making a deal with a convicted felon because the testimony may not be credible to present to a jury. 'In this case, Mr. Blanche is trying to develop testimony to be presented to Congress in a political forum,' DeMaria told the Herald. 'If Ms. Maxwell presents congressional testimony that is favorable to the president, whether or not that testimony can be corroborated, that testimony can be used to end the constant inquiries about his [Trump's] relationship with Epstein. 'But Ms. Maxwell won't offer to clear the president with her congressional testimony for free,' he added. 'Mr. Blanche will have to find a way to offer Ms. Maxwell a get-out-of-jail card in order to secure positive testimony for the president.' However, Maxwell's testimony may present other potential pitfalls for herself or Trump, because of her well-documented lack of credibility. After Maxwell's sex-trafficking conviction, prosecutors branded her crimes as 'monstrous' and cast strong doubt about her honesty. 'In short, the defendant has lied repeatedly about her crimes, exhibited an utter failure to accept responsibility, and demonstrated repeated disrespect for the law and the Court,' prosecutors with the U.S. Attorney's Office for the Southern District of New York wrote in June 2022 before her sentencing. Two of Markus' former colleagues in the Miami Federal Public Defender's Office said Maxwell is in good hands, noting that he 'lives and breathes the law.' 'Nobody wins everything, but he wins often,' Miami attorney Henry Bell said. 'He thinks like a criminal defense lawyer and fights to the end for his client,' Miami lawyer Orlando do Campo said. Both seasoned defense attorneys said Maxwell's potential testimony could have repercussions not only for herself and Trump but for any number of prominent figures in Epstein's social circles. 'The reason the Justice Department doesn't want to disclose the Epstein files is that it could harm the reputation of innocent people who associated with him,' Bell said. 'If Jeffrey Epstein's client list, or what I consider his 'association list,' were revealed, this could not only be a left or right thing, it might affect a lot of people across the political spectrum,' do Campo said. 'There are a lot of weird bedfellows here.' History of Epstein-Maxwell cases In June 2008, Epstein pleaded guilty to state charges of soliciting teenage girls at his Palm Beach mansion and served about one year in jail — after Miami U.S. Attorney Alex Acosta chose not to present a 53-page indictment to the grand jury alleging the more serious federal charges of sex trafficking dozens of minor girls. If convicted, those charges would have carried potential punishment ranging from a mandatory 10 years in prison up to a life sentence. Epstein's victims called it a 'sweetheart plea deal' that allowed him to go to work or do whatever he wanted for six days out of every week. The deal also shut down an FBI probe into whether there were more victims and other powerful people who took part in Epstein's sex crimes. Acosta's 'non-prosecution agreement,' signed in September 2007, was initially kept secret from Epstein's victims. The agreement also immunized several of his co-conspirators from federal prosecution. The Herald's investigation of the secretive plea deal, part of its 'Perversion of Justice' series by reporter Julie K. Brown, led to Acosta resigning as U.S. Secretary of Labor in 2019 during the first Trump administration. In July of that year, federal prosecutors in New York filed an indictment charging Epstein, 66, with conspiracy and sex-trafficking charges — similar to the case that was not pursued by federal prosecutors in South Florida. But the following month, Epstein hanged himself in a federal lock-up in New York, according to authorities. Upon the death of the notorious defendant, prosecutors turned their attention to his former girlfriend, Maxwell. In 2020, she was indicted on conspiracy and sex-trafficking charges and convicted the following year for her role in the abuse of underage girls. On Dec. 29, 2021, she was found guilty of five of the six counts against her, including sex trafficking of a minor, transporting a minor for illegal sexual activity, and related conspiracy charges. In June 2022, Maxwell, 63, was sentenced to 20 years in prison. Markus had worked as her appellate attorney during the trial. After her conviction, he filed Maxwell's appeal. His argument: Epstein's non-prosecution agreement with federal prosecutors in South Florida should have protected Maxwell from facing charges in New York. But both the federal district and appellate courts in New York found that the deal, which promised to immunize Epstein's co-conspirators, only applied to South Florida. In the fall, the U.S. Supreme Court is expected to decide whether to consider her appeal.


Los Angeles Times
10 hours ago
- Los Angeles Times
Essayli upended U.S. attorney's office by pushing Trump agenda. Will he stay on top?
