The Shadow Docket Strikes Again

Once again, the shadow docket has reared its ugly head. This time, it's a case brought by the American Federation of Government Employees, along with other state and local government unions and advocacy groups, who are challenging Donald Trump's February executive order that all federal agencies "promptly undertake preparations to initiate large-scale reductions-in-force (RIFs)" and an OMB memo ordering agencies to submit RIFs for approval and implementation. The plaintiffs contend, among other things, that while the XO asks agencies to "undertake preparations," the agencies have already carried out RIF's including "dismantling entire offices" and firing "half or more of all agency employees."

The district court granted a preliminary injunction; the Trump administration appealed to the Ninth Circuit and asked for a stay of the injunction pending the appeal, which the Ninth Circuit denied. So, up to the Supreme Court went the White House for an "emergency" stay, because that is the playbook now. No other litigant is afforded the access to SCOTUS that this administration enjoys.

On Tuesday, the Court granted the stay application in a brief 2-paragraph order, saying the XO and OMB memo were likely lawful, so it was appropriate to put the preliminary injunction on hold while the appeals continued. The Court specifically noted that "[w]e express no view on the legality of any Agency RIF and Reorganization Plan produced or approved pursuant to the Executive Order and Memorandum. The District Court enjoined further implementation or approval of the plans based on its view about the illegality of the Executive Order and Memorandum, not on any assessment of the plans themselves." While we can't know the exact vote count, in this case we know that Associate Justice Sonia Sotomayor voted with the majority, since she penned a concurrence, while Associate Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson dissented.

There are a couple of problems here, which Jackson points out in her dissent. The first is the same problem we've seen so many times with the Court majority's increased reliance on the shadow docket to essentially decide cases without knowing all the facts, and without having the case fully briefed. There's a reason it's called an "emergency" docket—the Court is only supposed to step in under the most rare and unique circumstances because of the lack of transparency in not fully explaining the Court's reasoning in these orders (including how each Justice voted) and because the chances of making a mistake are so much greater. But Trump not being able to do what he wants as soon as he wants is apparently sufficient for this Court to involve itself.

The second is that, as Jackson notes, the district court is in the best position to evaluate the evidence and decide what the facts are—which the Supreme Court can't be bothered with in this posture. And the facts on the ground are critical. According to the Court's order, any actual RIFs are not before the Court, so it is expressing no opinion about their legality. But according to the plaintiffs, the agencies are, in fact, moving ahead with RIFs under this XO. And the district court heard evidence and issued preliminary findings that this was happening. So, that judge enjoined any implementation of the XO, as well as the XO itself.

Justice Sotomayor threw the district court and the plaintiffs a bone by stating in her concurrence that since the RIFs are not before the Court, the district court is "free to consider those questions in the first instance." How that works in practice is hard to say, since that will require additional discovery and a review of each agency's plans, which will mean further delays. Meanwhile, the dismantling of Congressionally-authorized agencies will continue apace with no input from the increasingly-less-equal branch that created them. (L)

Rollins Visits Fantasyland

Secretary of Agriculture Brooke Rollins earned a degree in agricultural development from Texas A&M in 1994. Thereafter, she spent her professional life working at a law firm, clerking for a federal judge, serving in (appointed) political office and, for 15 years, running a right-wing think tank. If this sounds to you like the résumé of someone who is technically qualified to be Secretary of Agriculture, but who hasn't had any real connection to that field in 30 years and is therefore out of touch, you would be right.

The Greek hero Achilles had only one vulnerable heel, the one that he was held by while being dipped into the River Styx. The Trump administration's immigration policy, by contrast, has numerous Achilles' heels, any one of which could come to bite Team Donald in the rear end. Among the biggest is that several key sectors of the economy, like agriculture, rely on cheap, undocumented labor to keep things running. Without the undocumented laborers, the meat and the milk and the crops either wouldn't make it to market, or they'd be vastly more expensive when they got to the market.

Already, the effects of the Trumpian approach to immigration are coming home to roost. There are many workers in the agriculture sector who are undocumented. There are also many workers in the agriculture sector who are legally in the United States, thanks to work visas, asylum applications that have been granted, or even jus soli citizenship, but who are clever enough to realize those things are no guarantee against being grabbed by men in masks and whisked off to a prison in some foreign country. And so, workers are now failing to show up for their shifts on farms, at dairies, at meatpacking plants, etc.

