Breitbart News reported former President Barack Obama and former Vice President Kamala Harris strongly criticized President Trump's recent actions during separate speaking engagements, labeling them dangerous and unconstitutional.

During an interview at Hamilton College in Clinton, New York, Obama expressed deep concerns about Trump's federal government policies and approach to university regulations. Harris echoed similar sentiments at the Leading Women Defined Summit, where she addressed the mounting tension surrounding Trump's recent policy decisions.

Obama challenges Trump's university stance

The former president specifically targeted Trump's handling of university policies and law firm restrictions. Obama emphasized his worry about government overreach in academic institutions, particularly regarding student protests and free speech issues. His criticism extended to the administration's treatment of law firms representing opposing parties.

Obama highlighted the stark contrast between current reactions to Trump's policies and how similar actions would have been received during his presidency. He argued that Trump's approach to tariffs could harm American interests, though his primary concern centered on civil liberties.

According to Obama:

It's unimaginable that the same parties that are silent now would have tolerated behavior like that from me, or a whole bunch of my predecessors. I'm more deeply concerned with a federal government that threatens universities if they don't give up students who are exercising their right to free speech. The idea that a White House can say to law firms, if you represent parties that we don't like, we're going to pull all our business or bar you from representing people effectively. Those kinds of — that kind of behavior is contrary to the basic compact we have as Americans.

Harris warns of spreading fear

The former vice president delivered her message through video remarks, expressing little surprise at recent developments under Trump's leadership. She emphasized the growing concern about organizations remaining silent in the face of what she termed "unconstitutional threats."

Harris observed a pattern of institutional compliance with administration demands, suggesting this behavior feeds into a broader climate of fear. However, she maintained an optimistic outlook, suggesting that resistance to these policies might emerge.

The failed presidential candidate shared her perspective:

We are seeing organizations stay quiet. We are seeing those who are capitulating to clearly unconstitutional threats. And these are the things that we are witnessing, each day in the last few months, in our country, and it understandably creates a great sense of fear. Fear has a way of being contagious.

When one person has fear, it has a way of spreading to those around them. And we are witnessing that, no doubt. But I say this also, my dear friends, courage is also contagious.

Democracy defenders speak against power

These statements reflect growing Democratic opposition to Trump's governance style and policy implementations. The criticisms particularly focus on perceived threats to academic freedom and legal representation rights. Their remarks suggest mounting tension between traditional democratic values and current administrative practices.

Both leaders emphasized the importance of maintaining constitutional principles and protecting civil liberties. Their coordinated messaging indicates a unified Democratic front against what they view as executive overreach. The timing of their statements suggests a strategic move to address mounting concerns about governmental authority.

Notable voices raise constitutional concerns

Barack Obama and Kamala Harris have emerged as prominent critics of President Trump's recent policy decisions, particularly regarding university regulations and law firm restrictions. Their statements at Hamilton College and the Leading Women Defined Summit, respectively, highlighted concerns about governmental overreach and potential constitutional violations. As these discussions continue, both former officials suggest that resistance to these policies might grow, despite current institutional compliance with administration demands.