Padilla was pushed to the ground and handcuffed. It highlights a growing trend in the Trump administration
When the Trump Justice Department took the extraordinary step of arresting a local judge seven weeks ago, plenty feared what it could portend.
Milwaukee Judge Hannah Dugan's case will play out in the weeks and months to come – she's pleaded not guilty to obstructing the arrest of an undocumented immigrant – but arresting judges and public officials isn't something to undertake lightly. Critics warned of the chilling effect it could lead to and the precedent it would set.
Virtually nothing in the past seven weeks will have tempered those fears.
The fervor to arrest public officials who run afoul of the Trump administration doesn't appear to be going away.
Since Dugan's arrest:
The Justice Department has criminally charged a big-city mayor and a Democratic congresswoman.
A Republican congressman floated arresting 100 more judges who ruled against President Donald Trump.
Trump earlier this week floated arresting Democratic California Gov. Gavin Newsom.
And on Thursday alone, a Republican congressman advocated criminally charging three Democratic governors, while Democratic Sen. Alex Padilla of California was handcuffed after interrupting a press conference from Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem. Some in the MAGA movement are now pushing for Padilla to be charged, though there's no indication he will be.
Almost all of these situations involved officials on the opposite political side of Trump's aggressive immigration crackdown.
As with Dugan, it's important to account for the nuances of these situations. There's much we have to learn about Padilla being handcuffed, for instance.
His office said he was just trying to ask Noem a question, while DHS spokeswoman Tricia McLaughlin claimed that he 'lunged toward Secretary Noem.' (There is video – from multiple sources and angles – for people to draw their own conclusions.)
It's also not clear that those who handcuffed him knew who he was. Padilla did announce himself at one point as a US senator. McLaughlin said Padilla wasn't wearing his Senate security pin and that the Secret Service 'thought he was an attacker.' Noem said, 'Nobody knew who he was.'
Padilla told reporters after the incident that he was not arrested.
But other instances of apprehension – or threats of it – more clearly point to zealous attempts to go after the other side criminally. And the totality of them certainly paints a picture.
GOP Rep. Clay Higgins of Louisiana was talking about arresting 1 out of every 18 federal judges in the United States, for instance – apparently for the crime of ruling against Trump. (Republicans have claimed these judges are engaged in a 'judicial coup' against the president.)
Rep. Gary Palmer of Alabama on Thursday floated arresting Minnesota Gov. Tim Walz, Illinois Gov. JB Pritzker and New York Gov. Kathy Hochul for alleged obstruction of justice over sanctuary policies in their states. He did so even though the courts have generally upheld such policies.
'And charges … for obstruction should be brought against each one of you for doing this,' Palmer said. 'I'll leave that up to the Department of Justice.'
(Palmer struck his own comments from the record after Democratic Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez of New York argued he was intimidating the witnesses.)
Trump's justification for floating Newsom's arrest was even less robust, saying that 'his primary crime is running for governor, because he's done such a bad job.'
And in at least one case, the Justice Department has already reversed course. After charging Democratic Newark Mayor Ras Baraka for his actions at an Immigration and Customs Enforcement detention facility last month, it withdrew the charges.
That was followed by a rebuke from a judge that's pretty notable for this moment in time.
The magistrate judge told interim US Attorney for New Jersey Alina Habba that it was 'a worrisome misstep by your office' and suggested it involved 'political agendas.'
'An arrest, particularly of a public figure, is not a preliminary investigative tool,' the judge said, calling it 'a severe action, carrying significant reputational and personal consequences.'
Such concerns don't appear to be carrying the day in the Trump administration or the MAGA movement. The arrest of the judge in Milwaukee has only preceded more arrests – including of Democratic Rep. LaMonica McIver of New Jersey, who was indicted for the same scenes Baraka was involved in. The indictment alleges she impeded and interfered with immigration officers outside the detention center.
Some legal analysts have questioned the strength of that case, while McIver has disputed the allegations as baseless and defended her presence at the facility as part of her authorized role as a member of Congress. Her lawyer has referred to the prosecution as 'political retaliation against a dedicated public servant.'
