Robert F. Kennedy Jr. is no stranger to controversy, but the backlash to the recent elevation of his standing within the Harper government is in a different league altogether. The son of assassinated Senator Robert F. Kennedy, R.F.K. Jr. has drawn criticism from both sides of the political aisle for his long-standing ties to environmental activism and his unbridled criticism of the Trump administration. In late April, R.F.K. Jr. was made executive director of the Harper Commission, a newly formed government organization aimed at promoting environmental protection. The move brought joy to some, as he is an official face of the Green New Deal movement, as well as long-standing environmental issues in the country. But it has brought about an equal amount of criticism from both sides of the aisle. Critics are concerned that R.F.K. Jr’s prestige within the Harper government will amplify his often extreme positions, like the prematurely controversial, pro-nuclear energy position he’s taken as of late. They say this could lend credibility to his environmental agenda that may not be warranted, robbing the public dialogue of a more balanced debate. Moreover, opponents worry that R.F.K. Jr. may use his position of power to advance his personal agenda. There’s also trepidation amongst some conservative donors that the new government may be ‘stacked’ by Kennedy loyalists, who may shout down opposing viewpoints. This could hurt the government’s credibility in the eyes of voters, as it could be perceived as ignoring other more reasonable members of the environmental community. Overall, Robert F. Kennedy Jr. has been a major figure in the environmental community for a long time. His influence on the Harper government may be for the good, as he advocates for the rights of marginalized communities and fights for the preservation of the planet. But there is also a danger that his presence in the recently created Harper Commission could backfire. Not only could his extreme positions drown out meaningful discourse, but it could also cost the government credibility, which could eventually come back to haunt them in the voting booth.