logo
The list of 2028 presidential hopefuls is longer than you think. Just ask Hawaii Gov. Josh Green.

The list of 2028 presidential hopefuls is longer than you think. Just ask Hawaii Gov. Josh Green.

NBC News19 hours ago
COLORADO SPRINGS, Colo. — When it comes to the 2028 Democratic presidential contest, political pundits are already drawing up a broad list of prospective candidates.
But many recent presidential campaigns have been defined, at least in part, by candidates the prognosticators never saw coming. And the field of Democrats giving serious consideration to 2028 presidential bids is longer than usual at this early stage — and it includes an ambitious Hawaiian with an accomplished background whose last name is not Obama.
Hawaii Gov. Josh Green, a former emergency room physician who was elected governor in 2022 after more than a decade in state politics, said he's giving thought to a campaign in an interview with NBC News last week. (The interview was conducted before Tuesday's tsunami alerts in Hawaii.)
'Among governors, I think there are probably eight to 10 of us who are elevating in the public dialogue,' Green said on the sidelines of last weekend's National Governors Association summer meeting in Colorado.
'I haven't made up my mind about what the future holds,' Green said. 'I would be honored to help whomever. I might even become a potential candidate, but only if I've actually done a good job.'
Green no longer practices medicine, but he continues to lean into the lingo as he ponders his future.
'I believe we're going to have to heal this country in 2028 — and maybe beyond, because there's a lot of conflict that's been going on, and not just during the Trump era,' he said. 'So someone may want a healer.'
Green was among seven Democratic governors to attend last week's governors summit in person. A number of other governors thought to be eyeing 2028 didn't come.
But among the attendees, few others toyed rhetorically with a run with the enthusiasm of Green.
New Jersey Gov. Phil Murphy, who will be a political free agent after his second term concludes at the end of the year and whose name has been thrown around in a broader conversation around 2028, said he was focused on his last months in office — though he wouldn't rule out a run.
'I'm consumed by my last six months. Honestly, I haven't given any thought, literally, to what I will do when I hang up my cleats this coming January,' he told NBC News. 'We have an enormous amount to do … I'm gonna defer, in terms of what's next for me until down the road.'
Colorado Gov. Jared Polis was even more tight-lipped.
'I don't have anything on that,' Polis said. 'I'm, as you know, focused on the National Governors Association and in this work that I do here as governor of the state of Colorado.'
Green, meanwhile, is up for re-election next year and indicated he'd run for a second term. But that didn't preclude him from entertaining the idea of a run for higher office soon thereafter.
'I think what you're seeing is likely 10 or 12 of us will end up running for president and or ending up in the Cabinet if we've really elevated in a meaningful way,' Green said. 'We're seeing who actually steps up, and people are able to see us all and see what we're working on.'
Indeed, governors like Gavin Newsom of California, Andy Beshear of Kentucky and Josh Shapiro of Pennsylvania, as well as senators like Chris Murphy of Connecticut, Cory Booker of New Jersey and Ruben Gallego of Arizona, have all done little to tamp down speculation about potential presidential campaigns, making visits to early-voting states, pulling all-night speeches or publicly defying President Donald Trump.
Green praised the wide field of potential Democratic candidates in 2028 — mentioning by name fellow governors Newsom, Beshear and Shapiro, as well as JB Pritzker of Illinois, Wes Moore of Maryland and Gretchen Whitmer of Michigan — describing the unfolding prospective field as taking shape across 'two different approaches.'
'There are individuals who are decidedly fighting totally along party lines. And then there are individuals that are trying to stake out some kind of space where they fight for their ideologies and see if there's a place for achievement and results. And then there's a gray area in between,' Green said.
'These other guys, they have a larger national profile, but people are gonna have to appreciate whether they were able to achieve,' Green said.
Green, a Jewish, 55-year-old medical doctor from Pittsburgh, moved to Hawaii's Big Island 25 years ago after being assigned there by the National Health Service Corps, a government program that sends doctors to underserved communities. He built a life, meeting his wife, raising two children, and entering state politics and serving for 14 years in the state legislature before running for lieutenant governor in 2018.
In 2022, he ran to succeed term-limited Gov. David Ige and won in the deep-blue state. His first two-plus years in the top job have been busy: Most prominently, he oversaw the disaster response to catastrophic Maui wildfires in 2023. He was also out front this week as Hawaii prepared for tsunami waves after a powerful earthquake off the coast of Russia Tuesday. The state canceled an evacuation order Wednesday morning after the state's tsunami alert was lowered.
Green has also expanded reproductive rights and taken actions to counter the high cost of living in Hawaii. He's also increasingly inserted himself into national issues, for example, taking specific aim at Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy, Jr., whom he's blamed for measles outbreaks.
If he were to run for president, Green would likely face a big task ahead of him to stand out in a crowded Democratic primary, including low name recognition. He might not even be the only Jewish governor named Josh in the race — though he appears aware of such obstacles.
'As a small-state governor, you truly have to earn your reputation,' he said. 'You don't just get to be on Sunday morning shows all the time.'
Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

