Skip to content
Search

Latest Stories

Follow Us:
Top Stories

Can a gay, tough-on-crime prosecutor who supports abortion rights become California's 1st independent AG?

Can a gay, tough-on-crime prosecutor who supports abortion rights become California's 1st independent AG?

Griffiths is the national editor of Independent Voter News, where a version of this story first appeared.

California voters have a chance to make history this year by electing independent leaders to the state’s top executive offices for the first time in modern history. Among these independents is a gay, tough-on-crime, former Republican who supports abortion rights and is running for attorney general.

And then there's No Party Preference gubernatorial candidate Michael Shellenberger, who has tremendous financial backing and could beat out a weak Republican field with a message that targets Democrats’ handling of homelessness. If he is able to advance to November, the former Democrat could bring in support from across the political spectrum and give the incumbent, Democrat Gavin Newsom, a much more formidable challenge than he faced against his staunchly conservative opponent in the recall.

But the contest that may present the more probable path to a political upheaval going into the June 7 primary is not for the governor’s seat. It is the race for attorney general.


Sacramento District Attorney Anne Marie Schubert is running for attorney general as an NPP candidate, and unlike any independent candidate before her, she has garnered near-universal backing from California’s top law enforcement organizations. In other words, she may not have the power of the party institutions, but she has critical support in a race where crime is as big an issue as ever.

Schubert changed her affiliation from Republican to independent in 2018 and is prominently known throughout California for prosecuting the Golden State Killer. She is running against two Republicans and Democratic incumbent Rob Bonta.

Why could Schubert's matchup with Bonta present a serious challenge that a Republican challenger cannot offer?

Well, it’s California. With abortion rights taking center-stage following the leaked draft of a potential Supreme Court ruling in Dobbs v. Jackson, being anti-abortion (or a Republican for that matter) will be a non-starter with the California electorate. But Schubert, like Bonta, is supports abortion rights. She’s also gay.

These two factors could give disgruntled Democrats and left-leaning independents who fear of the Republican Party’s positions on social issues a viable alternative.

Under California’s nonpartisan top-two primary, the general election will be a one-on-one race between Bonta and one other challenger. Bonta knows that his path to victory against a Republican will be a much easier one, and is spending money to make sure Republicans vote for the most anti-abortion Republican in the race.

Against a Republican, Bonta would be able to duck widespread concerns over a rise in crime observed by most California voters, and his support for Proposition 47, which a majority of voters want to change. Proposition 47 reduced the threshold for some drug and theft offenses to misdemeanors, including more than doubling the amount stolen to charge a person with felony theft.

In its endorsement of Schubert, the San Diego Union Tribune writes:

“Sacramento County District Attorney Anne Marie Schubert would be a far more formidable rival. She’s a Republican-turned-independent, pro-choice, even-keeled disdainer of Donald Trump who was the first gay person elected to countywide office in Sacramento. In interviews, she’s wondered what’s progressive about telling people “that domestic violence is a nonviolent crime.” But she’s hardly a law-and-order caricature. She faults the state for inadequate rehabilitation funding to help offenders rebound. In our Q&A, she praised state laws limiting officers’ use of force and promoting transparency.”

Could Schubert, who believes Californians have grown “ sick of politics ” become the first NPP candidate to be elected attorney general?

In a head-to-head race against a Democrat who has been an advocate for far-left policies and prosecutors that have become increasingly unpopular, we might find out this November.

If Schubert can pull off a top-two finish on June 7, her nonpartisan approach to prosecution and law could help her win over Democrats dissatisfied with Bonta, Republicans who like her aggressive approach to violent crime, and independents who are just fed up with partisans on both sides of the isle.

An independent has already come close to winning a statewide election in California under the state’s nonpartisan top-two primary. Republican-turned-independent Steve Poizner nearly beat Democrat Ricardo Lara for insurance commissioner in 2018 in the midst of a blue wave. But he did not have the kind of institutional support that Schubert has garnered, the independent resume -- nor the timing.

Political analysts predict a red wave this year. But in California, Schubert could represent a shifting tide that brings in a wave of independence.

Read More

Varying speech bubbles.​ Dialogue. Conversations.

Examining the 2025 episodes that challenged democratic institutions and highlighted the stakes for truth, accountability, and responsible public leadership.

