After Trump’s attacks, Supreme Court Justice Neil Gorsuch determined to stay ‘fearless’ and ‘independent’
Supreme Court Justice Neil Gorsuch speaks with ABC News Live anchor Linsey Davis on ‘All Access.’ (ABC News)
(WASHINGTON) — Supreme Court Justice Neil Gorsuch responded publicly to personal attacks by President Donald Trump in an interview with ABC News Live Prime anchor Linsey Davis, suggesting he is determined to remain “independent” and “fearless” in fulfilling his duty despite harsh criticism from the president who appointed him.
After Gorsuch voted with Chief Justice John Roberts, Justice Amy Coney Barrett and the court’s three liberals to invalidate Trump’s sweeping global tariffs in February, the president lashed out at his nominees Gorsuch and Barrett, calling them a “disgrace,” “disloyal,” “unpatriotic,” “fools and lapdogs,” and “an embarrassment to their families.”
Gorsuch told Davis the comments prompted him to reflect on the ideals enshrined in the Declaration of Independence.
“We want independent judges, people who are fearless and able to apply the law without respect to persons, as our judicial oath says, right? That’s why we’re giving life [tenure] to anybody, and it’s quite an honor,” Gorsuch said when asked for his reaction to Trump. “It’s a humbling privilege to be able to serve in this capacity, and I’m just one link in a long chain.”
Gorsuch, who rarely does media interviews, spoke with ABC News ahead of publication of a new children’s book, “Heroes of 1776: The Story of the Declaration of Independence,” officially released Tuesday.
“We tell the story about the debate that led up to [the Declaration]. It almost didn’t go through,” the justice said of the nation’s founding charter, penned 250 years ago this year. “None of this is inevitable, and it isn’t inevitable that it will survive. America’s biggest enemy is itself. I believe we have to recommit every generation … if we’re going to carry those ideals forward.”
Even before he was confirmed in 2017, Gorsuch was forced to respond to extraordinary attacks on the federal judiciary by a sitting president, after Trump in his first term targeted judges who blocked controversial policies. Then-Judge Gorsuch described Trump’s behavior as “disheartening” and “demoralizing.”
Now, the conservative justice, 58, who will mark a decade on the high court bench next year, said he shares Roberts’ concern that a surge in personal attacks against judges is “dangerous,” even if intense criticism can be fair game.
“Part of the job of the judge is to accept criticism. Right? Everybody’s got a right to free speech,” Gorsuch said. “It’s a raucous thing in democracy, and that’s good. That’s great. And part of that is part of our story. Part of our story too, is realizing, again, that the person sitting across from you probably loves his country every bit as much as he did.”
Gorsuch said he was “heartbroken” by the recent attempted assassination of Trump at the White House Correspondents’ Dinner and that the episode appeared to be part of a broader deterioration of civility in politics.
“What keeps me up at night is disagreements that we have, and our sometimes incapacity to realize the humanity of the people we disagree with,” he said.
Gorsuch has publicly maintained a friendly personal relationship with senior liberal Justice Sonia Sotomayor, making several joint appearances in an effort to promote civics education and attempt to shore up faith in the Court as an institution.
“When I disagree with my colleagues … I never question that the person sitting across from me loves this country every bit as much as I do, that they love the Constitution and Declaration [of Independence], and that they’re doing their best.”
Kamala Harris speaks during a fireside chat at MEET Las Vegas on May 07, 2026 in Las Vegas, Nevada. (Ian Maule/Getty Images)
(WASHINGTON) — Former Vice President Kamala Harris said she’s “thinking about” a 2028 presidential bid, but some previous supporters are unenthusiastic — despite her national name recognition and experience as second in command.
ABC News spoke with more than 15 former donors, fundraisers, campaign aides, Biden White House staffers and current advisers about Harris running again, some of whom asked not to be named to be able to speak freely.
A source familiar with Harris’ thinking told ABC News that she’s considering all options, but hasn’t begun explicitly deliberating on a run with her team.
Kamala Harris vs. Gavin Newsom
Like Harris, California Gov. Gavin Newsom got his start in San Francisco politics. He is also viewed as a top 2028 presidential contender and may gain some of her supporters, though has not formally committed.
Former San Francisco Mayor Willie Brown, one of California’s top powerbrokers, told ABC News while it’s early to speculate, he believes the most “viable” between his two mentees would be Newsom, “because he would not be the most recent loser.”
“When you embrace somebody for the job, you really want to embrace a winner, and Newsom would be what you would have to say at the moment is a winner,” Brown said.