Needless to say, this is not an easy issue to fix, much less to fix RIGHT NOW. And in many cases, of course, if the issue is not solved RIGHT NOW, then product ends up permanently lost. You can either harvest the strawberries the week they are ripe, to take one example, or you can let them rot. Prices are already trending upward at grocery stores, and that's just a month or so into the new regime of border enforcement. The pandemic taught everyone a bit about how supply chains work, and how it takes 3-4 months for disruptions to fully manifest.

And that brings us to Fantasyland. Inasmuch as Donald Trump is never responsible for any of the effects of any of his policies, the troubles in the agricultural sector are eventually going to land at Rollins' feet. Yesterday, she and her staff staged an event designed to proactively respond to that challenge. And speaking to reporters, the Secretary stood firm and said there would be no amnesty for migrant workers. However, she said she expects to turn this problem into an opportunity, since there will now be plenty of work for the people who are now required to get a job in order to keep their Medicaid coverage.

As is so often the case when politicians—particularly members of the Trump administration—say things like this, it raises the question: Are THEY stupid, or is it just that they think that WE are? First, the wages paid for farm work aren't going to be acceptable to the vast, vast majority of Americans. Second, this is hard, hard work. The overlap between "people who really need Medicaid" and "people who are physically able to do farm labor" is very small. Third, and finally, it's not a secret that the point of the BBB was not to compel Medicaid recipients (many of whom already spend their days as caregivers, or else doing other unpaid labor) to get a job, it was to kick people out of the system entirely, so as to free up money for tax cuts.

In the end, the administration has a real problem looming ahead, and little time in which to solve it. It can certainly go with the "Rollins Plan," and then end up in a crisis when eggs jump to $10/dozen in a few months. Alternatively, it can adjust its policies, and find a way to keep the agricultural workers on the job—something Trump himself has hinted at. The first problem here is that it will be difficult to be harsh in some areas and not in others, with the goal of communicating the dual messages of "we are cracking down hard on immigrants" and "immigrants, don't worry, we won't come round you up at your farm job." The second problem is that it would divide the base, many of whom are Stephen Miller-like fanatics, and have no use for lenience, no matter how beneficial it might be for the country.

Incidentally, the Trump administration brought the immigration-enforcement reality TV show to Los Angeles again on Monday, as heavily armed immigration-enforcement officers rolled up to the city's MacArthur Park in SWAT-like armored vehicles to conduct a sweep of the area. The officers did not manage to detain a single person, reportedly, but they did disrupt several summer camps. So, it was certainly worth the time and effort. After all, everyone knows that the lanyards that 10-year-olds weave are a gateway to teenage embroidery or sculpture or scrapbooking. In any case, the raid didn't get a fraction of the attention that previous ICE raids have gotten, so it may be that we're moving into "dog bites man" territory, and that the most important thing the Trump administration wants on the immigration front—publicity—is going to be increasingly hard to come by going forward. (Z)

Of Course Newsom Is Running

Yesterday, we had an item about Gov. Andy Beshear (D-KY) positioning himself for a presidential run in 2028. Possibly the only person who is being more obvious about his intentions is Gov. Gavin Newsom (D-CA), who will be term-limited in 2026, and so will be able to campaign full-time in 2027.

At the moment, Newsom's approach to the presidential contest is three-pronged. First, he is trying to claim the mantle as the leader of the anti-Trump resistance. There are many others who are trying to claim that mantle as well, but Newsom is particularly well positioned here, because Trump sees California as the enemy, and because Newsom is able to initiate both legislation and lawsuits that will frustrate the White House's agenda. Beshear does not have that opportunity, nor do any of the myriad Democratic senators who aspire to a run.

Second, Newsom is doing everything he can to cast aside the "California liberal" label that might as well be tattooed on his forehead, and to reinvent himself as a centrist. He's been hosting some pretty odious right-wingers—e.g., Charlie Kirk, Steve Bannon, Dr. Phil McGraw, Michael Savage—on his podcast, in the name of "dialogue." He's also taken some litmus-test-failing stands on certain culture-wars issues, most obviously opining that trans girls should not compete in girls sports.