The man who got the Epstein subpoena
The man who got the Epstein subpoena

Washington Post

time25 minutes ago

  • Washington Post

The man who got the Epstein subpoena

Good morning, Early Birds. Everyone still able to get their matcha fix? Send tips to earlytips@ Thanks for waking up with us. In today's edition … How Democrats got an Epstein subpoena … 100 days from Election Day in Virginia and New Jersey … but first … Former vice president Kamala Harris is not running for California governor, leaving the door open for a 2028 presidential run. Harris was a top contender to replace Gov. Gavin Newsom, who is term-limited from running for a third term in 2026, but people in Harris's circle thought running for governor could box her out of a future presidential run, Maeve Reston reports. She also turned down a gubernatorial run in 2015 to run for U.S. Senate. Harris's statement said she would be focusing on organizing Democrats in the immediate term and would be 'sharing more details in the months ahead about my own plans.' Read more from Maeve. Here's what else you need to get ready with The Post: The House Oversight Committee is made for viral moments. It deals with some of the testiest issues on Capitol Hill, and many of the dramatic confrontations that make the rounds on social media are from the committee. It once again thrust itself into the spotlight after one of its subcommittees voted to subpoena the Justice Department's files on Jeffrey Epstein, going further on the case than Republican leadership seemed willing to go. Enter Rep. Robert Garcia (California), the second-term Democrat selected by his party to lead them on the committee — and the man who bypassed the committee's Republican leadership to subpoena the files. Garcia has been the top ranking Democrat on the committee since June. He's using the position to model how Democrats can push back on the Trump administration as voters repeatedly implore Democratic lawmakers to be more aggressive. 'One of the first things I told everybody is, we have got to be aggressive, and we have got to push back, and not just wait until we win control,' Garcia told us. 'The fight starts today, and I want us to come up with ways that we can use the Oversight Committee to get results and to get transparency.' He cited the subpoena as a prime example — using committee procedure to force action even when the party is in the minority. He targeted the House Oversight subcommittee on federal law enforcement because he knew it had a number of Republicans who were sympathetic to releasing the Epstein files, he told us, and was able to get enough Republicans on the subcommittee to vote with the Democratic members to approve a subpoena. The full committee is now required to issue a subpoena, which the team of Chairman James Comer said he would do soon. Garcia wrote to Comer (Kentucky) urging him to issue the subpoena as soon as possible. 'The Oversight Committee will be the tip of the spear in taking on Donald Trump,' Garcia told us. 'We're well positioned to do that, and we're not waiting until we win the majority back. We're doing it now.' Garcia is eager to demonstrate a new leadership style from past Democrats. He cast his candidacy to be the ranking Democrat as a generational changing of the guard, differentiating himself from more senior candidates including Stephen F. Lynch of Massachusetts and Kweisi Mfume of Maryland. The previous ranking member, Virginia's Gerry Connolly, died in May, opening the position. Connolly ran against Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (New York) for the role last year, another young Democrat who made a similar pitch as Garcia. 'He brings a deep understanding of the challenges our communities and country face, and has demonstrated an unwavering commitment and ability to meet the moment,' Rep. Summer Lee, the top Democrat on the federal law enforcement subcommittee, said in a statement. 'Under his leadership, Democrats are prepared to take this fight exactly where it needs to go.' Epstein offers a unique opportunity for Garcia to prove himself, with heightened interest in the case from the public and from several of his colleagues across the aisle. Garcia also has his eyes set on tackling other contentious, high-profile issues including deportations to the maximum-security prison CECOT in El Salvador. Garcia is hardly the first to recognize the power of the committee. Republicans under Comer have relentlessly investigated former president Joe Biden, beginning when he was in office. Oversight Committee Republicans led the probes into Biden's family and directed the unsuccessful impeachment inquiry into Biden. They are continuing to investigate Biden's mental acuity while he was in office, including whether staff acted on his behalf. (Garcia waved off pursuing impeachment now and said that would have to be a party-wide decision.) But