Brown said he was “surprised” that Harris decided not to run for California governor in 2026.
“I would have advised her to be elected governor, so that she would be in the same identical position, if not better than for electability nationally than Newsom. …. If she was in the category of being on January 8, 2027, the governor of California, the dialogue would be about her candidacy, not about anybody else’s,” Brown said.
An influential California donor and early Harris supporter told ABC News, “I have not heard one person suggest it would be good for anything if she ran. … We are looking for someone who is fresh and not imposed on the voters. We understood we were stuck with the situation last time, but this is not the case going forward.”
Asif Mahmood, a bundler who’s backed Harris for 15-plus years, said, “If it is Kamala and Newsom, the money will be divided, and I think Newsom might have little edge on that because he’s currently governor.”
“It is not that I can say with certainty that I will be backing her the way I was backing before, depending on the field,” Mahmood added.
A source close to Harris said that if she ran, she’d be aware that donors and operatives may align with other campaigns.
Sour feelings among some donors
Harris’ 2024 presidential campaign burned through more than $1 billion in 15 weeks — which some fundraisers said has discouraged them from giving large sums to campaigns going forward.
“I think the electorate is going to be extremely hungry for a new, fresh, younger voice with a different perspective, and who can effectively articulate an agenda for the future. … I don’t believe that Kamala is the right person for this moment by any stretch of your imagination,” said a fundraiser who raised money for Harris’ 2024 run.
A longtime Democratic donor who raised money for Harris’ 2020 presidential campaign told ABC News, “I really have not heard anybody say that they want her to run. In fact, it’s the opposite.”
“I really think that anyone who became the nominee after Biden dropped out would have raised a ton of money. … I don’t know a lot of at least big donors who were like, ‘I feel really great about putting this money in for her.’ It was just, she was the top of the ticket,” the donor added.
One Harris 2020 fundraiser who was involved with her 2024 run said, “For somebody who wants to have a future political career, she has done nothing … to maintain any relationships with anybody that I’m aware of … that were her big donors. We’re now two years into it, and I don’t know anybody’s even got a thank you note.”
But a couple fundraisers ABC News spoke with felt differently.
“The average Democratic voter who gives 10 bucks, 20 bucks, right now likes Kamala Harris, so she’ll have an ability to raise a lot of grassroots money, which is the mother of local politics,” said Tom Nides, a former Biden administration official who fundraised for Harris in 2024 when she became the nominee. “The big dollar money is becoming less significant, and they will come on board if they think she’s gonna win.”
In response to a request for comment regarding the seemingly unenthusiastic sentiment among some donors, a spokesperson for Harris said in a statement, “The Vice President is grateful to the supporters who have stood with her. Right now, as Americans look for leadership in the fight against the rollback of their fundamental rights and freedoms — including the Supreme Court’s devastating gutting of the Voting Rights Act — she is focused on electing Democrats up and down the ballot in the midterms and building up state parties for the critical fights ahead.”
‘Biden fatigue’
For some, Harris’ association to former President Joe Biden — who withdrew from the race only after facing mounting pressure from Democrats — will be scrutinized.
“There is a kind of Biden fatigue,” said a former senior campaign adviser who worked on Harris’ 2024 campaign.
“She was obviously his vice president, which is a benefit. … But also, a detriment in other ways, especially when your boss was not very popular when he left office. … I think the donors, and just the electorate writ large, they have an appetite for a fighter, but they kind of want some new faces,” the former adviser said.
One 2020 Harris fundraiser said her opponents would seize on her not calling on Biden to drop out earlier in a potential 2028 debate.
However, Ashley Etienne, the vice president’s former communications director, said Harris distanced herself enough with her book “107 Days,” which details her frustrations with Biden.
“I think that in 2028, if things are continuing as they are now, and there’s the affordability issue, costs, unemployment, lack of democratic principles, I think that Biden thing is not going to be an issue anymore,” said one former senior campaign adviser who remains close to Harris.
Another source close to Harris said enough time would have passed by, and she could address her association with Biden with self-reflection about topics she couldn’t address as vice president.
Decision to not run for governor Harris’ decision not to run for California governor this year came as a disappointment for some, but was viewed as strategic to others.
“Had Harris entered the race, she would have cleared the field and saved Democrats a lot of pain and uncertainty that developed in this primary,” Mahmood said.
Etienne said if she jumped into the gubernatorial race, it would’ve been a “losing proposition.”
