For several years, whenever Hillary Clinton appeared for an interview or commented on events on which she had particular expertise, she was greeted with howls from the punditocracy to essentially shut up and go away. Granted, she has been on the national stage since the 1990s, but frankly, Americans could have used more of her insight and advice on the deeds and misdeeds of President Trump over the years.

Now, less than a week into the Trump orgy of unconstitutional power grabs, preposterous declarations (renaming the Gulf of Mexico might be the stupidest of the bunch) and the release of the Jan. 6 felons (some of whom were convicted of violent crimes), I sure would like to hear the voice of the other woman nominated to run for president. Many of us would welcome the clear, compelling voice of former Vice President Kamala Harris.

Democracy defenders anticipated that Democrats might be caught on their back feet, but when the Senate minority leader issues anodyne declarations so utterly inapt in the current climate, it’s time to look for a single charismatic voice, one well-versed in law and unafraid to trim her sails. (Sen. Chuck Schumer’s statement after a deeply dishonest, dark, dangerous inaugural address suggested he had not been listening closely: “It’s now time to look to the future. The challenges that face America are many and great. The Senate must respond with resolve, bipartisanship, and fidelity to the working and middle class of this country.”)

Trump has launched a full-out assault on the Constitution and the rule of law. His gambits include: attempting to excise birthright citizenship from the 14^thAmendment; undermining professional, competent governance with “Schedule F”; and—frighteningly—to move to militarize the border, invoke emergency powers, and grab the Alien & Sedition Act out of the 18^th century. (As Ilya Somin explained about the latter, “[T]he Alien Enemies Act cannot be used in our current situation because we are not in a ‘declared war’ with any foreign nation, and there also is no ‘invasion’ or predatory incursion is perpetrated, attempted, or threatened against the territory of the United States by any foreign nation or government.’”)

Harris was the last administration’s most compelling advocate on a range of legal and public-safety issues, from the reversal of Roe v. Wade to the dangers of untrammeled executive power to anti-immigrant incitement. She showed Democrats how to be tough on the border without being cruel, reckless, and contemptuous of the Constitution. (At the Ellipse speech just before the election, she declared, “When I was attorney general of a border state, I saw the chaos and violence caused by transnational criminal organizations that I took on and when I am President, we will quickly remove those who arrive here unlawfully, prosecute the cartels and give border patrol the support they so desperately need.” However, she consistently reminded us we are a nation of immigrants.)

She never minced words about Trump’s dictatorial ambitions. She did warn us less than two weeks before the election, “Donald Trump vowed to be a dictator on day one. He vowed to use the military to carry out personal and political vendettas. His former chief of staff said he wanted generals like Hitler’s. Trump wants unchecked power.”

Given that she is a former prosecutor who boasted that she put violent criminals behind bars, I certainly would like to hear what she has to say about letting out of prison 1500 people convicted in association with the Jan. 6 insurrection (which resulted in the death of several police officers and serious injuries and trauma to scores of others).

On the anniversary of the riot, Harris had this to say about the violence: “On Jan. 6, we all saw what our nation would look like if the forces who seek to dismantle our democracy are successful. The lawlessness, the violence, the chaos. What was at stake then and now is the right to have our future decided, the way the Constitution describes it, by we the people, all the people.”

We all recall her frequently deploring political violence. (At an appearance before Black journalists, she recounted a conversation with Trump after a failed assassination attempt. “I told him what I have said publicly: There is no place for political violence in our country.”) And she routinely denounced Trump for “gaslighting” the country on the events of Jan. 6.

In short, Harris leaned into her prosecutorial background in the campaign and burnished her reputation as someone who dealt responsibly and effectively with international gangs. She therefore seems perfectly positioned to denounce Trump and his MAGA apologists as being soft on crime and anti-police (letting those implicated in violence against them waltz out of jail). She can stress he is already violating his oath to defend the Constitution and point out he is substituting rhetoric and military threats for real action to secure the border. And she can highlight the docile, partisan Supreme Court’s decision to let him wriggle out of criminal prosecutions.

She was right about what Trump intended to do and the danger he posed to the rule of law. She was right about the Supreme Court. Though she certainly deserves a break, whenever she is prepared, given our political vacuum, no one is better positioned to summon democracy defenders to stand up to a lawless president than Kamala Harris.