LOS ANGELES — California Assemblymember Vince Fong’s congressional hopes remain alive after a judge ruled Thursday he could proceed as a candidate to replace Rep. Kevin McCarthy (R-Calif.).

The ruling by Superior Court Judge Shelleyanne W.L. Chang caps off a chaotic start in the race to succeed the former House speaker, who is retiring at the end of the month.

The decision rejects the argument by California Secretary of State Shirley Weber, whose office said Fong’s candidacy violated state election code. Chang said such statute “is inapplicable to Fong and cannot be used as a reason to preclude him” from the primary ballot.

Fong issued a celebratory statement soon after the ruling was handed down.

“Today’s ruling is a victory for the voters of the 20th Congressional District, who will now have the opportunity to select the candidate of their choice in the March 5th election,” he said. “I am grateful that Judge Chang upheld the integrity of our elections and sided with Central Valley voters against an overreaching Sacramento politician.”

At issue was whether Fong could remain on the ballot as a congressional candidate, even though he had already filed for reelection for his Assembly seat after opting not to seek McCarthy’s seat. Fong changed his mind after state Sen. Shannon Grove (R-Bakersfield), who was widely seen as a strong potential contender, surprised the Central Valley by declining to run.

By that point, the deadline to withdraw from the ballot as an Assembly candidate had passed. Fong filed for a congressional run anyway, which Weber said violated state law against appearing on the same ballot twice for different positions. After Weber said Fong would not appear on the list of certified candidates for the 20th congressional district, Fong sued to stay on the ballot.

Thursday’s hearing delved into arcane interpretations of state election law, with Fong’s lawyers arguing that state law did not explicitly prohibit a politician from serving in both Congress and the state legislature.

The judge’s ruling, while favorable to Fong, contained a distinct note of concern about his candidacy. Change wrote the outcome of her decision “may result in voter confusion and the disenfranchisement of voters if Fong is ultimately elected for both offices but does not retain one. Moreover, it somewhat defies common sense to find the law permits a candidate to run for two offices during the same election.”

Chang issued her ruling minutes before the 5 p.m. deadline for the Secretary of State to produce a list of certified candidates for the district.

Fong, who once worked as McCarthy’s district director and was immediately endorsed by his former boss, is well-positioned as a front-runner, given his established profile in the district and access to the former speaker’s political network.

But the confusion over Fong’s eligibility prompted a number of other hopefuls to enter the race for the solidly Republican district. Tulare County Sheriff Mike Boudreaux and Kyle Kirkland, a wealthy Fresno casino-owner and philanthropist, are among those seeking the seat, as well as David Giglio, who entered the race months earlier as a far-right challenger to McCarthy.

John Fetterman’s had a rollercoaster of a year.

In January, he was sworn into office as Pennsylvania’s new Democratic senator despite suffering from a debilitating stroke on the campaign trail. In doing so, he managed to flip the only seat in the upper chamber during the 2022 cycle. Six weeks after assuming office, he checked himself into a hospital for clinical depression.

Fetterman emerged from Walter Reed National Military Medical Center as an unlikely evangelizer of mental health treatment, something medical professionals applauded as a stigma-busting move that could save lives.

But in the last few months, Fetterman has returned to the place where he’s most comfortable: as a highly skilled troller. Only this time, his targets have often been allies in the progressive movement who have long seen him as an icon. In the wake of Hamas’ Oct. 7 attack on Israel, Fetterman has emerged as one of the most vocal supporters of the country in the Senate.

We sat down with Fetterman earlier this month to talk about his disagreements with the left, his beef with Democratic strategist James Carville, why the app formerly known as Twitter is no longer on his phone and his predictions for 2024. Fetterman used a service on his phone that instantly transcribed our conversation as he continues to deal with auditory processing challenges from his stroke.

This interview has been edited for length and clarity.

Are you surprised that so many progressives disagree with you on Israel?

