House Democrats are insisting that anyone is free to jump into their 2024 presidential primary — but suggest challenging Vice President Kamala Harris is a futile effort.

“The convention delegates can vote for whomever they choose once they’re released. That means anybody who wants to can and should offer themselves — Vice President Harris has offered herself. So far, the only other person who speculated that he might do it is former Democratic, now independent, Senator Manchin, and then he took it back, so it’s open,” Rep. Dan Kildee, D-Mich., told Fox News Digital.

When asked if another Democrat jumping into the race just weeks before their nominating convention would hurt the party’s momentum, Kildee answered, “No, I don’t think so. I think she’ll more than likely be a first-ballot nominee, for good reason.”

Ex-House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer, D-Md., was blunter in his assessment of the situation.

BIDEN ENDS BID FOR SECOND TERM IN WHITE HOUSE AS HE DROPS OUT OF HIS 2024 REMATCH WITH TRUMP

“Woah woah woah woah woah woah. I thought Kamala Harris was on the ballot,” he told a reporter who asked if he had concerns about the lack of a primary. “I thought Kamala Harris was on the ballot to be the president if the president couldn’t serve. She was on the ballot. It was Biden-Harris.”

Harris confirmed she would seek the presidency on Sunday after President Biden made the bombshell announcement that he’s dropping out of the race. Biden has endorsed her, along with a host of Democratic leaders, including former President Clinton and former House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif.

Pelosi said when asked if she supported an open process, “Anybody can run. They can run.”

More than 150 House Democrats have endorsed her as of Monday, according to multiple counts.

But with the rush to get behind Harris, Republicans have accused Democrats of staging a coup to replace an 81-year-old candidate who was trailing former President Trump in the polls.

TRUMP SAYS BIDEN ‘IS NOT FIT TO SERVE’: ‘WHO IS GOING TO BE RUNNING THE COUNTRY FOR THE NEXT 5 MONTHS?’

President Joe Biden announced Sunday he’s not seeking re-election (Hannah Beier/Bloomberg via Getty Images)

Several House Democrats who spoke with Fox News Digital, however, said anyone was free to jump into the race but denied a challenger would derail Harris’ and Democrats’ momentum.

“You’re seeing Democrats coalesce around Vice President Harris. I have endorsed her. Ultimately, in order to have a primary, you have to have a challenger. No one is challenging her,” said Rep. Jared Moskowitz, D-Fla. “And so right now it is an open process, right? You’ve seen potential people come out who could run and they’re endorsing her. And so that is the open process that’s happening.”

When asked if he would advise potential challengers to stay out, he said, “I’m not discouraging anything but these people, right, folks at a high level, governors, senators…they’re not saying they’re gonna throw their hat in the ring, they’re endorsing Vice President Harris because they also think she’s the best person for the job. So it’s tough to say ‘We want to process’ when right now you don’t even have a challenger.”

The top Democrats on the Education and Homeland Security Committees, Reps. Bobby Scott, D-Va., and Bennie Thompson, D-Miss., both insisted the primary was open but agreed Harris would most likely be the nominee after the Democratic National Convention (DNC) in August.

Scott said, “It is open, but nobody’s running. And frankly, I don’t see much point, I mean, you’ve got about 150 members of the Democratic caucus already endorsed, delegations…The delegates are Biden-Harris delegates. Where are they going to go?”

KAMALA HARRIS’ PRESIDENTIAL CAMPAIGN RAISES NEARLY $50 MILLION SINCE BIDEN ENDORSEMENT

Top House Homeland Security Committee Democrat Rep. Bennie Thompson is also behind Harris ((Photo by Kent Nishimura/Getty Images))

Thompson said her likely victory “cements her strength” among Democrats even if she does face a challenger.

“If you had an open primary, I’m not sure who’s…left to compete with her,” said Rep. Glenn Ivey, D-Md., pointing out the significant number of Democrats endorsing her in just 24 hours since she took up Biden’s mantle.

Harris has indeed scored support from a wide array of House Democratic factions, including the Congressional Black Caucus and Progressive Caucus. But some lawmakers who have been critical of the Biden administration — like Reps. Jared Golden, D-Maine, and Marie Gluesenkamp Perez, D-Wash., have been notably silent.

Biden announced he was dropping out of the presidential race after mounting pressure from fellow Democrats who were worried he was not mentally or physically fit to campaign again, and that such debates were a distraction from the left’s overall campaign against Trump.

The tech billionaires backing a proposal to raise a brand-new city on the rolling prairie northeast of San Francisco Bay have agreed to pull their measure off the November ballot and will first fund a full environmental review of the project, officials announced Monday.