Garcia's recent maneuver to secure the Epstein subpoena is notable because he managed to get it done while in the minority, going beyond what Republican leadership was comfortable pursuing on Epstein. Comer has also made steps to address interest in Epstein, even if he didn't go as far as to push for a full release of the Justice Department documents, which Trump has made clear he opposes. Oversight Committee Republicans also voted to interview Ghislaine Maxwell, an Epstein accomplice who is serving prison time for sex trafficking, and issue subpoenas on several prominent former Justice Department figures, including former FBI director James B. Comey; former attorneys general Merrick Garland, William P. Barr, Jeff Sessions, Loretta E. Lynch, Eric Holder and Alberto Gonzales; and former special counsel Robert S. Mueller III. They also threw in Bill and Hillary Clinton. Comer knew Democrats would make a go for releasing the files during subcommittee hearings last week and warned Republican leadership about it at the time, a Republican aide told us. Democrats had previously made moves to subpoena, including Elon Musk. He also knew several Republicans were likely to support the Epstein subpoena, so the approval didn't come as a surprise, the aide said. Comer has to sign off on the subpoena before it goes out but has yet to do so. Trump got the good economic news he is craving, but not the reaction he has been publicly and privately demanding. After the economy contracted in the first three months of the year, the Commerce Department announced yesterday that the U.S. economy grew by 3 percent in the second quarter of the year, a strong showing that our colleague Abha Bhattarai reports was 'boosted by a slowdown in imports amid ongoing trade turmoil.' That is the news Trump wanted. Hours later came the news he didn't want: The Federal Reserve, led by Chair Jerome H. Powell, announced it was keeping interest rates steady and warned about slowing economic growth, bucking Trump's furious pressure campaign that is sure to anger the Republican president. Notably, two Fed governors, Christopher Waller and Michelle Bowman, dissented from the decision and said they preferred lowering rates, our colleague Andrew Ackerman reported, the first time in more than 30 years that two sitting governors have dissented from such a decision. In announcing his decision, Powell pointed to Trump's tariff policy: 'Increased tariffs are pushing up prices in some categories of goods,' he said. 'Near-term measures of inflation expectations have moved up on balance over the course of this year on news about tariffs.' So it's a mixed bag for the president. While the economy is growing, analysts were sure to say it was not the time for Trump to be doing cartwheels on the South Lawn. 'You abstract from all of the tariff-related ups, downs and arounds, and the underlying story is that the economy is struggling,' Mark Zandi, chief economist at Moody's Analytics, told our colleague. 'The economy has significantly throttled back this year.' This news matters, though. The dominant political issue right now is the economy, prices and how people feel about their bottom line. Because so much of this is driven by vibes, news like this could improve those vibes for Republicans as they head into what is expected to be a challenging 2026 midterms season. With just under 100 days until Election Day in New Jersey and Virginia, the head of the Democratic Governors Association has a clear message for Democrats: We feel good about our standing in these races, but do not assume they are easy wins. 'These are both going to be really competitive races,' Meghan Meehan-Draper, the executive director of the association, told us. 'In Virginia, we have a lot of statewide elected Republicans. We lost this race in 2021, so we're the ones who had to make up ground from last time. And in New Jersey, history says that we shouldn't win this race. [Gov. Phil] Murphy had a tough reelection, not because he's not a great governor, but because they like to change governors in New Jersey. It's been decades since they've elected back-to-back Democratic governors.' It was a blunt assessment, but one, Meehan-Draper argued, that Democrats need to understand to avoid overconfidence ahead of two key elections. Former congresswoman Abigail Spanberger is running as the Democratic nominee in Virginia, and Rep. Mikie Sherrill is running as the party's nominee in New Jersey. 'Anyone who wants to be part of the path forward for Democrats and the Democratic Party needs to look at 38 governors races in the next two years,' Meehan-Draper said, starting with Virginia and New Jersey, two states she thinks have clear momentum, no matter how close the races may end up. The reason for that moment, she argued, was Trump and what Republicans have done with unified power since taking control earlier this year. That has federalized these statewide campaigns and given Democrats something to rally around. 