And finally, Newsom has gotten to work on the nuts-and-bolts stuff that a presidential aspirant has to do. That's actually the news that drives this item; Newsom is currently touring South Carolina, where he has displayed a newfound love of scripture (specifically Corinthians) that was not known to the Governor's California constituents. That was at a meeting of hundreds of African Methodist Episcopal bishops, incidentally.

Newsom has also rubbed elbows with a lot of prominent Democratic movers and shakers in The Palmetto State, among them Rep. Jim Clyburn (D-SC), who joined Newsom at several town hall meetings. Clyburn, who obviously carries an enormous amount of clout with voters in South Carolina, particularly Black voters, said: "I feel good about his chances."

Officially, Newsom's trip is being undertaken in support of communities that have been ravaged by natural disasters, and that will be ravaged by cuts to Medicaid. Exactly why such folks would need a visit from a governor on the other side of the country, and exactly what a governor from the other side of the country might do about such problems from his current post, was somehow unexplained.

Of course, everyone knows what's really going on, just as with all those trips by Gov. Ron DeSantis (R-FL) to Iowa back in 2023. It's interesting that Newsom is focusing on South Carolina. Maybe that is just the luck of the draw, and he'll be leasing apartments in Iowa and New Hampshire in short order. Maybe it is because South Carolina is sure to be one of the early states, while the status of Iowa and New Hampshire is somewhat in flux. Or maybe it is because he thinks he's got a better chance at winning over Democratic voters (especially Black voters) in South Carolina than the two other places.

In any event, it is going to be a tall order to overcome the reflexive dislike that many voters, including many Democratic voters, have for California in general, and for Newsom in particular. He does have a lot of time and energy to devote to the task, as noted, and he's a very shrewd political operator, so while we wouldn't want to bet money on him, we wouldn't count him out, either. (Z)

Democratic Candidate of the Week, #33: Sen. Jon Ossoff (D-GA)

This series got moved to the back burner for a few weeks, but it's time to get going again. Here are the potential 2028 Democratic presidential candidates we've already written up:

40. Gov. Phil Murphy (D-NJ)
41. Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-VT)
42. Al Franken
43. Jon Tester
44. Jon Stewart
45. Sen. Chris Murphy (D-CT)
46. Mitch Landrieu

And now, striding up to the batter's box, it's the third "Jon" of the series, namely Jon Ossoff:

• Full Name: Thomas Jonathan Ossoff
  
  
• Age on January 20, 2029: 41 (though he will turn 42 less than 3 weeks later)
  
  
• Background: It would be hard to find a biography that trumpets "future politician" more loudly than Ossoff's does. His parents were not officeholders, but they were both deeply involved in community organization and activism, with his mother, Heather Fenton, founding NewPower PAC, which works to elect women to local offices in Georgia.
  
  For his education, Ossoff attended the private academy The Paideia School from grades K-12, and then enrolled at Georgetown, taking a degree from that school's Walsh School of Foreign Service, and enrolling in classes taught by former secretary of state Madeleine Albright and former Israeli ambassador to the United States Michael Oren, among others. He also found time to be a member of the a capella group The Georgetown Chimes, and so performed at the National Security Council's holiday party several times. During a summer break, Ossoff interned with Rep. John Lewis (D-GA); thereafter, backed by Lewis' recommendation, he worked on the staff of Rep. Hank Johnson (D-GA) for 6 years, focusing on foreign affairs and defense policy.
  
  In 2012, Ossoff decamped from Washington for London, enrolling at the London School of Economics, where he earned an M.Sc. in international political economy. He remained in the British capital for most of the 8 years after graduation, co-founding and managing a production company called Insight: The World Investigates, which produces documentaries about corruption in foreign countries. The films produced under his leadership included, as their subjects, judicial corruption in Ghana, human trafficking in South America, and the enslavement of women and girls by ISIS.
  
  
• Political Experience: At the ripe old age of 29, Ossoff filed to run in the special election to represent GA-06, a seat left vacant by the appointment of Tom Price to run the Department of Health and Human Services. Inasmuch as Price won the seat by 23 points in 2016, it was not supposed to be a competitive race. However, Ossoff ran a strong campaign, and brought in bushels of money from Trump-skeptical voters across the country, while facing off against a weak opponent in former Georgia Secretary of State Karen Handel. So, while Handel did win, it was by only 3 points.
  
