Up until now, it’s been hard to find good information on judicial nominees as they make their way through the nomination process. The sources tend to be biased, offering faulty comparisons between current nominees and those selected by previous presidents. The legal minds of Heritage’s Meese Center for Legal and Judicial Studies have a solution.

Under the leadership of Deputy Director Thomas Jipping, the Meese Center has created the Judicial Tracker. It will provide both current and comparable data for six different components of the appointment process: vacancies, nominees, hearings, cloture votes, roll call votes, and confirmations. We believe activists and Senate staffers alike will find this tool useful.

John Malcom, Director of the Meese Center, had this to share about the Judicial Tracker: “President Trump can be expected to continue appointing constitutionalist judges to the federal bench, building upon his remarkable success over the first two years of his administration. Heritage’s new Judicial Appointment Tracker will enable the public to get current and accurate information on an ongoing basis about how President Trump is doing with respect to his judicial nominations—as well as the unprecedented procedural hurdles being thrown in his way—compared to past presidents dating back to President Reagan. It is a valuable tool that should bring attention to the critical role that the federal judiciary plays in upholding the rule of law in this country.”

Conservatives are making a lasting difference on the court, and now you can see how the nominees are doing on the road to confirmation. Thank you for making it all possible.

As a Heritage Member, you will be among the first to see this innovative new tool (in beta version) by going to heritage.org/judicial-tracker

How do you think the conversation about Justice Kavanaugh and lower court nominees impacted the election?

Liberal candidates won in races across the country this week, which is disappointing, but precedented, considering that the president’s party tends to lose seats in Congress during midterm elections. It’s too early to know the extent of voter fraud in this election, but The Heritage Foundation is on top of it, just like in previous elections where fraud occurred.

Heritage maintains a compilation of documented cases of voter fraud in all 50 states. As irregularities emerge, Heritage won’t let them go unreported. Instead we will take note, and add them to our database to inform lawmakers and citizens. In addition, this very important information will help us form new ideas to safeguard the integrity of our elections, and to discourage anyone who would undermine the legitimate will of the people in our constitutional republic.

At Heritage, we thank you for letting us serve in this capacity, to protect our elections from any interference, small or large. Thank you for empowering us to serve, and for doing your part to restore faith in the ballot box.

Is voter fraud a problem where you live, and if so, what should be done about it?

There’s more to the 14th Amendment than meets the eye. The media isn’t accurately reporting on the birthright citizenship issue. Instead, they constantly jump to conclusions without discussing the facts. The Heritage Foundation is here to fix that.

Heritage Founder Ed Feulner wrote a brief overview explaining that the original interpretation of the 14th Amendment isn’t being applied properly. Dr. Feulner refuted the notion that limiting birthright citizenship is unconstitutional.

Heritage Senior Legal Fellow Hans Von Spakovsky has written on this subject for years. He argues that a president does have the power to direct the executive branch on how to interpret the Constitution, meaning that an executive order is appropriate. In the Daily Signal, Von Spakovsky and the Meese Center’s Amy Swearer distilled their comprehensive legal and historical analysis into bullet points that conclude: current law isn’t applying the Constitution, and the president has the right to execute the original intent of the 14th Amendment.

Because of your support, Heritage can cut through the media hype and bring you the truth. Thank you for standing with us in defense of the Constitution and support of sensible immigration policies.

What is the best option to clarify the 14th Amendment on birthright citizenship: an executive order, legislation, or a court ruling?

This week’s news reminds us we have a serious problem with immigration enforcement, and our current immigration laws encourage illegal immigrants to break them.

In a recent report, Heritage expert David Inserra explains how “loopholes and defects in U.S. immigration laws are among the largest problems contributing to illegal immigration and are fully within Congress’ power to fix.” Specifically, he points to federal asylum laws and policies dealing with families and children, which are at the heart of the border crisis.

The reason caravans of thousands of foreign nationals convoy through the Mexican desert to cross our southern border is that, under current law, even if they are caught, there is a high probability they will be released into the United States. Inserra’s report explains what lawmakers can do to stop incentivizing foreign nationals to break our laws.

Your trust and support have put Heritage in the right place at the right time, and allow us to offer conservative solutions that promise to fix our immigration challenges. Thank you for letting us represent you as we fight for America.

Read Inserra’s Immigration Law and Enforcement report here >>

What should Congress do to fix broken immigration laws?

Heritage President Kay Coles James prescribes a dose of common sense in her recent column: Don’t trade freedom for a “vapid slogan.” As she puts it, “Even if you can’t be guaranteed a perfect life, ask yourself: Who should make the decisions in your life? You, or the government?”

In an op-ed, published by the Chicago Tribune, the New York Daily News, the Arkansas Democrat-Gazette, the Sacramento Bee and dozens more, President James warned against the rising popularity of socialism. “When people are free to make their own decisions and follow their dreams, it’s only natural that their everyday life is better than that experienced by people under the thumb of a dominating, all-controlling state.”

She also had a word of caution for those who naïvely glorify Scandinavian hybrids between socialism and capitalism: “The fact remains that wherever unalloyed socialism has been tried, the result has been disastrous for the citizens it’s inflicted on.” The proponents of pure socialism will never find what they seek: instead, they’ll find themselves living in societies that mirror Cuba, Venezuela or Vietnam.

Heritage stands firmly against socialism, and because of you, we’re in a unique position to debunk socialist lies wherever they appear. Thank you for uniting with us against the failed ideas of our time.

Read Kay Coles James’ op-ed here >>

 What is the most convincing argument against socialism?

« Older Entries