Pennsylvania state representative and democratic socialist Chris Rabb has aligned himself with streamer Hasan Piker, a figure whose controversial statements have drawn widespread criticism. Rabb has also labeled Democrats who defend existing constitutional structures as "institutionalists," a term that appears to be gaining traction among the far-left who advocate for significant changes to the U.S. constitutional system.
Rabb, who is the Democratic nominee for Pennsylvania’s 3rd Congressional District, recently tweeted his support for Piker, stating, "This is what the institutionalists are focusing their efforts on now: Disavowing Hasan Piker." He contrasted this with what he described as other priorities, such as "White Christian nationalists? Not the broligarchs? Not the AI overlords? Nope, the guy encouraging young people to use their collective political power for good. F--- that noise."
The term "institutionalist" is being used by some on the far-left to describe those who support preserving current U.S. institutions and the Constitution. Former senior speechwriter for President Barack Obama, Sarada Peri, has referred to institutionalists as "peculiar creatures" in Washington, suggesting they have a "reflexive distaste for change, preferring the enduring, if ossified, conventions that offer them inherited credibility." Peri also commented that "they are mostly old, white men, institutionalists are afforded significant deference by the media and the general public."
Hasan Piker has become an influential figure within progressive circles, though his past statements, including claims that America deserved 9/11 and that American Jews provoke attacks by supporting Israel, have drawn significant backlash. Rabb's defense of Piker positions him with a segment of the Democratic Party that seeks to challenge established norms and institutions.
Legal scholars and commentators have also raised concerns about what they see as a growing movement to dismantle or fundamentally alter the U.S. Constitution. Some academics have publicly questioned the Constitution's efficacy, with Erwin Chemerinsky, dean of UC Berkeley Law School, authoring "No Democracy Lasts Forever: How the Constitution Threatens the United States." Similarly, Ryan D. Doerfler of Harvard and Samuel Moyn of Yale published a New York Times column titled "The Constitution Is Broken and Should Not Be Reclaimed," advocating to "reclaim America from constitutionalism."
Jonathan Turley, a Shapiro Professor of Public Interest Law at George Washington University and a Fox News contributor, has written extensively on this trend. He argues that the rhetoric surrounding "institutionalists" reflects a radical agenda to undermine core institutions, including the Supreme Court. Turley draws parallels to historical revolutionary periods, citing the French Revolution's descent into "mobocracy" as a cautionary example.
He notes that even mainstream political figures are sometimes perceived as pandering to more radical elements within the party. Turley suggests that politicians who do not distance themselves from figures like Piker risk alienating moderates or facing pressure from more progressive factions. The debate highlights a broader ideological struggle within the Democratic Party concerning the preservation of existing structures versus the pursuit of radical transformation.