  The House race did much to create name recognition for Ossoff, and to convince Democratic operatives and donors that he was capable of big things. In 2020, when he jumped into the Democratic primary for the seat that Sen. David Perdue (R-GA) was trying to defend, Ossoff managed to scare off most of the serious contenders. He crushed the other six Democrats on the ballot, to win the right to advance to the general. Thereafter, he kept the general election close enough that Perdue, though he won a plurality on Election Day, barely missed out on a majority (Perdue got 49.73% of the vote).
  
  By the terms of Georgia law, the contest famously advanced to a runoff, one in which Ossoff was aided substantially by a sour-grapes-driven Donald Trump, who blamed his presidential loss on Gov. Brian Kemp (R-GA) and Georgia Secretary of State Brad Raffensperger (R-GA), and urged the MAGA base not to support the Georgia Republican Party. Trump's temper tantrum was just enough to allow Ossoff to prevail in the runoff, 50.61% to 49.39%.
  
  
• Signature Issue(s): If he runs for president, his signature issue is likely to be healthcare. That is the main thing he ran on in 2020, and he is married to a physician, Alisha Kramer, who would be a very useful surrogate on this issue, especially on women's healthcare issues, since she is an OB/GYN. Further, by 2028, there is every chance that the BBB Medicaid cuts will be coming home to roost, presenting an obvious line of attack for the Party's nominee.
  
  
• What Would His Pitch Be?: "It's time for generational change in the Democratic Party, and who better to lead it than the first millennial elected to the Senate?"
  
  
• Instructive Quote: "I'll tell you where I stand on the issues, and then I'll let the pundits decide how to label me."
  
  
• Completely Trivial Fact: Ossoff is Georgia's senior senator, by virtue of the fact that he and Sen. Raphael Warnock (D-GA) were elected on the same day, and none of the other tiebreakers (e.g., length of service in the House) applied, leaving the final tiebreaker, which is last name, in alphabetical order. This made Ossoff the youngest senior senator since 30-year-old Robert M. La Follette in 1925 (who got his "senior senator" status under the same circumstances).
  
  
• Recent News: For multiple years, Ossoff tried to walk a centrist line, but he's concluded that Trump and Trumpism are unpopular with the voters he's after, so he's been sharply critical of the administration's policies, particularly the BBB. He is also vociferous in accusing Trump of unlawful conduct, and is one of the loudest voices in the Senate calling for House Democrats to impeach Trump, should they get the opportunity in 2027.
  
  
• Strengths for the Democratic Primaries: (1) He's young, at a time when many Democratic voters are telling the old coots to get lost; (2) He's from a Southern state, which makes Democrats drool; (3) He's a very, very good fundraiser.
  
  
• Weaknesses for the Democratic Primaries: (1) The Middle East—Ossoff is Jewish, but is critical of Israel, which is likely to alienate some of his potential voters; (2) He's young, and he looks even younger than he is, so some voters might not feel he has the gravitas to be president; (3) While he has the potential to be an excellent public speaker, he's not there yet, and needs to get more emotion into his delivery.
  
  
• Polls: Nobody's polling him as a presidential candidate yet, but he does fairly well in terms of his approval ratings as a Senator; he's 12 points above water, on average (48% to 36%).
  
  
• How Does the Readership Feel?: We asked readers for their thoughts on Ossoff running for president; here are some of those responses:
  
  
  • S.P. in Harrisburg, PA: Jon Ossoff could bring advantages to Democrats, including being young, attractive and energetic. This could counterbalance someone like J.D. Vance if Vance was the Republican nominee. Southern Democrats have an appeal, since if they come from a swing state, they might have an edge over a solid-blue-state Democrat. That said, Ossoff seems to not have a huge national prominence, and much of his potential for presidential aspirations probably hinges on his reelection in 2026. Otherwise, think Beto O'Rourke.
    
