Back in December, I reported that then-President-elect Donald Trump had tapped Polaris Dawn astronaut and entrepreneur Jared Isaacman to head the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA).
Almost six months later, and after the nomination had recently made it through the hurdle of a Senate committee vote, President Trump withdrew Jared Isaacman’s nomination as NASA administrator just days before the official Senate confirmation vote was expected.
The White House did not explain the move in its statement, but White House spokesperson Liz Huston said “it’s essential that the next leader of NASA is in complete alignment with President Trump’s America First agenda.”Trump in December said he was nominating Isaacman, a billionaire entrepreneur who has never been in federal government, as NASA administrator.Isaacman has been to space twice, on commercial missions that he funded himself.
The news is causing a bit of consternation among space enthusiasts.
Behind the scenes, additional factors have been reported. According to the New York Times, Trump learned that Isaacman had donated to prominent Democrats, which may have contributed to his decision to withdraw his nomination.
Mr. Trump told associates he had learned from allies that Mr. Isaacman had donated to Democrats, including Senator Mark Kelly of Arizona and former Senator Bob Casey of Pennsylvania, as well as the California Democratic Party, during the past two campaign cycles, the people with knowledge of the deliberations said.Mr. Trump told advisers he was surprised he had not been told about those donations previously, two people briefed on the matter said, neither of whom was authorized to discuss the matter. Sergio Gor, the director of the Presidential Personnel Office who has clashed with Mr. Musk over nominees, supported Mr. Trump’s moving to withdraw the nomination, two other people briefed on the matter said.
Some reports also note that Isaacman’s public statements during Senate hearings, during which he expressed a stronger interest in returning to the moon rather than prioritizing Mars (a key Trump administration goal), may have signaled a misalignment with the president’s vision.
In early April, Isaacman contradicted Musk about space travel priorities. The commercial astronaut told senators he would focus on returning people to the moon, rather than Mars, which has been a priority of Musk’s for some time.“I’d like nothing more than to see … Americans walking on the moon,” he said during the Senate Commerce, Science and Transportation hearing.This is the latest of a number of nominations Trump has pulled since returning to the White House. He pulled his original nominee for surgeon general earlier this month.
However, it must also be noted that Isaacman did support Mars missions.
During Isaacman’s confirmation hearing, he signaled he would back an effort to land humans on Mars. The remarks were notable because NASA has been squarely focused on the Artemis program, which aims to return astronauts to the moon, since Trump’s first term.Only since Musk became a close Trump ally in 2024 has the president vocalized an interest in human exploration of Mars, which has been Musk’s longtime goal.Isaacman indicated during the confirmation hearing that he hoped to back both the Artemis program’s underlying goals and “prioritize sending American astronauts to Mars.”“Along the way (to Mars), we will inevitably have the capabilities to return to the Moon and determine the scientific, economic and national security benefits of maintaining a presence on the lunar surface,” Isaacman said.
And there are indications that the post-Musk landscape may be different.
The waters of MAGA run murky, and the political machinations of the Trump administration are abstruse. However, the timing of Isaacman’s derailment coincides with the recent departure of SpaceX founder Elon Musk from Washington. Musk had a central role in the Trump Administration during its first four months. In an interview on Tuesday, Musk told Ars that he has now “significantly” reduced his involvement in politics.Musk was a key factor behind Isaacman’s nomination as NASA administrator, and with his backing, Isaacman was able to skip some of the party purity tests that have been applied to other Trump administration nominees. One mark against Isaacman is that he had recently donated money to Democrats. He also indicated opposition to some of the White House’s proposed cuts to NASA’s science budget.
Whatever the reason, it is clear Isaacman would have been an innovative and invigorating choice for NASA.
What next?
I believe the trend lines at this point indicate more reliance on private enterprise to develop the elements of the space program we need. Hopefully, we will start seeing success soon, before we start living the Red Chinese version of Apple TV’s “For All Mankind.”
CLICK HERE FOR FULL VERSION OF THIS STORY