I mean, of course I expected that there will always be a diversity of opinions, and that as long as things go that the Democratic caucus might splinter more. … I would be the last man standing to be absolutely there on the Israeli side on this with no conditions.

I grieve, and it’s awful the incredible civilian deaths and the suffering. It’s awful. War is hell, as they say. But only one side has used civilians as human shields. Only one side has broken the cease-fires. Only one side will systematically rape, torture and mutilate Israeli women and girls in the most unspeakable, awful ways. … Without destroying Hamas, there will be no enduring peace and a stable, two-state solution.

What about Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu? Should he remain in power?

He’s the leader that we have. And that’s the leader that we’re working with.

Even some Israelis are frustrated with him.

To me, it’s not a referendum on Netanyahu. It’s just what we have to do to stand with Israel. And I do agree with the prevailing opinion that Hamas must be destroyed.

But should Netanyahu stay in power, yes or no?

I don’t have a vote in that. That’s for the Israeli citizens. They have much more at stake. But what I can say [is] I believe that an overwhelming majority of Israeli citizens would want a senator standing with them and their right to destroy Hamas [and not] somebody that would splinter or peel away when things continue and as more and more antisemitism continues to go across college campuses, across our nation.

You have some newfound fans on the online right because of your views on Israel. What do you make of them?

I don’t spend any time on Twitter and that’s the truth. I encourage you — you can check my personal phone. I couldn’t even get on Twitter if I had to.

When did you decide X, formerly known as Twitter, wasn’t worth it?

It was not very helpful to promoting mental health.

Is this something you realized in the last year?

Very much so.

[Editor’s note: A Fetterman staffer said he still drafts “all the memes” on his social media accounts, but he tells his aides to press send.]

Biden’s campaign hasn’t yet announced any battleground staff in Pennsylvania. Should the campaign be more built out in the swing states at this point?

I don’t give anybody advice unless on fashion. … All I do know is that the president will win Pennsylvania. And I do believe if he wins Pennsylvania, and I believe he will, he will be a second-term president.

We’ve talked about this a few months ago, and you told me then you thought Biden would win Pennsylvania and win the overall election. But things have gotten worse for him since. Trump is now ahead in many polls.

But that doesn’t really matter. There’s a whole lifetime in politics between now and next November as well. I’m not worried about that. And I’m very vocal about this, too, while there are Democrats that are being very critical about the president. … I’ll use this [as] another opportunity to tell James Carville to shut the fuck up. Like I said, my man hasn’t been relevant since grunge was a thing. And I don’t know why he believes it’s helpful to say these kinds of things about an incredibly difficult circumstance with an incredibly strong and decent and excellent president. I’ll never understand that.

(Editor’s note: Asked if he’d like to respond, Carville said other Democratic senators “apparently haven’t gotten the memo yet” that he’s not relevant. “His colleague Sen. Casey asked me to host a fundraiser with him last week,” he said. “Sen. Brown asked me to go to Cleveland to campaign with him.” Of Fetterman, he added: “I’m glad he’s feeling better.”)

When I talk to voters, they’re worried about inflation. They really don’t like the economy. Are you not hearing that?

To me, it’s going to come down to good and evil and personalities and everything about this, too. It’s going to be a gut check kind of a situation where it’s just like, really? Really, really, as you’re going into the voting booth, do we want chaos and somebody that is in three or four criminal hearings? Is this somebody that you want to be their finger back on the button? Or do you want to have a decent and very effective president that has gotten us through the pandemic, addressed inflation and has been a real masterclass of diplomacy with Israel?

And that’s the thing. And if you want to be more pissed off about a $16 McDonald’s extra meal, I don’t know.

Is Biden the only Democrat who can beat Trump?

I really am not worried about that because he is my guy. And he is going to be the Democrats’ guy, and I’m proud to campaign with him.

What do you think of Dean Phillips, the Democrat who’s mounted a longshot primary campaign against Biden?