    
  • E.S. In Providence, RI: While I knew of Ossoff from following the press coverage of his initial Senate campaign, I didn't know much about his policy positions. A look at his Wikipedia page and now I'm really impressed. What I like most about him is that he is a former investigative journalist. With the free press under attack, he would know how to call out the "Fake News" narrative. That his wife is an OB-GYN would be an incredible asset on the campaign trail with pro-choice Republican women. If he can raise his national profile in the next 18 months, he could be a formidable candidate.
    
    I like him already, and would support him if he runs.
    
    
  • L.R.H. in Oakland, CA: Jon Ossoff's first steps toward the presidency are getting re-elected, then developing a higher national profile. What, exactly, is he known for? What has he done, besides being a Jewish guy elected to the Senate by Georgians?
    
    Speaking of Jewish guys who are potential Democratic presidential candidates, they are Jon Ossoff, J.B. Pritzker, Josh Shapiro, and Josh Stein. I assume that if any Jewish women emerge as candidates, they will be named JoAnn, Joyce, or Julie.
    
    
  • G.K. in Blue Island, IL: My knee-jerk impulse is to support Ossoff running for president, mainly just to raise his profile within Georgia and ensure he continues to hold his U.S. Senate seat. He's articulate, likeable, and would probably do a good job connecting with disaffected voters even if his campaign eventually suffered the fate of a snowball in Hades.
    
    
  • M.J. in Birmingham, AL: I can't see Jon Ossoff even considering running in 2028 unless Georgia Democrats run the table in statewide elections in the midterms, and in truly spectacular fashion. However much he might want to become president, he strikes me as being grounded enough to accept that Democrats don't love him unconditionally—they love him because he flipped a Senate seat they could've hardly dreamed of flipping 6 years earlier and every day he holds onto it makes the day Georgia becomes a purple or even a blue state feel one day closer.
    
    In 2032 or 2036, a Presidential run might make sense for him, but I don't dare hope that Georgia is moving left enough, fast enough to get there before then.
    
    
  • H.G. in Ashburn, VA: Before Ossoff thinks about 2028, he needs to worry about 2026 first. Remember former Virginia Senator George Allen, who many considered the front runner for president in 2008, but who lost his 2006 reelection bid and was never heard from again.
    
    Assuming Ossoff wins in 2026, something that got a bit easier with Brian Kemp declining to run, Ossoff does present some good qualities for the presidential nomination; one is that he would have won two competitive elections defeating some high quality candidates, and another is that he is a young, charismatic leader who does have the ability to show fight in him. Plus, if he is the presidential candidate in 2028, he may have help in Georgia, with Raphael Warnock running for reelection. That could energize the Black vote in Georgia, which puts that state into play.
    
    Now the pitfalls. Ossoff is Jewish, so he may have to deal with some issues with the Gaza crisis which could harm him in places like Michigan where Democrats need to win. He did sign on to Sen. Bernie Sanders' (I-VT) resolution to halt arms sales to Israel, so this could also hurt him in the Jewish community. He is progressive on all the hot topics and has voted 97% of the time with Joe Biden—will that still play well in 2028 or not? As his youthful look could be a plus, it could also hurt him if things are rough and the voters are looking for the adult and not a child to help the country. Plus, he will have to answer the question in 2026 about serving a full term, so we will see how that answer plays. Yes, others have dealt with that, but this is a competitive state and 2026 will be close, so any little slip could cost him his seat in 2026 which would end his 2028 hopes.
  
  
• The Bottom Line: If Ossoff were to run, it would likely be to set the stage for a future presidential run, the way another senator elected in his early thirties, a fellow named Biden, did in 1988. Note that Georgia does have a resign-to-run law, but it only applies to the people who hold statewide office, so he could take his shot in 2028 without having to quit the Senate (assuming he wins reelection in 2026).
  
  All of this said, if a senator from Georgia is the Democratic nominee in 2028, we would bet on that person being Raphael Warnock.

Next week, it's #32, Sen. Tim Kaine (D-VA). If readers have comments about Kaine running for president in 2028, please send them to comments@electoral-vote.com.

