**Kamala Harris' Evolution on Criminal Justice: From DA to Presidential Candidate**

Kamala Harris' career has been marked by her evolving stances on issues of criminal justice. Two decades ago, when Harris, then the District Attorney of San Francisco, refused to seek the death penalty against a young gang member accused of killing a police officer, she emphasized her firm opposition to capital punishment. Amid mounting pressure, including from the late Sen. Dianne Feinstein who publicly called for the death penalty at the officer's funeral, Harris remained resolute. In a 2004 opinion piece for the San Francisco Chronicle, Harris underscored her commitment to her principles, stating, "I gave my word to the people of San Francisco that I oppose the death penalty, and I will honor that commitment despite the strong emotions evoked by this case."

However, Harris' stance shifted when she launched her campaign for California Attorney General four years later. Pledging to enforce the death penalty as mandated by law, Harris demonstrated her willingness to adapt her positions in accordance with her roles. As Attorney General, she further exhibited a "tough on crime" approach by supporting a state law that could imprison parents of chronically truant children. Later, during her presidential campaign, she expressed regret over prosecutors' enforcement of this measure, clarifying that severe punishments were never her intention.

Harris' critics label her as inconsistent, pointing to instances such as her introduction of a body-camera requirement for special agents following the 2014 police killing of Michael Brown, yet her avoidance of a broader, state-regulated body camera measure. Additionally, her reluctance to offer external reviews for controversial police shootings during her tenure as California's AG clashes with her subsequent advocacy for independent investigations post-George Floyd's murder. Republican vice presidential nominee Sen. JD Vance has repeatedly dubbed her a "chameleon," suggesting a pattern of political flip-flopping.

Conversely, supporters view Harris as a leader willing to evolve based on evidence and changing circumstances. Brendon Woods, Oakland’s chief public defender who has observed Harris’ career closely, insists that changing stances can signify growth. Harris herself contends that her core values remain unchanged despite the apparent shifts in her policies.

Throughout her career, Harris has maintained a focus on the disparities within the criminal justice system that propelled her to become a prosecutor in the first place. Her "smart on crime" philosophy included programs aimed at diverting non-violent offenders from prison through job training and improving government accountability by releasing statewide criminal justice data. One notable initiative was her truancy prevention program, targeting parents whose children habitually missed school. Though controversial, it became the foundation for a state law criminalizing excessive unexcused absences.

The enforcement of this law led to some unintended consequences. Parents like Ayman Haddadin and his wife in Orange County experienced the severe end of this policy. They were arrested for their son’s chronic absences, which were exacerbated by his allergies. This arrest, highlighted in local media, had a profound impact on their family.

Kamala Harris’ journey from San Francisco’s District Attorney to a national political figure running for President illustrates a complex balance between steadfast principles and pragmatic shifts in policy, drawing both criticism and praise along the way.