“For somebody who wants to be president, somebody who was already vice president, I didn’t see that as a really good, sound move. … I just didn’t think she gained anything by doing it,” Etienne said.
A longtime supporter of Harris said he was “surprised” by Harris’ decision not to run for governor, because it would’ve been a “significant” role for her, but said at the time she was making the decision, her campaign would have been hit by questions regarding her defense of Biden and why she didn’t press him to drop out sooner.
A former senior campaign adviser who remains close to Harris said there was a sense that Harris had to make a decision on a gubernatorial run too quickly after the presidential campaign.
How Harris may be approaching her 2028 decision A source close to Harris said that if she ran in 2028, she’d have high name recognition, favorability among Democrats, freedom to articulate her vision without restraints of the vice presidency and more time.
The source added that Harris is focused on the midterms — helping raise money for candidates and state parties — and vocalizing opposition to Republican-led redistricting efforts in the South.
In August, Harris will be delivering a keynote speech to Louisiana Democrats at the party’s annual fundraiser gala, where she will outline what she thinks Democrats must do to counteract the Louisiana vs. Callais decision that gutted Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act. The former vice president has also been placing calls to federal and state lawmakers impacted by the decision, including members of the Congressional Black Caucus. During the spring, she anchored fundraising events for Democratic state parties in North Carolina, South Carolina, Arkansas, Georgia and Nevada.
Her decision could hinge on whether she thinks a presidential campaign or setting up a foundation would be a better vehicle to advance her vision for America, according to the source familiar.
Adrienne Elrod, who served as Harris’ senior adviser and spokesperson in 2024, said, “I think anyone who has valuable ideas about how to move our country forward. … they should run for president, especially if they have broad experience to bring to the table, and she certainly fits that bill.”
Etienne said she thinks Harris should run and said she can distinguish herself from the field as she’s not currently serving in office for the first time in her political career.
“Folks think she’s fantastic, but there was some obvious, baggage that she had, and so how are you in this short period of time addressing that, offloading it, and then coming out with this combination of feeling fresh and new, yet seasoned enough to bring the nation through what Trump is taking us,” Etienne said.
“It’s really hard to run for president, and I think people who haven’t done it underestimate the difficulty and the scrutiny and all the things that come with it at that level, and so in a lot of ways the best way to be prepared to run is to have run already,” said a former senior campaign adviser who remains close to Harris.
The U.S. Capitol Building dome, on May 12, 2026, in Washington, DC. (Graeme Sloan/Getty Images)
(WASHINGTON) — In an unanimous 99-0 vote, the Senate on Wednesday advanced a resolution to withhold pay from senators during a government shutdown.
Republican Sen. Pete Ricketts did not vote on the resolution, which was introduced by Republican Sen. John Kennedy of Louisiana.
The vote was a procedural one. The legislation now moves toward final passage, and is expected to pass with resounding support.
The legislation, which would take effect after the November 2026 election, would instruct the secretary of the Senate to place senators’ paychecks on hold during the duration of any future federal government shutdowns. Those payments would be released to lawmakers only after the government reopens.
While multiple similar House bills have been introduced, it’s unclear if legislation in the lower chamber will pass.
“Take your brain with you, because this is about shared sacrifice. This is about putting our money where our mouth is,” Sen. Kennedy said on the Senate floor ahead of Wednesday’s vote.
Kennedy’s resolution comes after federal workers faced a historic 43-day government shutdown late last year caused by a deadlock between parties over Affordable Care Act subsidies.
During that time, approximately 670,000 federal workers were furloughed, 60,000 workers outside the federal government lost their jobs and Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) recipients lost out on benefits all while members of Congress continued to get paid — highlighting the disparity of financial pain endured by members of Congress and the people they serve.
Calls for withholding pay from members of Congress continued to grow this year during the record 75-day partial shutdown of the Department of Homeland Security. Transportation Security Administration agents, Coast Guard members and other department employees went without pay as a stalemate played out on Capitol Hill over immigration enforcement funding and oversight reforms.
(WASHINGTON) — House Speaker Mike Johnson and Senate Majority Leader John Thune announced on Wednesday the Republican-controlled Congress “in the coming days” will fully fund the Department of Homeland Security through both the appropriations process and reconciliation process.
“In following this two-track approach, the Republican Congress will fully reopen the Department, make sure all federal workers are paid, and specifically fund immigration enforcement and border security for the next three years so that those law-enforcement activities can continue uninhibited,” the top Republicans said in a statement.
This is a developing story. Please check back for updates.
