The Democratic battle for the highest spot on the Home Judiciary Committee is heating up as Congress returns this week to Washington, the place Rep. Jamie Raskin (D-Md.) is difficult Rep. Jerrold Nadler (D-N.Y.) to be the face of resistance to the second Trump presidency.
The race has apparent sensible implications, because the Judiciary panel has huge jurisdiction over the federal courts and legislation enforcement companies, together with the FBI, the place Democrats worry Trump will abuse his powers to focus on political opponents.
It’s additionally the panel the place impeachment investigations are likely to launch, and Nadler and Raskin — each constitutional attorneys who performed outsized roles in impeaching Trump throughout his first time period — probably see a possibility to construct on that legacy if Democrats flip management of the Home within the 2026 midterms.
With these high-stakes at play, the race might get ugly.
“I think it’s unfortunate,” Nadler informed The Hill when requested about Raskin’s bid. “He’s already ranking on a different committee, which is a very important committee.”
Past a mere roster change, nonetheless, the competition additionally bears a heavy symbolic significance for Home Democrats, who’ve an extended historical past of honoring seniority relating to selecting prime committee seats. In a typical 12 months, that may favor Nadler, 77, a 34-year veteran of Capitol Hill hailing from a strong Manhattan district. And a few Democrats are already questioning Raskin’s determination to problem the long-serving liberal stalwart.
“I don’t really like the idea of — kind of like a barracuda, cruising around the pool looking to consume smaller fish,” stated one Democratic lawmaker, who spoke anonymously to debate the delicate matter. “That’s not to say that Jerry is a smaller fish than Jamie. But it’s kind of like a predatory situation.”
However that is no typical political 12 months.
President Biden was pressured to drop off of the presidential poll over issues about his age. Two different Democratic committee heads, outdoors of Nadler, have additionally confronted challenges from much less senior members. And a youthful cohort of Democratic lawmakers appear more and more desperate to problem custom and expedite the generational turnover that’s been sluggish to emerge beneath the present conventions of seniority.
“It’s not a lack of confidence [in Nadler]. It’s a fire in the belly thing,” stated a second Democratic lawmaker, touting Raskin. “I think he has the votes. I think he’s going to do it.”
That clamor not solely lends a lift to Raskin, 61, an eight-year veteran, but in addition threatens to upend a core customized on the coronary heart of the Democrats’ governing construction — a change that would have far-reaching implications for each the legislative route and the general public face of the social gathering for years to come back.
Some lawmakers — particularly newcomers on Capitol Hill — are unbothered by that departure in custom.
“I have total respect for seniority,” stated Rep. Madeleine Dean (D-Pa.), a Judiciary Committee member who has served within the Home since 2019. “But maybe because I’m one of the newer people, not quite so young, but one of the newer people, that I’m not so absolutely dreaded that seniority is the only barometer.”
Others aren’t so certain.
Rep. Hank Johnson (D-Ga.), a member of the Judiciary Committee, instructed the seniority system has labored nicely, and shouldn’t be deserted merely for the sake of a generational shift.
“That may be an argument for some, but the fact of the matter is that we still have the rule of seniority in place,” stated Johnson, who can also be a member of the Congressional Black Caucus that has lengthy defended the seniority system.
“I’m certainly open to discussing whether or not we, at some point in the future, move to another way of selecting leadership,” he continued. “However proper now, seniority is the rule. And I’ve all the time gone with the rule until there is a compelling cause to ignore the rule and transfer in a distinct route.”
Raskin’s determination to leap into the Judiciary rating member race — which he introduced in a letter to colleagues on Monday — got here after weeks of hypothesis surrounding whether or not or not he would make the leap from the highest job on the Oversight and Accountability Committee.
A number of retailers reported that some Democrats had been pushing Raskin to problem Nadler — together with former Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) — seeing the youthful, extra refined Marylander as optimum to the brash, septuagenarian New Yorker. That sparked some tensions throughout the caucus.
“This is people encouraging Jamie to run for this seat to settle old scores against Nadler,” stated the primary Democratic lawmaker.
Raskin stated he got here to a conclusion “after a week of consulting most of our Colleagues and engaging in serious introspection about where we are,” earlier than citing “new generations” of leaders — a veiled nod to his competitors, and an indication that age was one in every of his motivations in operating.
On Tuesday, Raskin downplayed any lingering tensions between the 2 whereas additionally emphasizing that he’s nonetheless barreling forward along with his problem.
“Obviously I’ve got great affection and admiration for Congressman Nadler and everything he’s done over an amazing career,” Raskin stated.
“I’m working to get the votes,” he added. We’re having an important dialog within the caucus about the place issues are headed.”
If Raskin is utilizing his younger age as a bonus, nonetheless, Nadler is referencing his a long time of expertise — which embrace seven years as the highest Democrat on the Judiciary Committee — as an asset in his quest to carry the management put up.
“As a New Yorker, I have stood up to Donald Trump my entire career,” Nadler wrote in his letter to colleagues final month.
Nadler informed The Hill that he’s “of course” persevering with along with his bid, including that Raskin is “entitled to run.” Regardless of the problem, he stated he’s assured he’ll maintain the seat.
“I think we’re gonna be okay.”