Never Forget: Sweet Tooth

Today is a reminiscence from M.G. in Boulder, CO:

A Depression kid, my dad, Virgil Grotzky, had one chance at a scholarship, but lost out to a classmate who had spent his time in a tuberculosis sanitarium reading an encyclopedia. Virgil needed to take the next job offered and became a stockboy at Woolworth's in Dodge City, KS. At a meeting with the district manager, in response to the manager's newest policy proposal, the new kid said, "Well, that sounds like a good idea." The manager turned to him and said, "Son, if I say it, it is a good idea." Lesson learned. Thereafter the kid had a friend in a high place.

Woolworth's had a policy that said, "If you are offered a promotion, take it. Do otherwise, and you won't get another chance." Dad rose through the ranks, but was not offered opportunities that came up in places like East Poison Spider, ID. Finally he got his break—an assistant manager's position in Longmont, CO. He'd never been around mountains, but he had heard that mountains had no dust storms. Good enough.

The war came and the army came looking for Virgil in Kansas. Somehow, no one thought to tell them that he was living in another state. It took a while, but the army did finally catch up with him. He went home to say good-bye to his family. While he was there, he called the pretty, shy girl who worked at the Longmont Woolworth's candy counter and proposed. Annabeth Cohagan agreed and got to the clerk's office as they were closing. The clerk, accustomed to wartime weddings, unlocked the door for her and gave her the needed marriage license.

Virgil aced basic with the help of a sergeant who saw his potential. They trained with broomsticks because there was a shortage of guns. Virgil did not hide his thoughts about that. The lieutenant was sure the know-it-all kid couldn't handle a gun; the sergeant bet (literally) on my dad. Virgil had spent summers on the family homestead during a rabbit plague—the sergeant won the bet and helped him get into OTC. His unit was headed for North Africa, but dad wanted nothing more to do with dry, hot, flat places and declared that, like all Coloradans, he was an accomplished skier. He was transferred to the ski paratroops.

The next problem was figuring out how to attach skis to his boots. He made it down the first mountain in one piece and began looking for alternatives. The Army Air Force was looking for pilots. Clearly flying a plane beat jumping out of one. He collected his car and his wife and drove to Arizona to learn to fly.

In 1944, he was sent to England, where he piloted or co-piloted his required missions without losing a plane or crew member. Until '44, flying a B-17 over Germany was close to suicidal, but by '44, the P-51 Mustang, which combined a very maneuverable American fighter plane with a British-made Rolls-Royce engine and enlarged gas tanks, was being manufactured in large enough numbers that they could accompany the heavy bombers on their missions. In the meantime, the German air force was running out of fighter pilots. The bombing missions were never safe, but they were much safer. Given that Dad was home for Christmas of 1944, he was probably in Europe for D-Day, but he never mentioned it.

Once again, he collected wife and car and then drove to California for R&R near a base in Santa Monica before "being given the opportunity" to serve in the Pacific. The commanding officer from the base summoned dad to his office: "I see that you trained with the infantry, so, thank god, you're not one of those fly-boys." My father remembered his former district manager's advice—if someone above you says something, agree with it. He agreed. "Now it says here that you used to be an assistant manager at Woolworth's, so you know about inventory control and supply and that sort of thing?" "Yessir." "We happen to need someone with those skills here—if you'd be interested?" "Yessir!" My dad said later, "I'd have shined his shoes if he'd asked."

My dad spent the rest of the war in safe, warm California, with his car and a wife who would stand in line for an hour to buy him a few pieces of (rationed) See's chocolate. When the base was closed, he drove back to Colorado with his wife and 5-week-old daughter to see what life had to offer next.

Virgil built a house for his family with the help of his own father, learned to plaster by doing his own plaster work, and went into the business with two friends. He studied to become a chemist, then became an electron microscopist. Virgil and Annabeth were married for 66 years. He never skied or piloted a plane again. He lived to be 91, and for his last 20 years his oldest daughter kept him supplied with See's.

Thanks, M.G. (Z)

---

If you wish to contact us, please use one of these addresses. For the first two, please include your initials and city.

• questions@electoral-vote.com    For questions about politics, civics, history, etc. to be answered on a Saturday
• comments@electoral-vote.com   For "letters to the editor" for possible publication on a Sunday
• corrections@electoral-vote.com To tell us about typos or factual errors we should fix
• items@electoral-vote.com            For general suggestions, ideas, etc.

To download a poster about the site to hang up, please click here.

---

Email a link to a friend.

---The Votemaster and Zenger