'These are going to be the first governors races in response to Trump 2.0,' Meehan-Draper said. 'This is voters' first opportunity just to make their voices heard in a governor's race about the way Trump's chaotic governing has affected people in their states.' Elsewhere on the campaign: House Republican Conference Chair Lisa C. McClain is hitting the road next week to advertise the One Big Beautiful Bill Act in three competitive House districts. She's partnering with the National Association of Manufacturers for events in districts represented by Reps. Tom Kean Jr. (New Jersey), Rob Bresnahan (Pennsylvania) and Ryan Mackenzie (Pennsylvania). 'It's a privilege to help carry the message of President Trump and the American people's agenda,' McClain said in a statement. 'As Conference Chair, I have the opportunity to join my colleagues during this district work period and share that message across the country. I'm excited to help bring our results directly to more people and communities.' The National Association of Manufacturers praised the tax cuts in the bill for businesses of all sizes. Republicans are pushing back on Democratic attacks on the bill zeroing in on cuts to Medicaid, extolling instead the major tax benefits for most Americans. Democrats criticize the tax cuts as disproportionately helping the rich while reducing benefits for the poor, citing estimates by the Congressional Review Act. Senate Republicans advanced out of committee a stock trading ban bill derisively named after former House speaker Nancy Pelosi yesterday. The Pelosi Act would ban members of Congress, presidents, vice presidents and their spouses from holding individual stocks. Republicans frequently accuse Pelosi of insider trading, citing her husband's stock trading that they allege was based on confidential information gleaned from her office. Pelosi rejects the accusation but has previously been unenthused about a stock-trading ban for members. This is a capitalist country and everyone should participate, she would say. But now Pelosi is backing the effort. 'While I appreciate the creativity of my Republican colleagues in drafting legislative acronyms, I welcome any serious effort to raise ethical standards in public service,' she said in a statement. A stock trading ban has support — and opposition — on both sides of the aisle. But Democrats and some Republicans were chagrined by the fact that the Pelosi Act would kick in for elected officials next term, meaning Trump wouldn't be subjected. We finally have a proposed map for new congressional districts in Texas. As expected, the map increases the number of Republican-controlled seats by five. Though they make some districts slightly more competitive, Trump won all of the proposed Republican seats by at least 10 percentage points, making any Democratic challenge a hard sell. That could placate some House Republicans, who were unenthusiastic about new district lines that could make their reelections more competitive. It also takes some wind out of the sails of Democrats who said they would aggressively campaign in more competitive Republican districts if a new map gets approved. Democrats said they were still pursuing legal challenges and would recruit candidates to challenge in the new districts. Texas Democrats have historically performed better than Democratic presidential candidates in the state, especially in areas like South Texas, which has unique political cultures and longtime members who defy shifting political winds. Democratic Rep. Vicente Gonzalez, for example, won reelection last year despite Trump taking every county in his district. Same with Democratic Rep. Henry Cuellar, who survived a challenge despite being criminally indicted and Trump winning all but two counties in his district. Yvonne Wingett Sanchez, Patrick Marley, Marianna Sotomayor, Nick Mourtoupalas, Maeve Reston and Lenny Bronner have more on the latest map. Honolulu Civil Beat (Honolulu): Chaos across Hawaii followed a tsunami warning caused by a magnitude-8.8 earthquake just off the east coast of Russia. The warning led to sirens, jammed roads and quiet beaches. Los Angeles Times (Los Angeles): The federal funding cuts for NPR and PBS are being felt across the country, with public broadcasters in California and elsewhere cutting positions. MLive (Grand Rapids, Michigan): In what has become a summer tradition, smoke from Canadian wildfires is blanketing parts of Michigan, the Great Lakes area and the northern stretches of the Northeast. With Kamala Harris's announcement that she won't run for governor, we're curious about your thoughts on the 2028 field. Any candidates already sticking out to you? Send us your thoughts at earlytips@ or at and Thanks for reading. You can follow Dan and Matthew on X: @merica and @matthewichoi.

