Just a few months ago, Vice President Kamala Harris delivered a pivotal address that cemented her dual legacy as both a former prosecutor and a prominent political leader in the Democratic party. Following President Joe Biden’s exit from the presidential race, he endorsed Harris as his successor. This endorsement thrust her into a rapid campaign for the Democratic nomination, necessitating her effective self-definition in the face of a competitive political landscape.

During her address, she emphasized her experience in law enforcement, stating, “I took on perpetrators of all kinds – predators who abused women, fraudsters who ripped off consumers, cheaters who broke the rules for their own gain. So, hear me when I say: I know Donald Trump’s type,” thereby simultaneously establishing a contrast with her Republican opponent. This theme of contrasting her prosecutorial history with Trump’s legal issues has become a central element of her campaign rhetoric.

The Early Years: A Prosecutor’s Path

Harris’s legal career began shortly after she graduated from law school, working as a prosecutor in Alameda County, which encompasses Oakland and Berkeley. In the 1990s, amid a nationwide initiative against drugs, Oakland was plagued by high rates of violent crime, presenting tough challenges for new prosecutors. Colleagues recall the intense atmosphere, with gang-related violence and serious criminal cases abounding, making the role both daunting and significant for ambitious attorneys.

According to Teresa Drenick, who worked alongside Harris, the trials were filled with gravity, and Harris showcased both competence and compassion, particularly while handling cases involving child abuse. Harris’s ability to communicate effectively with traumatized victims marked her as a standout early in her career.

Navigating San Francisco’s Political Landscape

During her rise in San Francisco, Harris entered a relationship with Willie Brown, a political figure who would later become the city’s mayor. Brown’s influence helped her make important connections within the city’s political circles. After her romantic involvement ended, Harris started her role as a district attorney in San Francisco.

The political environment in San Francisco has been described by Harris as intense and often combative, as she navigated her dual commitment to justice and political advancement. Notably, she formed valuable alliances with key political figures, including the late Senator Dianne Feinstein and former House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, which would aid her ascent through California politics.

Major Decisions and Controversies

Harris’s tenure as district attorney was not without challenges, highlighted by the shooting of Officer Isaac Espinoza in 2004 by a gang member. The city braced for a potential death penalty case, but Harris, who had campaigned against capital punishment, opted for a life sentence without parole. This decision drew critical backlash, notably from Senator Feinstein, who expressed disbelief given Harris’s previous opposition to the death penalty.

In hindsight, Harris defended her stance publicly, stating, “there can be no exception to principle.” This philosophy guided her responses to subsequent high-profile cases, although her decisions often fluctuated based on the political climate, revealing a complexity to her approach.

A ‘Progressive Prosecutor’?

Harris tried to blend a tough-on-crime reputation with progressive ideals during her time in office. Her “smart-on-crime” initiative aimed to keep non-violent offenders out of prison, advocating for job training and educational support for youthful offenders. However, her critics on both sides of the political spectrum raised concerns about her perceived alignment with the establishment.

By the time she became California’s attorney general, Harris had successfully carved a national profile. Nonetheless, her policies sometimes raised eyebrows; for example, she enforced truancy laws that led to the incarceration of parents, a move that alienated some of her liberal supporters. Additionally, her reversal on the death penalty sparked controversy, contrasting sharply with her earlier principles.

Campaigning for President

As she seeks the presidency again, Harris is leveraging her legal background while navigating the complexities of changing political views. The recent national conversation around crime has shifted, providing her with an opportunity to redefine her positioning as a prosecutor, especially against the backdrop of Trump’s legal challenges.

With different electoral dynamics in play, Harris found it necessary to moderate her stances to appeal to a broader voter base, including disillusioned Republicans. This pragmatic approach has attracted criticisms of inconsistency from her opponents. Still, supporters argue this adaptability reflects her political insight and commitment to securing the presidency.