The former President Barack Obama and the ex-Vice President Kamala Harris unleashed a wave of criticism against President Donald Trump’s administration on Thursday. These criticisms were aimed at a range of decisions they claimed as unconstitutional and detrimental to the foundational values of the nation. However, their notable public silence since Election Day 2024 does make one wonder about their current intentions and motives behind these sudden remarks.
During his declaration at Hamilton College, located in Clinton, New York, Obama vehemently expressed his disapproval for the unfolding policies under Trump’s second term. He criticized the newly imposed tariffs, the ominous threats against universities and law firms, and the alleged upheaval of the international order orchestrated by the government.
Providing his insights on the economic policies and tariffs, Obama declared his deep-seated concerns regarding the federal government’s approach towards universities. His exact words were, ‘I’m more deeply concerned with a federal government that threatens universities if they don’t give up students who are exercising their right to free speech.’ It appears as though he believes the essential American values are under threat.
‘I am more troubled by the idea that a White House can say to law firms, ‘If you represent parties that we don’t like, we’re going to pull all our business or bar you from representing people effectively.’ That kind of behavior is contrary to the basic compact we have as Americans,’ he added. Even as Obama emphasizes on adherence to the ‘basic compact’, one can’t help but question his own administration’s record on protecting these systems.
The White House has remained resilient against these criticisms. They argue that their actions, particularly towards universities, are meant to ensure accountability in dealing with important issues, including but not limited to any antisemitic tendencies or activities. Their executive actions against law firms stand strongly on the premise of national security and public interest, and thereby, reassuring the nation that they are upholding its values and not undermining them.
Obama castigated the Trump administration’s foreign policy as well, viewing it as a direct assault against the established system of alliances and international trade norms. Echoing his disapproval in his downtrodden tone, Obama termed the White House’s intention of acquiring control over Greenland as a national security measure, a blatant disregard for international order.
Harris, who unsurprisingly aligned herself with Obama’s remarks that day, was another voice emanating from the Leading Women Defined Summit in California. Her concerns were pitted against the allegedly unconstitutional actions of the White House, declaring them instrumental in spreading a ‘sense of fear’ across the nation.
She insinuated that ‘we are in the midst of seeing progress being rolled back’, but didn’t offer substantial evidence to support that claim. According to Harris, an atmosphere of fear has pervaded the country and she expressed her dismay over people’s reluctance to voice their concerns, which is a somewhat confusing standpoint coming from a former vice president.
Moreover, Harris did not shed any light on her future political plans, leaving the audience bemused about the timing and purpose of her bold declarations. One would naturally wonder, with a background of her past efforts towards weaponizing our justice system against political opposition and coercing social media companies to squelch free speech, whether she is the most credible source to stand up for these issues.
Her admittance about organizations staying silent against ‘clearly unconstitutional threats’ seems to reflect more on her own time in office than anything else. The irony is, those who were silent then are the ones ‘witnessing each day in these last few months in our country.’
Desperately putting herself back in the spotlight, earning gossip column inches over her speculated run for the California gubernatorial bid, Harris remains cynical and aloof. Without giving clear signals, she continues to keep everyone in suspense while sowing seeds of dissension and disunity.
In response to these high-sounding declarations from Obama and Harris, the White House was quick to point out the misplaced criticisms. A spokesperson responded, ‘During her time in office, Kamala Harris presided over the weaponization of our justice system against political opponents, the coercion of social media companies to censor free speech, and the wholesale destruction of our country’s economy and borders.’
The spokesperson also highlighted Obama’s insensitivity towards worker layoffs, reminding everyone how he bluntly declared that ‘some of those jobs of the past are just not going to come back.’ Such reckless attitudes clearly show that neither Harris nor Obama have a solid foundation to judge the Trump administration’s dedicated efforts for putting Americans and America first.
Obama’s and Harris’s remarks served as stark reminders of their own failures while holding office, which they conveniently mask with theatrical criticism of the current administration. Instead of providing constructive feedback or rallying the nation towards unity, they chose to tow the line of derision and divisiveness.
In the end, one can hope that their rhetoric will be seen for what it is: sadly misplaced criticism that is more a result of personal agenda than actual concern for the nation. What this nation requires are constructive criticisms and actionable plans, not divisive remarks from people who have had their chance to make things better but fell short.