When Bill Essayli was appointed interim U.S. attorney for the Los Angeles region in April, many in the former state assemblyman's Riverside County district were afraid the ambitious Republican lightning rod would be willing to attack a whole range of California policies to please the MAGA base. They feared that, as the region's most powerful federal prosecutor, Essayli would bow to the Trump administration and ramp up assaults on queer people, immigrants, voting rights, environmental protections and anyone or anything else that displeased President Trump. Now, it's clear they were right to worry, said Jacob Daruvala, an LGBTQ+ advocate from the Inland Empire. 'Essayli is a very specific and terrible threat,' Daruvala said during a recent town hall for the 'Stop Essayli' campaign, which is working to block the top prosecutor's permanent appointment. 'He has already shown multiple times that he is willing to use the office in a partisan manner.' Nearly four months into Essayli's tenure at the top of one of the nation's busiest federal prosecutor's offices, it is perhaps complaints about his partisanship that hound him most. In the midst of a pitched culture war between the Trump administration and California — in which Essayli has participated in federal lawsuits challenging L.A.'s sanctuary policy, California's protections for transgender athletes and more — his partisanship has become a central note in conversations about his leadership style, grasp of the law and understanding of the traditional role of U.S. attorneys. Is he too loyal to Trump? Too bound up in the administration's battles? Too eager to please his bosses and too inexperienced to know that rushing cases for political points can lead to embarrassing losses in court and a crisis of confidence among his own line prosecutors? Essayli — who declined to be interviewed — was never nominated by Trump, but rather appointed by U.S. Atty. Gen. Pam Bondi. That has cast doubt about his future in the office, as Bondi's appointment is limited to 120 days by federal statute and will expire on Wednesday. Barring any formal nomination from Trump proceeding through to the Senate before then — which is unlikely — a panel of judges in the Central District of California can appoint a U.S. attorney. That could be Essayli, or someone else. However, the Trump administration has used unprecedented maneuvers to sidestep that process for two other federal prosecutors this month. A judicial panel declined to name interim U.S. Atty. John A. Sarcone III, or anyone else, as the U.S. attorney in upstate New York. So Bondi appointed Sarcone to a lesser position in the same office, then designated the responsibilities of the higher office back to him. Another judicial panel declined to permanently appoint New Jersey's interim federal prosecutor, Alina Habba — one of Trump's former personal lawyers who has no prosecutorial experience. Bondi decried the judges for going 'rogue,' fired the career prosecutor they chose instead and reinstated Habba. Trump then withdrew Habba's initial nomination and appointed her acting U.S. attorney, a position she can hold for another 210 days without Senate or judicial appointment. Essayli has suggested the administration may not go along with a judicial decision about his appointment either. When conservative pundit Glenn Beck asked him this week if his time was up soon, Essayli said, 'Potentially. We've got some tricks up our sleeves.' The uncertainty around Essayli's future in the office has contributed to a darkening cloud around his tenure there. That unease has been defined by mass departures of career prosecutors, decisions in high-profile cases being criticized as politically motivated and a wave of rushed filings against pro-immigration protesters that pleased Trump administration officials but have struggled to gain traction in court. The controversy has caused his supporters to rally around him, praising his performance and the zealous way in which he has championed the president's causes. Bondi told The Times this week that Essayli had her 'complete support.' His critics, meanwhile, have become increasingly vocal about his faults — and the dangerous path they see ahead were he to win a permanent posting. For months, Trump administration officials have had a loyal and loquacious ally in Essayli, who has doubled as a hype man for Trump's agenda and eagerly filed criminal charges and civil lawsuits to advance it. In late May, Assistant Atty. Gen. Harmeet Dhillon — a fellow conservative culture warrior who has worked alongside Essayli in California for years — repeatedly praised his efforts to increase federal detentions of undocumented immigrants in L.A. despite local sanctuary laws, calling him an 'absolute rock star.' Amid pro-immigrant protests in L.A., Essayli bragged during a June 10 Fox News interview about federal law enforcement arresting David Huerta, president of the Service Employees International Union California, for allegedly impeding federal officers. 