I really don’t believe anyone can honestly think that the gelato guy is going to beat Trump. And he has the right to spend his money to figure out that thesis, but I don’t think it’s going to end well for him.

You traveled to Iowa recently, where you were very critical of California Gov. Gavin Newsom, saying he is “running for president right now” but doesn’t have the “guts to announce it.” Why?

I wasn’t so critical about Newsom. I just simply said that it seems kind of strange to challenge a candidate of a race that you’re not involved in. … It’s also strange that you are going to make a very splash visit to China when the leaders are actually coming to your very own state … a couple of weeks later. Or making donations to obscure South Carolinian politicians.

Do you think he’s laying the groundwork to run in 2024 if something happens to Biden?

I think that he’s a great governor. And he’s an incredible part of the Democratic Party. That’s it. Two things can be true at the same time.

What about you? Would you ever run in 2028 for president?

Fundamentally, about politics, you never go get high on your own supply. And I’m not thinking about 2028. I am only making sure to prioritize 2024.

Outgoing California Rep. Anna Eshoo’s biggest tech regret isn’t what you’d expect: It’s immigration reform.

“We would not be the nation that we are without being an immigrant nation. And immigrants play a very important role in the technology industry. So many come to the United States to be educated here,” Eshoo, whose district covers Silicon Valley, said Sunday during an interview on MSNBC’s “Inside with Jen Psaki.”

“We have the finest colleges and universities,” Eshoo continued. “Certainly, Stanford University, which is the geographic center of my district. But once they’re educated, if they cannot get a green card, they have to leave.”

Eshoo, 81, announced last month that she won’t seek reelection in 2024, capping a more than 30-year career as a member of California’s House delegation. She’s one of roughly three dozen House members who are already heading for the exit next year.

Discussing comments about immigration she made in The Washington Post, Eshoo also expressed regret Sunday about the wording of part of a 1996 law — Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act — that protects websites from being sued over much of the content that other people post on their sites.

“I think we made a mistake, many, many years ago. I understand what we were thinking and why we did what we did at the time, because the Internet was really nascent then,” she said of the law — but Section 230 meant “they [would] not be liable for anything.” And that, she said, “was a mistake.”

Last time Rep. Bill Pascrell faced a serious primary challenge, he ended up winning by a 20-point margin after the Arab American community rallied in support of the New Jersey Democrat. Now that same constituency is turning against him, posing a major threat to the 14-term House member over his stance on the Israel-Hamas war.

Arab Americans protested outside his district office in Paterson, home to Little Ramallah, the largest Palestinian American enclave in the country. They’ve held press conferences demanding a cease-fire and, last week, interrupted a fundraiser to confront him over his pro-Israel position. Most consequentially, some Arab Americans plan to mobilize against the 86-year-old when he seeks reelection next year.

Former supporters now call him a “charlatan” and a “mouthpiece for the dehumanization of Palestinian people.” They say Pascrell’s seeming indifference to their concerns over Israel’s offensive in Gaza and his refusal to back a cease-fire has led them to consider backing Democratic challengers in June — including a former aide.

“You can’t call yourself a friend of the community and then turn your back on them,” said Feras Awwad, a local school board member in the city of Clifton whose grandparents hail from Ein Karem, a village outside Jerusalem. “There’s not a chance in hell anybody’s going to be supporting him.”

The rising tension in Pascrell’s 9th congressional district is a striking reflection of the broader fault lines running through the national Democratic party following Hamas’ Oct. 7 attack on Israel. Federal lawmakers have strongly backed Israel’s right to defend itself but, after two months of Israel pummeling Gaza, killing about 20,000 people, they’ve faced increasing pressure from the left to push for an end to the offensive.

One of the biggest names to join calls for a cease-fire is Rep. Katie Porter, a California Democrat running for that state’s open Senate seat in 2024. But the vast majority of Democrats in Washington take the same view Pascrell expressed at a fundraiser Monday in Paterson.