Getty Images, DrAfter123

Why I Was ‘Diagnosed’ With Trump Derangement Syndrome

After a year spent writing columns about President Donald Trump, a leader who seems intent on testing every norm, value, and standard of decency that supports our democracy, I finally did what any responsible citizen might do: I went to the doctor to see if I had "Trump Derangement Syndrome."

I told my doctor about my symptoms: constant worry about cruelty in public life, repeated anger at attacks on democratic institutions, and deep anxiety over leaders who treat Americans as props or enemies. After running tests, he gave me his diagnosis with a straight face: "You are, indeed, highly focused on abnormal behavior. But standing up for what is right is excellent for your health and essential for the health of the country."

Keep ReadingShow less
After the Ceasefire, the Violence Continues – and Cries for New Words

An Israeli army vehicle moves on the Israeli side, near the border with the Gaza Strip on November 18, 2025 in Southern Israel, Israel.

(Photo by Amir Levy/Getty Images)

After the Ceasefire, the Violence Continues – and Cries for New Words

Since October 10, 2025, the day when the US-brokered ceasefire between Israel and Hamas was announced, Israel has killed at least 401 civilians, including at least 148 children. This has led Palestinian scholar Saree Makdisi to decry a “continuing genocide, albeit one that has shifted gears and has—for now—moved into the slow lane. Rather than hundreds at a time, it is killing by twos and threes” or by twenties and thirties as on November 19 and November 23 – “an obscenity that has coalesced into a new normal.” The Guardian columnist Nesrine Malik describes the post-ceasefire period as nothing more than a “reducefire,” quoting the warning issued by Amnesty International’s secretary general Agnès Callamard that the ”world must not be fooled” into believing that Israel’s genocide is over.

A visual analysis of satellite images conducted by the BBC has established that since the declared ceasefire, “the destruction of buildings in Gaza by the Israeli military has been continuing on a huge scale,” entire neighborhoods “levelled” through “demolitions,” including large swaths of farmland and orchards. The Guardian reported already in March of 2024, that satellite imagery proved the “destruction of about 38-48% of tree cover and farmland” and 23% of Gaza’s greenhouses “completely destroyed.” Writing about the “colossal violence” Israel has wrought on Gaza, Palestinian legal scholar Rabea Eghbariah lists “several variations” on the term “genocide” which researchers found the need to introduce, such as “urbicide” (the systematic destruction of cities), “domicide” (systematic destruction of housing), “sociocide,” “politicide,” and “memoricide.” Others have added the concepts “ecocide,” “scholasticide” (the systematic destruction of Gaza’s schools, universities, libraries), and “medicide” (the deliberate attacks on all aspects of Gaza’s healthcare with the intent to “wipe out” all medical care). It is only the combination of all these “-cides,” all amounting to massive war crimes, that adequately manages to describe the Palestinian condition. Constantine Zurayk introduced the term “Nakba” (“catastrophe” in Arabic) in 1948 to name the unparalleled “magnitude and ramifications of the Zionist conquest of Palestine” and its historical “rupture.” When Eghbariah argues for “Nakba” as a “new legal concept,” he underlines, however, that to understand its magnitude, one needs to go back to the 1917 Balfour Declaration, in which the British colonial power promised “a national home for the Jewish people” in Palestine, even though just 6 % of its population were Jewish. From Nakba as the “constitutive violence of 1948,” we need today to conceptualize “Nakba as a structure,” an “overarching frame.”

Keep ReadingShow less
Ukraine, Russia, and the Dangerous Metaphor of Holding the Cards
a hand holding a deck of cards in front of a christmas tree
Photo by Luca Volpe on Unsplash

Ukraine, Russia, and the Dangerous Metaphor of Holding the Cards

Donald Trump has repeatedly used the phrase “holding the cards” during his tenure as President to signal that he, or sometimes an opponent, has the upper hand. The metaphor projects bravado, leverage, and the inevitability of success or failure, depending on who claims control.

Unfortunately, Trump’s repeated invocation of “holding the cards” embodies a worldview where leverage, bluff, and dominance matter more than duty, morality, or responsibility. In contrast, leadership grounded in duty emphasizes ethical obligations to allies, citizens, and democratic principles—elements strikingly absent from this metaphor.

Keep ReadingShow less