The Volokh Conspiracy
Mostly law professors | Sometimes contrarian | Often libertarian | Always independent
Lessons of the Heritage Foundation's Implosion
The decline of this major conservative institution has been a wakeup call for conservative intellectuals. But will they draw the right lessons from it?

Over the last two days, there has been a massive wave of resignations and departures of scholars and staff from the Heritage Foundation, once one of the nation's most respected conservative think tanks. Those leaving include the leadership of Heritage's Meese Center for Legal and Judicial Studies, leading economic policy scholars, my former student and Volokh co-blogger Josh Blackman (editor of the Heritage Guide to the Constitution), and more. This wave of departures follows in the wake of others, such as that of Princeton Princeton professor and prominent conservative political theorist Robert George, who resigned from the Heritage Board last month. Many of the Heritage refugees have moved to Advancing American Freedom (AAF), an organization led by former Vice President Mike Pence.
The immediate cause of the exodus was Heritage President Kevin Roberts' defense of anti-Semitic "influencer" Tucker Carlson and his support of Nick Fuentes, an even more virulent anti-Semite. As it has become clear that Roberts refuses to break his ties with Carlson and unequivocally condemn right-wing anti-Semitism, and that the Heritage board won't remove Roberts, more and more people have left Heritage.
Perhaps more importantly, the Heritage scandal has served a kind of wakeup call to many conservative intellectuals who were previously inclined to ignore or minimize dangerous trends in the Trump-era political right. As I have previously noted, the rot at Heritage long predates the current scandal. I myself decided to forego any potential future collaboration with Heritage years ago, which is why I refused an invitation to contribute to the Heritage Guide when Josh invited me (I should have been fully honest about my reasons for refusing, at the time). I had been a college student intern at Heritage way back in 1994, when the organization was very different from what it is today.
It would have been better if those now leaving Heritage had recognized the organization's moral deterioration earlier. But better late than never! And I certainly understand that such a break is more psychologically painful for people who consider themselves conservatives and had longstanding close ties to the organization, than it was for me. I am a libertarian, not a conservative, and I have had only limited contact with Heritage since that long-ago internship.
There is, I hope, growing recognition that the problem here goes well beyond Kevin Roberts (though Roberts certainly deserves blame). In his resignation letter, Josh Blackman laments that Roberts "aligned the Heritage Foundation with the rising tide of antisemitism on the right," implying that the "tide" is a more general phenomenon. In a statement welcoming the former Heritage scholars to AAF, former VP Pence said "these people are coming our way [because]…. Heritage and some other voices and commentators have embraced big-government populism and have been willing to tolerate antisemitism."
I hope Josh, Pence, and other conservatives will come to recognize more fully that the root of the problem is the Trump-era shift of most of the American right towards ethno-nationalism. For reasons outlined in detail in my recent UnPopulist essay on this topic, nationalist movements are inherently prone to anti-Semitism and other forms of racial and ethnic bigotry. It is not surprising that anti-Semitism among MAGA conservatives has risen alongside nativism and bigotry towards other minority groups, such as Indian-Americans.
As I explained in the UnPopulist article, the only sure way to avoid this problem is to reject ethnic nationalism and instead recommit to the universalist principles of the American Founding, which the Heritage Foundation once claimed to stand for, but has more recently betrayed:
Conservatives who seek to curb the growth of antisemitism on the right must reject nationalism and recommit to the principles of the American Founding.
In his resignation statement from the Heritage board, Robert George urged Heritage to be guided by the principles of the Declaration of Independence, especially the idea "that each and every member of the human family, irrespective of race, ethnicity, religion, or anything else; … is 'created equal' and 'endowed by our Creator with certain unalienable rights….'"
In his General Orders to the Continental Army, issued on the occasion of the end of the Revolutionary War in 1783, George Washington stated that one of the reasons the United States was founded was to create "an Asylum for the poor and oppressed of all nations and religions." Other leading Founding Fathers—including James Madison and Thomas Jefferson—expressed similar sentiments.