“I can’t control the politics of Israel,” he said, according to a video of his remarks obtained by POLITICO. “But they have every right to protect themselves and defend themselves. Case closed.”

While Arab Americans are an important constituency for Pascrell, they make up a relatively small bloc in a district that includes two dozen towns in heavily Jewish Bergen County. That’s made it impossible for the representative to please the entire Democratic base.

Pascrell has tried since the Oct. 7 attacks to tread a fine rhetorical line. He backed a “humanitarian pause” and pushed for more aid into Gaza, but, like most House members, did not sign onto a resolution calling for a cease-fire (his Democratic colleagues Rep. Bonnie Watson-Coleman and Donald Payne Jr. were the only lawmakers from New Jersey to do so).

In public statements and in letters to the White House, Pascrell has pushed for the release of hostages and advocated for “good faith efforts” between Palestinians and Israelis to reach a two-state solution. Until then, he said that “restraint to protect innocent civilian lives” is the most prudent path forward.

“I hear and feel powerfully the anguish of our community and like millions of Americans I desperately want a permanent end to the fighting as soon as possible and a major flow of humanitarian aid provided by America to protect Palestinians and begin the rebuilding of Gaza,” Pascrell said in a statement to POLITICO.

Some of his constituents don’t accept his public statements as enough. Since the start of the war, members of the Arab American community have met with Pascrell and other federal and state leaders, including Rep. Mikie Sherrill, Sen. Cory Booker and Gov. Phil Murphy, expressing their concerns and pressing them to support a cease-fire. But some residents and leaders said they don’t feel Pascrell has been receptive and have made it clear to him that he is no longer welcome in their mosques, businesses and homes given his unwavering support for Israel.

“He’s been somebody who in past years had been engaged in the community,” said Ahmet Akdag, a resident of Clifton who is both Turkish and Muslim. “We just don’t feel like he’s been reciprocating as we had hoped and what we had expected.”

A native of Paterson who served as its mayor and in the New Jersey Legislature before his 1996 election to the House, Pascrell is one of New Jersey’s more colorful political figures. He is well known for speaking passionately with a North Jersey accent — and at considerable length — when given the opportunity, whether it’s on the House floor or at a local press conference.

His style and stances have endeared him in the past to the Arab American community. Other Muslim leaders said Pascrell had been much more responsive to them in the past, particularly in 2012, when he was forced into a Democratic primary in the newly redrawn 9th district against incumbent Rep. Steve Rothman. Pascrell, who was then representing the 8th district, was seen within the Arab American community as a strong alternative to the Jewish, staunchly pro-Israel Rothman.

Salaheddin Mustafa, who helped lead the grassroots Muslim effort to make Pascrell the Democratic nominee in 2012, recalls inviting Pascrell to an office on nearby Route 46 to fill him in on their plans to organize support by going town by town in the new district.

“We led, he followed,” said Mustafa, who is also outreach director for the Islamic Center of Passaic County.

Pascrell trounced Rothman in the primary, capturing 61 percent of the vote. The Record newspaper reported that year that Pascrell won 90 percent of the vote in the new district’s six Passaic County towns — including Paterson, which has the second largest Arab American community in the country, according to the city.

But that level of support seems unattainable following Israel’s invasion of Gaza and a death toll that hits close to home. More than 1,000 Palestinians with relatives in North Jersey have been killed in the conflict, according to the Council on American-Islamic Relations’ New Jersey chapter. The council’s vice chair, Ali Aljarrah, was one of the protesters at the fundraiser. He said Pascrell’s response since Oct. 7 contrasts with the person the Arab American community helped reelect.