It's at this point that many Trump supporters will say: Well, Democrats started it. It's true that Trump was indicted no fewer than four times in recent years.
But the only criminal case to actually reach a conclusion resulted in a conviction.
And the substance of his federal indictments were things even many Republicans had criticized Trump for. A historic number of GOP senators voted to convict Trump in connection with the January 6, 2021, attack on the US Capitol, and Trump's own former attorney general, William Barr, repeatedly said that Trump's classified documents indictment was 'entirely of his own making.'
In other words, these were serious cases involving weighty issues of trying to overturn a democratic election and protecting national secrets.
What we're seeing today is a much more cavalier application of the concept of criminally charging public officials. And the fact that examples keep coming in quick succession suggests we've reached something of a turning point.
And that's regardless of the propriety of what happened with Padilla.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
40 minutes ago
- Yahoo
TACO Trump Punts Decision on Bombing Iran in Wild New Twist
President Donald Trump will decide whether to attack Iran within the next two weeks, and has issued a plea to stave off the backlash in his MAGA base: Trust in Trump. As a MAGA civil war over military intervention threatens to tear his party apart, the president has left the door open to a diplomatic off-ramp. 'Based on the fact that there's a substantial chance of negotiations that may or may not take place with Iran in the near future, I will make my decision whether or not to go within the next two weeks,' he said, in a direct message issued through his White House spokeswoman Karoline Leavitt. The unexpected twist is reminiscent of the two week window Trump regularly gives Russia to start negotiating a genuine ceasefire with Ukraine. It comes after the president left the nation on edge for days about the possibility that he would help Israel destroy a deeply buried nuclear enrichment facility at Fordow, in northeast Iran, using a 30,000 pound bomb known as a 'bunker buster'. Trump gave numerous mixed messages, insisting the strikes could be imminent and saying it was 'too late' to talk while also insisting that there was scope for negotiations. On Wednesday, he even boasted that 'nobody knows what I'm doing' when it comes to Iran. Tensions escalated this week when he abruptly departed the G7—despite having meetings locked with global allies including Australia and India—to rush to Washington to deal with the issue. For the next three days, he then huddled with his national security advisers to decide whether the U.S. military helps Israel's bombing campaign. But such a move would risk any remaining chance of the nuclear disarmament deal Trump has been pursuing and threatened to tear apart the very base that got him elected. The MAGA civil war over the Iran put conservatives such as pro-Israel war hawks Laura Loomer and Mark Levin on one side, and America First firebrands such as Charlie Kirk, Steve Bannon and Jack Posobiec on the other. 'We can't have another Iraq,' Bannon warned at a breakfast with reporters hosted Wednesday by The Christian Science Monitor. Earlier today, he was spotted at the White House but Leavitt declined to say what he was doing there. The issue also spilled out onto screens this week, with conservative pundit Tucker Carlson—who accused the president of being 'complicit' in the Middle East conflict—skewering Texas Senator Ted Cruz over his support for regime change. Asked what the president would say to those who voted for his 'America First' doctrine and didn't want the nation involved in another foreign war, Leavitt replied: 'Trust in President Trump.' 'President Trump kept America and the world safe in his first term as president, implementing a 'peace through strength' foreign policy agenda,' she said. 'With respect to Iran, nobody should be surprised by the President's position that Iran absolutely cannot obtain a nuclear weapon. He's been absolutely unequivocal about this.' Trump's announcement was immediately mocked online. One critic on social media described it as 'beyond parody' while another joked: 'He's going to announce it during Infrastructure Week when the healthcare plan comes out.' Leavitt was also quizzed about the issue in the briefing room, with one reporter noting that Trump had regularly given Russia two week deadlines on Ukraine, with no outcome. However, she blamed the Biden administration, saying both were complicated global conflicts that the president had inherited.