Kamala Harris leaves door open for potential 2028 presidential run
Kamala Harris leaves door open for potential 2028 presidential run

Yahoo

timean hour ago

  • Yahoo

Kamala Harris leaves door open for potential 2028 presidential run

WASHINGTON – Former Vice President Kamala Harris won't be running for California governor in 2026– but is not ruling out another bid for the White House. The two-time Democratic presidential candidate, who abruptly took over as her party's nominee in the 2024 general election, said in a surprise announcement on July 30 that she would not compete in next year's gubernatorial race. What Harris, who currently lives in Southern California with her husband Doug Emhoff, did not say was whether she'd decided about running for president in 2028. 'For now, my leadership – and public service – will not be in elected office,' she said. 'I look forward to getting back out and listening to the American people, helping elect Democrats across the nation who will fight fearlessly, and sharing more details in the months ahead about my own plans.' A source familiar with her thinking said Harris, 60, did not pass on a gubernatorial campaign in order to clear a path to run for president in 2028. But the person noted that Harris also did not close the door on running for president. And it would have been politically impossible for her to seek both elected offices. The next governor of California will take office at the beginning of 2027, around the same time that Harris would need to be gearing up for a presidential bid were she to compete again. Another factor: Harris is currently writing a book, two people with knowledge of her plans said, and is expected to go on tour. More: Burdened by what had been: Kamala Harris couldn't convince voters "She can do anything she wants to do, but she owes us nothing. And I hope she spends some time with the kids and Dougie, maybe teaches. I'm ready to go read the book,' longtime Harris ally Bakari Sellers said. 'She's a talent and 2028 could be it. Or 2032. Whatever she decides. She's young." The announcement adds an additional wrinkle to the decision-making process for Democrats with national ambitions who were forced to take a back seat to Harris last year, when former President Joe Biden quit his reelection campaign and endorsed his sitting vice president as his replacement. Harris lost in a landslide to President Donald Trump, whom she characterized on the trail as an acute threat to democracy in the face of robust evidence that the electorate was primarily concerned about inflation and the economy. She also came under criticism in the abbreviated campaign for refusing to distance herself from Biden, whose mental fitness and age have faced even greater scrutiny since he left office. In her statement on the California governor's race, Harris said the country is in a 'moment of crisis' because the nation's politics, government and institutions have frequently failed the American people. 'As we look ahead, we must be willing to pursue change through new methods and fresh thinking – committed to our same values and principles, but not bound by the same playbook,' Harris said. 'She could still drop the hammer' The announcement took even some of her closest political allies by surprise. 'I was anticipating an announcement for governor, because she would be good at it, and I thought she still wanted to get back in that fryer right now,' said Sellers, a co-chair of Harris' first presidential campaign. Harris allies said they do not know which way Harris would come down on a 2028 presidential bid, but they were glad to see her commit to remaining politically active. 'I think we'll all be waiting with bated breath to see what her next steps are,' former Biden and Harris campaign manager Julie Chavez Rodriguez said. Chavez Rodriguez worked for Harris in her Senate office and on her bid for the 2020 presidential nomination before joining Biden's team. She worked as a senior aide at the White House and ran his reelection campaign. She said she believes Harris is focused on 'figuring out what she can do in the moment…given the challenges that we're facing in the immediate, and what I know will be even more challenges coming up.' Glynda Carr, president of Higher Heights, which works to expand Black women's political power and backed Harris' 2020 presidential bid, said her campaign had inspired other women to run. 'I am on team Kamala Harris in whatever she decides to do,'' Carr said, noting that Harris can lead outside of having an elected office. 'I'm on team 'Kamala, private citizen,' team 'Kamala, candidate.'' Jaime Harrison, the former chair of the Democratic National Committee, said he would like to see Harris campaign for Democrats running for office in 2026, especially in the South. He encouraged his party to stay focused on overturning Republicans' narrow majorities in the U.S. House and Senate and winning governorships. 'It's good to have her out there, and I'm sure, as she goes around the country, she'll make up her mind about what she wants to do about 2028. But we can't think about 2028 until we get to 2026,' Harrison said. As for what it all means for possible candidates such as former Transportation Secretary Pete Buttigieg, Maryland Gov. Wes Moore, California Gov. Gavin Newsom and Pennsylvania Gov. Josh Shapiro, the answer is simple, Sellers said. 'Nothing, because she could still drop the hammer on all of them if she wants to run for president,' the Harris ally said. 'She'll beat all of them if she decides.' This article originally appeared on USA TODAY: Kamala Harris leaves open door for 2028 presidential campaign