“He was the guy. He was essentially like our T.E. Lawrence in Congress,” he said, referring to the British diplomat known as Lawrence of Arabia. “That’s why Arabs got involved. They saw Steve Rothman in 2012 as this pro-Zionist candidate, and you have a lot of Arabs who live in the district who just did not want someone who would toe the party line. …. That’s why they went out and got Pascrell elected.”

Now, he said, Pascrell is the one toeing the party line.

Muslim residents say they may have found someone more aligned with them in Paterson Mayor Andre Sayegh, a former Pascrell communications assistant. Sayegh is of Syrian and Lebanese descent, speaks Arabic and has been among the few politicians in New Jersey to vocally back a cease-fire. He declined to comment on speculation he will run for Pascrell’s seat. But he told the Paterson Press, after it reported his recent political donations to organizations in Bergen and Hudson county towns that make up the 9th district, that “if you have ambition and ability, you shouldn’t restrict your opportunities.”

Any challenger would face difficulties against Pascrell. He has strong organizational support and, despite its large Arab population, the 9th district is also dominated by heavily Jewish towns in neighboring Bergen County. But the frustrations and disappointments with Pascrell extend beyond the Arab American community to younger, more liberal and even some Jewish voters in the district, Mustafa said. The goal is to build a political infrastructure for the long term “so that our community doesn’t have to deal with charlatans like Congressman Pascrell,” he said.

“It’s not the community that he knew on October 6,” Mustafa said. “It’s a much more unified community. It’s a much more demanding community. It’s a community that’s not going to allow people like Pascrell to use us for his own personal gain and abandon us like he’s doing now.”

Senate Republicans are working closely with Homeland Security Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas as they try to craft a bipartisan border security deal.

Which creates a new problem for the GOP negotiators: If they succeed, they’ll need to sell that deal to colleagues who loathe Mayorkas and, later, House Republicans who are trying to impeach him.

Mayorkas’ role in the high-stakes border talks is confined to policy proposals, not politics. He’s participating to assess border changes without deciding what the White House might ultimately back, according to a person familiar with the talks who was granted anonymity to address them.

His presence is nonetheless a conundrum for Republicans — many of whom will get asked to vote for legislation that bears the mark of a Biden official they have fought for literally a decade.

“I’m skeptical” of the DHS secretary, said Sen. Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa), who has clashed with Mayorkas since the Obama administration. “Hearing for three years that the border’s secure when every day, you can see it’s not secure? He’s living in dreamland.”

At the moment, Mayorkas’ talks with Sen. James Lankford (R-Okla.), Sens. Chris Murphy (D-Conn.) and Kyrsten Sinema (I-Ariz.) are advancing despite facing huge hurdles. They’ve made progress on changes to asylum standards but remain at odds over dialing back the president’s parole authority and new expulsion authority, according to a second person briefed on the talks.

After the Senate left for the year on Wednesday, discussions are set to continue throughout the holiday season. Mayorkas’ involvement may not squash GOP support for any deal to pair new migration limits with Ukraine aid. But it undoubtedly complicates the already delicate task of selling that agreement to Republicans who are loath to compromise.

“I don’t think Mayorkas gets it done. I mean, you’ve seen his performance on the border, it’s worse than abysmal,” Sen. John Hoeven (R-N.D.) said. “We have him up for hearings. And he sits there and says the border’s secure. He’s not even dealing with reality.”

In the House, Mayorkas’ impeachment is taking a back seat to the impeachment inquiry into President Joe Biden — but even GOP lawmakers who don’t favor going that far are not fans of the DHS chief. And one of Republican senators’ biggest challenges is ensuring they cut a deal that the GOP-controlled House can support.

Mayorkas’ presence is particularly tricky on that front, given that support for impeaching him is growing among House Republicans. Even former skeptics like Rep. Darrell Issa (R-Calif.) are now ready to boot the DHS chief from office, and Rep. Tony Gonzales (R-Texas) is working to court moderates. Gonzales and his centrist allies are some of the same Republicans whom senators hope might vote for any deal on new border restrictions.