Yahoo
40 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Trump Boasts ‘Nobody Knows What I'm Doing' as MAGA Civil War Rages
President Donald Trump has boasted that 'nobody knows what I'm doing' when it comes to Iran as a MAGA civil war rages over the prospect of a U.S. military attack. Speaking with reporters for the first time since meeting with his national security council on Tuesday, the president refused to say whether the U.S. is moving closer to helping Israel strike Iranian nuclear facilities. 'You don't seriously think I'm going to answer that question,' Trump said, mockingly. 'Will you strike the Iranian nuclear component, and what time exactly? Sir, sir, would you strike it? Will you please inform us so we can be there and watch? 'I mean, you don't know that I'm going to even do it. You don't know. I may do it; I may not do it. I mean, nobody knows what I'm going to do.' Trump's comments come as a MAGA civil war has been brewing for days between pro-Israel war hawks such as Laura Loomer and Mark Levin on one side, and America First firebrands such as Charlie Kirk and Jack Posobiec on the other. Former Fox News host Tucker Carlson also entered the fray last week, calling Trump complicit and suggesting that the administration 'drop Israel [and] let them fight their own wars.' Carlson also clashed with Texas Senator Ted Cruz this week, lashing out over Cruz's support for military intervention in Iran despite his apparent lack of knowledge about the country. While a U.S. attack on Iran could have serious consequences for the region, Trump's rhetoric has shifted considerably in recent days, with the president admitting that his patience is wearing thin on finding a diplomatic solution to stop Iran from building its nuclear arsenal. On Wednesday, Iran Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei hit back at the president for his 'absurd rhetoric' after Trump demanded Iran's 'complete surrender' and issued an ominous warning on X: 'The US entering this matter (war) is 100% to its own detriment. The damage will be far greater than any harm that Iran may encounter.' But Trump doubled down on his push for Iran to surrender, telling reporters that Tehran should have negotiated weeks ago. Only now were they rethinking their strategy, he said. 'They even suggested coming to the White House,' he claimed. A U.S. defense official told the Daily Beast it was moving the Nimitz Carrier Strike Group to the Middle East to protect U.S. forces in the region. Vice President JD Vance also posted on X that after showing 'remarkable restraint,' Trump 'may decide he needs to take further action to end Iranian enrichment.' As the president weighed options, some Democrats on Capitol Hill called for Congress to act. Senator Tim Kaine introduced a resolution to prevent the U.S. from using military force against Iran without congressional approval while several others backed Vermont Senator Bernie Sanders' bill to prevent the use of funds for military force against Iran without congressional authorization. But Democrats were deeply divided over the response to Iran. Senator John Fetterman, who has often bucked his party to fiercely defend Israel, said he would vote against Kaine's resolution. He told reporters he was a 'hell yes' on the U.S. making preemptive strikes against Iranian nuclear facilities. Senate Majority Leader John Thune rejected that the president would need authorization from Congress to strike Iran. 'I think right now the president's within his authorities,' Thune told reporters on Capitol Hill on Tuesday. 'He obviously has a lot of authorities as Commander in Chief to respond to incidents that happen around the world.' Thune said if it goes on for a period of time, there would be discussions on what the role of Congress should be and whether it needed to take action. 'I think right now, let's hope and pray for the best outcome,' he said. Senate Foreign Committee Chair Jim Risch emphasized on Tuesday 'this is not our war' and praised the president for threading the needle when it came to Iran. While the House is not in session this week, in a rare moment of bipartisanship, Republican Rep. Thomas Massie was joined by Democratic Rep. Ro Khanna to introduce a resolution to prohibit the U.S. from getting involved in the conflict. 'This is not our war,' Massie wrote in a post. 'Even if it were, Congress must decide such matters according to our Constitution.'
Bloomberg
an hour ago
- Bloomberg
Pakistan Backs Trump for Nobel Peace Prize He's Long Craved
Pakistan said it will nominate US President Donald Trump for the Nobel Peace Prize, a move that may have as much to do with annoying rival India as it does with building stronger ties to Washington. The recommendation is being made for Trump's 'decisive intervention and pivotal leadership during the recent India-Pakistan crisis,' according to a social media post on Saturday by Pakistan's government.