'California is so lucky to have [Essayli] as the US Attorney in Los Angeles!' Dhillon posted to X. Two days later, Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem held a news conference in L.A. about federal law enforcement and military troops being posted on city streets. She, too, praised Essayli — who stood nearby — for being 'aggressive' and ensuring 'that people who break the law and perpetuate violence will be brought to justice.' A week later, Bondi and Essayli announced they were suing the city of L.A. over its sanctuary policies. A week after that, Bondi, Dhillon and Essayli announced they were suing the California Department of Education and the California Interscholastic Federation over policies allowing transgender girls to compete in girls' sports. Essayli made his name in the state legislature as a fierce opponent of allowing transgender girls to compete against other female athletes in high school sports. He also was the author of a controversial bill that would require schools to out children presenting in gender-nonconforming ways at school to their parents. Instead, state Democrats passed a bill barring school districts from requiring staff to report such information. LGBTQ+ activists and parents of transgender teenagers have told The Times they fear Essayli is trying to lie low for now but will quickly become the Trump administration's go-to prosecutor for its anti-LGBTQ+ agenda. Federal law enforcement sources said they may be right. During meetings with prosecutors early in his tenure, Essayli floated the idea of criminally charging doctors and hospitals for providing gender-affirming care to transgender youths, according to two federal law enforcement sources who spoke on the condition of anonymity for fear of reprisal. A spokesman for the U.S. Attorney's office did not reply to a question about the meetings. Meghan Blanco, a defense attorney and former federal prosecutor in L.A., said Essayli's partisanship has gone far beyond the left and rightward swings of U.S. attorneys in the past. 'You're seeing hyper politicized prosecutions, where many times the prosecutions are coupled with these extrajudicial statements by the U.S. attorney himself on news programs or on his X account, where it is very clear the purpose of that is not to promote public safety,' she said. 'The purpose is to rile up Trump's base and to prove to the people around him that he is a true believer who is backing whatever agenda is before him, whether or not that comports with his ethical obligations as a prosecutor.' In his interview with Beck, Essayli said he is working to get things 'reoriented and reprioritized' after years of liberal leadership in the federal courts, in the prosecutor's office and in partner law enforcement agencies in L.A. 'I'm up against very hostile judges, a bench here in Southern California that's extremely left,' he said. 'I have an office I inherited with left-leaning attorneys. And, you know, I inherited an FBI office that frankly needs culture change.' An FBI spokesperson declined to comment. One controversy sparked by Essayli involves Trevor Kirk, a Los Angeles County Sheriff's deputy convicted by a jury in February of using excessive force when he assaulted and pepper-sprayed a woman outside a supermarket. After Essayli was appointed, three law enforcement sources said he became focused on undoing the felony conviction. He requested that the Riverside County district attorney's office look it over. He also tried to delay Kirk's sentencing. Legal experts thought it an odd request, especially since Essayli could have asked the L.A. County district attorney's office — which has experience reviewing sheriff's department conduct and is run by a former federal prosecutor in Nathan Hochman — to provide a second opinion. When a judge denied that request, Essayli's office offered Kirk a misdemeanor plea deal, despite the jury having already convicted him of a felony. It was the same week Trump issued an executive order vowing to 'unleash' American law enforcement. Several federal prosecutors who had worked on the case resigned. U.S. District Judge Stephen V. Wilson, a Ronald Reagan appointee, sharply questioned the Assistant U.S. Atty. Robert J. Keenan, the only prosecutor left on the case, for hours, asking whether prosecutors had a 'serious and significant doubt' as to Kirk's guilt. Ultimately, Wilson rejected the plea agreement — which recommended that Kirk be sentenced to probation — but granted the prosecution's motion to lessen the charges against him and sentenced Kirk to four months in prison. The Andrew Wiederhorn case has also drawn scrutiny. Wiederhorn, the former chief executive of the company that owns fast-food chains Fatburger and Johnny Rockets, is under federal indictment on gun and fraud charges. Days before Essayli's appointment, Adam Schleifer, the assistant U.S. attorney handling the criminal cases against Wiederhorn, was fired at the behest of the White House. Schleifer alleged in appealing the decision that his firing was motivated in part by his prosecution of Wiederhorn, a Trump donor who has maintained his innocence. According to three sources familiar with the matter, Essayli had a meeting with Wiederhorn's defense team shortly after he was appointed. The meeting included former U.S. Atty. Nicola T. Hanna, who the sources said was in charge of the office when the investigation into Wiederhorn began and is now on Wiederhorn's defense team. According to those sources, Essayli suggested shortly after the meeting ended