Harris Warns Trump Can’t Be Allowed to Pick More Supreme Court Justices
Former Vice President Kamala Harris is openly warning that President Donald J. Trump must be blocked from appointing additional justices to the Supreme Court of the United States—a statement that underscores growing concern on the Left over the court’s originalist direction.
In a post on X, Harris—fresh off a decisive loss to Trump in the 2024 election—shared a report from The New York Times detailing how a “liberal organization” is preparing a multi-million-dollar campaign to oppose potential Trump nominees before any vacancies even arise.
According to the report, Josh Orton, president of Demand Justice, estimated the effort would require significant funding. “the project would cost $3 million to start and $15 million more if vacancies occurred.”
The Times noted:
Josh Orton, the president of Demand Justice, said the project would cost $3 million to start and $15 million more if vacancies occurred and Mr. Trump nominated a successor to the court — most likely for Clarence Thomas or Samuel A. Alito Jr., the two oldest justices. Justice Thomas is 77 years old, and Justice Alito is 76.
If Democrats were to win control of the Senate in the November elections — they need to flip at least four Republican-held seats to do so — Mr. Trump would face steep odds of getting nominees confirmed during the remainder of his term. If a Democrat were to succeed him as president, Justices Thomas and Alito would both be in their 80s by the time a potential Republican president could appoint a successor.
Harris made her position explicit, writing, “We must be clear eyed about what is at stake with the Supreme Court right now. We cannot allow Donald Trump to hand pick one, if not two, additional justices. The nation’s highest court must be stopped from becoming even more beholden to him.”
Her comments reflect a broader frustration among Democrats as the Court continues to move in a constitutionalist direction, with Trump-appointed justices consistently emphasizing the original meaning and intent of the nation’s founding document—an approach long championed by conservatives.
That contrast has only sharpened political divisions, particularly after the confirmation of Ketanji Brown Jackson, whose nomination by Democrats drew criticism from conservatives who argued identity politics played an outsized role in her selection.
Meanwhile, attention has also turned to the health of sitting justices. Samuel Alito was briefly hospitalized last month after feeling unwell during a March 20 event, according to reports from CNN.
“On the evening of Friday, March 20, Justice Alito felt ill during an event in Philadelphia,” Patricia McCabe, a spokeswoman for the Supreme Court said in a statement. “Out of an abundance of caution, he agreed with his security detail’s recommendation to see a physician before the three-hour drive home. After that examination and the administration of fluids for dehydration, he returned home that night, as previously planned.”
Sources indicated the visit was precautionary, as Alito and his wife were preparing to return to their home in Northern Virginia and opted to stop at a hospital out of caution.
Alito had been in Philadelphia attending an event hosted by the Federalist Society honoring his judicial record. While he skipped earlier panels, he participated in an evening reception and appeared alongside several federal judges and former clerks.
Earlier that same day, the Supreme Court released opinions, though Alito was not present on the bench. However, he did attend the Court’s private conference afterward, signaling no major disruption to his duties.
Now 76, Alito remains the Court’s second-oldest justice behind Clarence Thomas, who is 77. Alito also recently participated in arguments related to birthright citizenship—proceedings that were notably attended by President Trump, where observers reported the justice appeared in normal condition.
Originally nominated by George W. Bush in 2005 and confirmed the following year, Alito has become a central figure in the Court’s conservative jurisprudence—precisely the kind of influence that has Democrats increasingly anxious about the possibility of further Trump appointments.
As the political battle over the judiciary intensifies, Harris’s warning signals what could become a major flashpoint heading into the next election cycle: whether the Supreme Court continues its shift toward constitutional originalism—or is pulled back by a resurgent Left determined to block it.