“Why wouldn’t Donald Trump be allowed to choose his own people?” she said. “To all the liberals who are panicking, I say—yes, you’re right to be nervous. If you’re not putting America first, then no, you shouldn’t stay.”
Her comments have intensified ongoing national conversations about the role of career officials in the executive branch and the boundaries between political loyalty and public service. Critics argue that replacing federal employees based on political alignment could risk eroding the nonpartisan nature of the civil service, which is designed to ensure continuity, stability, and adherence to the law regardless of which party holds power.
Supporters of Habba’s stance contend that elected administrations should have greater freedom to appoint individuals who share their governing vision, especially in sensitive or high-level roles.
“This isn’t about partisanship,” Habba added. “It’s about ensuring that the people tasked with carrying out the president’s policies are actually committed to doing so, not undermining them from within.”
No official White House statement has been released in response to Habba’s remarks, but they have already prompted renewed scrutiny over executive authority, bureaucratic independence, and the long-term implications for government staffing practices should Trump win a second term.
As the 2024 election cycle unfolds, the conversation around the federal workforce is likely to remain a key issue—one that sits at the intersection of governance, loyalty, and institutional integrity.