that the cases against Wiederhorn could be dismissed if Essayli gets permanently appointed. The trial dates in both cases have been pushed out to next year. Neither Essayli nor Wiederhorn's defense team responded to a request for comment. Essayli's tenure has been demoralizing and disruptive to many career prosecutors. His belligerent management style and clear partisanship are helping drive out veteran lawyers, according to interviews with several current and former prosecutors who spoke on the condition of anonymity for fear of retribution. Essayli has stressed making examples out of those protesting Trump's immigration raids, two prosecutors said, insisting on filing charges even in cases in which the evidence is unlikely to secure a conviction. The office has filed roughly 40 felony cases against protesters and people who have allegedly interfered with ICE operations, but only seven have netted indictments, court records show. Some have been dismissed or reduced to misdemeanors. Law enforcement sources said several were rejected by grand juries, which is rare. Some in Essayli's office have taken to calling him 'No Bill' Essayli, a reference to the legal term for a grand jury refusing to return a criminal charge — or a 'bill' — in response to a prosecutor's request, according to three federal law enforcement sources who spoke on condition of anonymity for fear of reprisal. One prosecutor said work under Essayli has been filled with threats of termination and screaming matches over cases, leading to 'very low' morale. 'When he's in the office, I feel like I usually find out about it because he's yelling at someone,' the prosecutor said. Essayli's office declined to provide The Times with the number of career prosecutors who have left the office recently. According to two law enforcement sources who spoke on the condition of anonymity for fear of retribution, Essayli said at a recent meeting that roughly 80 prosecutors out of fewer than 300 have left since early January. 'It feels like we have a going away party pretty much every week,' one prosecutor said. 'Most people that I'm familiar with are looking for other jobs.' Some see Essayli's influence spreading to the national level if he is appointed to the role permanently — and they welcome it. Riverside County Sheriff Chad Bianco is a Republican who is running for governor and knows Essayli well. He said he has been in law enforcement for more than 30 years and has never had a more cooperative partner in the local U.S. attorney's office than Essayli. 'We finally have someone that's willing to prosecute people that break the law,' Bianco said. 'Of course I want him confirmed.' That path, however, is far from certain. It's unclear whether the district's judges approve of Essayli or would appoint him, as some have expressed frustration in court with the office's tactics under his leadership. Essayli clearly has his doubts, alleging to Beck that liberal district judges in the country 'have basically signaled en masse they're not going to confirm any Trump U.S. attorneys.' A formal nomination from Trump likely wouldn't put Essayli in any better position. Under traditional Senate rules, California's two senators could scuttle any formal Trump nomination for U.S. attorney in the region by withholding what is known as their 'blue slip,' or acknowledgment of support for a nominee. Essayli told Beck there was 'no world in which' Sens. Alex Padilla and Adam Schiff agreed to his nomination. Both Padilla and Schiff in interviews with The Times declined to say whether they would oppose Essayli's appointment given that he has not been formally nominated. But both expressed strong concerns about how he has conducted himself to date. Schiff, who once worked as a prosecutor in the same office, said the U.S. attorneys he worked for under both Republican and Democratic administrations appropriately 'avoided getting involved in incendiary cultural wars or engaging in overt political activity or commentary.' Schiff said Essayli 'is a dramatic departure from that,' leaving him with 'profound concerns.' During a second 'Stop Essayli' town hall on Tuesday, Abi Jones, a 17-year-old transgender athlete from Riverside County, voiced her own fears. In a testimonial video, she said running track and cross-country in high school had taught her about resilience and helped her find a community. But she said that all changed after Essayli 'openly supported' a lawsuit challenging her participation in school sports. Abi accused Essayli of helping to launch a 'harassment campaign' against her and other transgender athletes, and of using it 'for social media content and cheap political points.' 'We need leaders who protect and support all youth,' she said, 'not target and isolate us.' When Daruvala first launched the 'Stop Essayli' effort, he said he felt as though he were 'shouting to the void' about the dangers Essayli posed, where 'only really the LGBTQ community from the Inland Empire who already knew him seemed to understand.' But that has changed with each new partisan move Essayli has made, especially his decision to charge Huerta, the SEIU president, Daruvala said. 'People woke up right away, like, 'Oh, this is not just a Trump puppet,'' Daruvala said. ''He is Trump's enforcer.''