And as Republicans recoil, Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer said Mayorkas’ engagement was one of the most critical aspects of the whole talks.

“We made sure Mayorkas was in the room. He’s very, very helpful. He knows the details,” Schumer said in an interview.

Republicans are arguing that Biden will ultimately close any deal, not Mayorkas, since the Cabinet secretary is charged with getting a deal that functionally works, not counting votes. The technical information he provides is integral to the talks, according to senators in both parties.

Sen. Tim Kaine (D-Va.) said that without Mayorkas, “I don’t know how you’d reach an agreement that would work.”

Even those who don’t particularly like him concede that it makes sense for Mayorkas to dig into the negotiations. And he’s certainly not there to be the chief spokesperson: As he enters and exits the Capitol meetings, he does not engage with reporters and rarely utters more than pleasantries.

“He still has the president’s confidence, evidently, so it seems natural to me that he’d be at the table,” said Sen. Todd Young (R-Ind.).

As to Mayorkas’ stewardship of the department, Young added: “Pathetic.”

Republicans are livid about Mayorkas’ recent testimony on Capitol Hill that the administration’s approach is “working” as border flows hit daily highs. The GOP’s beef with him is long-standing: He received zero Republican supporters 10 years ago to become deputy secretary and just six GOP votes in 2021 in his confirmation to lead the department.

Many immigration policy advocates and former administration officials view Mayorkas as the administration’s scapegoat on the hot-button issue of immigration. He has the often thankless jobs of unveiling challenging policy announcements and defending the Biden administration’s record, even as immigration policy extends well beyond DHS.

“He’s carrying out the direction from the White House. I believe if he had freer reign, he would take different approaches,” said Sen. Susan Collins (R-Maine), who voted for Mayorkas in 2021. “I hope these bipartisan discussions will give him the tools that he desperately needs.”

Mayorkas lawyered up earlier this year to combat House GOP efforts to impeach him. Protesters even targeted his Washington home. But despite the pressure, a third person who’s worked closely with him — granted anonymity to speak candidly about the secretary — described him as a “good soldier” with a high tolerance for chaos.

While the White House seeks to protect Biden from the deluge of criticism surrounding the border, Mayorkas is occasionally taking heavy blowback from the left as well as Republicans.

“No man has done more to take on … one of the largest policy and political topics in this country than Secretary Mayorkas,” said Jason Houser, the former chief of staff at Immigration and Customs Enforcement under Biden. “The secretary has been out almost on an island.”

Still, some immigration advocates warn Mayorkas’ credibility may suffer if a deal comes together that is opposed by progressives and the Congressional Hispanic Caucus.

Mayorkas “would be forever tied to these policies that he had always previously marked as too extreme,” said one former Biden and Obama administration official, delivering that warning on condition of anonymity.

He is publicly pleading for more border funding, telling lawmakers the $13.6 billion included in the president’s national security funding request would help “tremendously” with border enforcement by providing money for additional personnel and technology. He’s said that he’s open to border policy changes but pushes for broader immigration reform instead of smaller-scale policies.

“We fully endorse the need for policy changes, not in piecemeal form, but in a comprehensive form,” Mayorkas told lawmakers on the Senate Appropriations Committee last month.

Yet the administration now finds itself forced to consider such piecemeal proposals. Republicans hemmed in Biden’s $106 billion foreign aid request until Democrats made concessions on the border. There’s little talk of comprehensive overhauls lately and no hint of any legalization of undocumented immigrants.

And until Biden gives more forceful direction to Democrats, Republicans don’t see the border talks concluding with them cutting a deal with Mayorkas, anyway.

“I’m told that he’s trying to help. He’s very knowledgeable. But he doesn’t have any authority,” said Sen. John Kennedy (R-La.). “We’re not going to reach any kind of agreement until the president tells us what, if anything, he’s willing to do to secure the border.”

Jordain Carney contributed to this report.