The pause — announced in a joint statement from a Solano County supervisor and the chief executive of California Forever, the group backing the development — marks a dramatic shift in what had been a relentless push to build a city from scratch in rural Solano County. Until recently, California Forever, whose roster includes tech giants such as LinkedIn co-founder Reid Hoffman and venture capitalist Marc Andreessen, appeared set on taking the proposal directly to local voters this fall.

In June, after the group spent millions of dollars on a signature-gathering campaign, the county registrar announced the measure had qualified for the November ballot, despite opposition from many local elected officials. At the time, Jan Sramek, the former Goldman Sachs trader who is leading the effort, said the measure was nothing less than “a referendum on what do we want the future of California to be.”

Then, on Monday morning, an about-face: California Forever announced it would withdraw the measure. Instead, the group will follow the normal county process for zoning changes for the nearly 18,000-acre swath of land proposed for development. That includes funding a full environmental impact review and reimbursing the county for staff time and consultants related to the venture, according to the joint statement issued by Sramek and Mitch Mashburn, chair of the Solano County Board of Supervisors.

While “the need for more affordable housing and good paying jobs has merit, the timing has been unrealistic,” Mashburn said in the statement. California Forever’s rush to the ballot without an environmental review and negotiated development agreement “was a mistake,” he added. “This politicized the entire project, made it difficult for us and our staff to work with them, and forced everyone in our community to take sides.”

In his portion of the statement, Sramek, CEO of California Forever, stressed that his investment group remains committed to the project and feels an urgency to get it done. “For every year we delay, thousands of Solano parents miss more mornings, recitals, and bedtime stories because they’re commuting two hours for work. They cannot get those magical moments back.”

“We want to show that it’s possible to move faster in California,” Sramek said. “But we recognize now that it’s possible to reorder these steps without impacting our ambitious timeline.”

He said his group would work with the county to complete an environmental review and development agreement over the next two years, then bring the package back to local voters for approval in 2026.

In an interview with The Times, Sramek said the decision to pull the ballot measure was made after it became clear that Solano County residents wanted a thorough environmental review process. He said he was confident the decision to “invert the order of the steps” — putting the environmental review and development agreement before taking the question to voters — would lead to a better outcome.

“It’s not going to affect the timeline,” he said. “In fact, it might accelerate it.”

The shift also gives California Forever time to reset with local residents after the group’s rocky introduction to Solano County politics.

The effort, launched under a cloak of secrecy, became ensnared in controversy last year amid unfounded speculation that the land buyers were foreign agents intent on espionage.

That’s because for years before proponents revealed their plans, they used a limited liability company called Flannery Associates to buy up land from farmers in a vast swath of the county, stretching from Rio Vista west toward Travis Air Force Base, without telling anyone why. News of the mysterious land sales, in an area so close to a crucial military installation, led some people to speculate it might be part of an effort by foreign spies to gain military secrets.

Last year, it was revealed instead as a bold plan to build a model city from the ground up and reinvent how housing is built in California.

In January, Sramek unveiled blueprints of the new community that call for tens of thousands of homes surrounded by open space and trails. California Forever showcased the community’s proximity to the San Francisco Bay Area, vowing the project would convert unused farmland into “middle-class neighborhoods with homes we can afford.” The city would be walkable, socioeconomically integrated and fueled by clean energy.

But the proposal garnered fierce early opposition from some local leaders, concerned the group was making an end run around the planning process, as well as environmental groups concerned about the loss of natural habitat.

Mashburn said his agreement with Sramek came after tough conversations about how the process had gone so far.

“We talked about Solano County, and we talked about the initiative, and we talked about the future, and the way things were going to look, and the processes that we would have to go through, and whether we wanted to do that amicably and have a county where neighbors weren’t fighting with neighbors,” Mashburn said.

“Much to his credit and to their credit, they agreed with that. That’s not an easy thing to do, for a leader to admit that you may have been wrong about something.”

The decision to pull the ballot measure came a day before the Board of Supervisors was scheduled to discuss a consultant’s report, commissioned by the county, on the potential fiscal impacts of the development and to vote on whether to put the initiative before voters in November.

The report, prepared by Stantec Consulting Services in Walnut Creek, questioned the financial viability of the proposed new city and predicted construction challenges that could lead to hefty deficits for the county. It estimated the price tag for constructing schools, roads, sewer systems and other infrastructure to support the new community at tens of billions of dollars.

In announcing the new timeline, Mashburn issued a challenge to the California Forever investors, calling on them to show how they would provide water, solve transportation challenges and navigate the “financial engineering that makes it possible to pay for billions of dollars of infrastructure” without increasing taxes.

Asked if he believed Sramek and his backers would eventually build their dream city in his county, Mashburn said he was skeptical it would turn out exactly as the tech titans envisioned.

“We’re starting over from scratch,” he said. “There are some incredible obstacles that have to be overcome.”