A federal three-judge panel ordered both sides to confer about the plaintiffs’ demands, and the state agreed to extend the 2-for-1 credits to all eligible minimum security prisoners.

… “As she said at the time, Senator Harris was shocked and troubled by the use of this argument… Her office, on behalf of the state corrections’ department, then came to the table with the plaintiffs’ representatives to negotiate an agreement, which the court subsequently approved, that led to an expansion of the 2-for-1 credits.”

Citations needed. Was she actually shocked? Or was she forced to act by federal judges? Because it really sounds like federal judges.

Did you keep reading from there? Did you know she was a prosecutor putting people in cages for money?

“As far as I know, she did very little if anything to improve the criminal justice system when she was attorney general… The way I look at it is, she was really late to the party and more importantly when she had the authority to do something as attorney general she was absent… I’m very skeptical of her views of criminal justice at this point, she basically carried on the policies of her predecessor for the most part in battling us on getting the prison population down and anything else that the government wanted to do to prevent prison conditions from improving.”

"Time after time, when progressives urged her to embrace criminal justice reforms as a district attorney and then the state’s attorney general, Ms. Harris opposed them or stayed silent,” Lara Bazelon, a law professor and the former director of the Loyola Law School Project for the Innocent in Los Angeles, wrote in a blistering op-ed in The New York Times a week before Harris formally launched her campaign.