What to Do — And Not to Do — About a Judge Like Emil Bove
What to Do — And Not to Do — About a Judge Like Emil Bove

The Intercept

timean hour ago

  • The Intercept

What to Do — And Not to Do — About a Judge Like Emil Bove

Emil Bove, the nominee to be U.S. Circuit Judge for the 3rd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, is sworn in before his confirmation hearing in the Senate on June 25, 2025, in Washington. Photo: Bill Clark/CQ-Roll Call via Getty Images President Donald Trump's second term has so far been a constant barrage of unconstitutional actions and illegal orders. So it was thus no surprise when the Senate on Monday confirmed Trump's former personal lawyer and Justice Department lackey, Emil Bove, to a lifetime appointment on the 3rd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals. That 50 Republican senators would install this fascist bootlicker to one of the most powerful judicial positions in the land for life is, as MSNBC legal analyst Andrew Weissmann put it, 'a nail in the coffin' for a system of checks and balances on authoritarian presidential overreach. There's a risk, however, after a grave blow like this to legal, political, and constitutional norms, that liberal epitaphs to the American constitutional order will mourn the wrong thing. Bove's appointment confirms something worse than the Republican embrace of lawlessness. He represents the Republicans' use and abuse of our fraught constitutional order for the purposes of enacting profound, life-denying, and long-lasting injustices to uphold a white nationalist regime. Liberal epitaphs to the American constitutional order risk mourning the wrong thing. Calling on the restoration of preexisting norms of law and constitutionality to reverse course will be, at best, insufficient. After all, liberal reliance on a system of order above justice helped deliver us Trump and his jurist enablers in the first place. This is not to understate how appalling it is that Bove has been appointed a federal judge. 'It is one thing to put lab-designed Federalist Society members on courts across the country — and, to be clear, several of Trump's nominees from his first administration went far beyond that,' wrote legal journalist Chris Geidner when Trump nominated Bove, 'but it is another thing altogether to name a lawless loyalist to a federal appeals court.' Geidner called Bove's confirmation a 'line that cannot be crossed.' It has now been crossed. Bove is perhaps best known as the Justice Department official who dismissed corruption charges against New York Mayor Eric Adams — a decision that led more than 10 Justice Department attorneys to resign in protest. He fired federal prosecutors who had worked on January 6 cases. According to three Justice Department whistleblower accounts, Bove also told federal attorneys that they 'would need to consider telling the courts 'fuck you'' and ignore orders blocking the administration from sending immigrants to El Salvador's gulag. Over 900 former Justice Department attorneys, identifying with both parties, wrote letters opposing Bove's judgeship. Yet Republican senators refused to hear whistleblower testimony and dismissed the widespread concerns about Bove as Democratic meddling. As usual, they did what the president asked. Bove's new, permanent position assures more serious harms to come. Given how few cases are heard by the Supreme Court, the 3rd Circuit is most often the final voice in the law for cases from Delaware, New Jersey, Pennsylvania, and the U.S. Virgin Islands. Bove has made unwaveringly clear that, for him, the law is the president's will. This position is now standard in the Republican Party and all too consistently affirmed by a Supreme Court majority committed to unitary executive theory to vest authoritarian powers in Trump's hands. Earlier this month, Geidner posted on social media that 'should Bove be confirmed — which he should not be — he should immediately be the subject of an impeachment inquiry should Dems retake Congress.' Based on his actions at the Department of Justice, there are ample grounds to call for impeachment. Democrats should vow to do this immediately. Senate Democrats carry significant blame for Bove's judgeship, too. Senate Democrats, after all, carry significant blame for Bove's judgeship, too. His seat should have been filled by Biden nominee, Adeel Mangi, who would have been the first Muslim judge on a federal appeals court. Instead of shutting down vile, Islamophobic Republican attacks against Mangi, Senate Democrats allowed the smears to gain ground and eventually stood down on the nomination. Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer on Tuesday said, 'To confirm Mr. Bove is a sacrilegious act against our democracy.' He did not mention that, when he was Senate majority leader, he permitted a relentless Islamophobic campaign to tank Mangi, a qualified nominee, which left the judge's seat open for Trump's taking. The Democratic establishment may lament Bove's confirmation as 'a dark, dark day,' but we have no reason to think that this party leadership will bring us toward the light. Geidner's suggestion — to pursue impeachment — would be the very least that Democrats can do. What they should already be doing is using every tool in their power to hinder Trump's deportation machine. Given the Democrats' own vile embrace of harsh border rule, I am not holding my breath. The judges who have continued to push back directly against Trump's illegal actions, meanwhile, remain a crucial constraint on some of the administration's worst attacks on our rights. These judges are under unprecedented attack. On the same day Bove was confirmed, Trump's Justice Department filed a baseless misconduct complaint against U.S. District Judge James Boasberg. In March, Boasberg issued an order to block deportation flights to El Salvador under Trump's invocation of the 1798 Alien Enemies Act — the very sort of order that Bove reportedly told attorneys to say 'fuck you' to. In an obscene retaliatory escalation, the Justice Department's complaint claims that Boasberg's alleged comments — that the administration could trigger a 'constitutional crisis' by disregarding court orders — 'have undermined the integrity and impartiality of the judiciary.' The complaint says that the administration has 'always complied with all court orders.' The idea that it constitutes judicial misconduct to suggest otherwise, despite clear evidence of the executive's disregard for certain unfavorable court orders, is the sort of authoritarian logic that obviates concerns about a constitutional crisis in the worst way: There can be no crisis if fascist rule silences all constitutional pushback. Then the problem is not a constitutional order in crisis, but a fascist order without opposition. This is not yet the state of affairs. The courts — certain courts, at least — are not yet a dead end. It should be increasingly clear, however, that they will not deliver us from fascism either. As legal scholar Aziz Rana wrote earlier this year, the left should 'strongly back litigation efforts and condemn Trump's defiance of the courts,' but not because the courts are a terrain of liberatory struggle. Rana is clear that 'the reason to oppose Trump's violation of court orders is not out of a general faith in judges or constitutional norms,' but because they are a tool, however limited, for protecting people and holding the administration to account. The affront at the heart of Bove's confirmation is not that he does not respect the law — although that should no doubt be disqualifying for a judge. If that's where we object, however, we risk lionizing a criminal legal system that also gives rise to racist policing and mass incarceration. Bove's violence lies primarily in his commitment to a form of injustice that ensures impunity for the corrupt and powerful, while the poorest and most vulnerable are treated as wholly disposable. The infamous advice Bove allegedly gave to ignore court orders over deportations was a 'fuck you' to the Constitution and the rule of law, yes, but above all it was a 'fuck you' to the over 200 men who were rounded up, kidnapped, shaved, beaten, and tortured in a foreign gulag without any recourse. It was a 'fuck you' to human beings. It should go without saying that the constitutional order in and of itself has never in practice guaranteed equality and justice for all. The constitutionalization of slavery's abolition and many basic civil rights protections took extraordinary social struggle and political work. The successful dismantling of the constitutional right to an abortion took decades of political organizing, too. Nothing in the Constitution guarantees progress. 'The great social movements of the past, from abolition to civil rights, labour to women's suffrage, famously called for the defiance of unjust court judgments that sustained slavery, segregation and disenfranchisement, or criminalized union organizing,' Rana noted. 'Considering the current right-wing control over the courts, the left may find itself in a similar place in the coming years, calling for civil disobedience of judicial authority.' With judges like Bove in place, such action will likely be all the more necessary.

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into a world of global content with local flavor? Download Daily8 app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store