Washington sounded a similar theme in his famous 1790 letter to the congregation of the Rhode Island Touro Synagogue, in which he avowed that the United States has "an enlarged and liberal policy," under which "All possess alike liberty of conscience and immunities of citizenship," and that the U.S. government "gives to bigotry no sanction, to persecution no assistance." America, he emphasized, went beyond "mere toleration" of Jews to granting them full equality. It could do so because American identity was based on universal liberal principles, not ethnic or religious particularism.
The United States has never been completely free of bigotry, including antisemitism, or fully lived up to its ideals. But it has never given up on these ideals either, as much of the right effectively wants it to do now. America has been relatively more free of such prejudices than many other nations, precisely because of its universalist roots. We have also been at our most successful when we reject zero-sum thinking, and instead recognize that the success of Jews, Indians, and other minorities and immigrant groups is beneficial to the majority, rather than harmful to it….
A conservative movement that recommits to the universal principles of the Founding need not abandon all its differences with the left, or with libertarians like me…. But we can unite in rejecting racial and ethnic bigotry.
For more on the dangers of nationalism, see my 2024 article, "The Case Against Nationalism," coauthored with Alex Nowrasteh.
Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Comments may only be edited within 5 minutes of posting. Report abuses.
Please to post comments
This is not an implosion. It is a Jewish power play.
Thank you for the example of the antisemitism that has always bubbled under the surface of conservatism. Kevin Roberts failure was making it blatant enough these people leaving Heritage couldn't pretend it's not there.
"...has always bubbled under the surface of conservatism"
...sometimes breaking the surface like flatulence in a bathtub.
Thanks for showing how lefties can't see their own dirt. It is statism which is racist, because statism is a collective mindset. So is racism and bigotry in general. But you won't admit that because you are fine with lefty statism and lefty bigotry.
LOL big lefty, that Roger S.
I replied to gVOR08.
Roger is a racist and a bigot. By your own ridiculous logic, that makes him a leftist.
Good grief no. This is what I was responding to:
Notice he singles out conservatism. So I responded that he couldn't see lefty bigotry and that the real culprit is statism, because it is collective and so is bigotry, by definition.
Sometimes it's statism, sometimes it's some forms of nationalism, and on occasion it's religious. Only the first is leftist.
Nationalism is statist; are you one of those who claim natioonal socialists were not socialists, or that not all socialists are leftists? Forcing religion on a society is also statist.
Sorry, but there's nothing anti-Jewish about taking note of the fact that Jews wield power in American society far greater than their proportion of the population would indicate.
1 out of 50 Americans is Jewish. The proportion of Americans in the upper echelons of American society is more like 1 out of 3.
It's not wrong to notice that fact.
It is when it's a lie. It is when it's made up to generate hate because you're a bigot.
Ahh. All this talk about meritocracy, no special priveleges or hand-holding. Until it becomes inconvenient…
You lost the last string of arguments. You're going to lose this one for the same reason.
Show the Jewish power play. Name names. Show the connections. Show how it is not a spontaneous reaction to bigots coming out of their (and your) anti-Semite closet.
Show your homework. Anyone can allege anything. Now's your chance to show that your allegations have some meat on the bone.
My money says you will stammer and weave and dodge and never prove a damned thing.
Look at who is complaining on this site. Somin, Blackman, Bernstein. All Jewish. Many of the commenters also. Even the anonymous ones use Jewish buzzwords. And they all repeat the same lines, as if reading from a script.
SHOW YOUR WORK!
Tell us what Jewish buzzwords are. Tell us how you know which commenters are Jewish. Tell me what script I am reading this from. Tell us what script you are following.
You're just another anti-Semite who has no logic for your hatred.
I did. You post anonymously, and complain that I do not name commenters. Go ahead, tell us who you are, and what you think the Heritage controversy is all about.
You did what? You're as anonymous as I am. I have no more way of knowing who you are than you have of knowing who I am. 99% of commenters are anonymous.
You're the one making the extraordinary claim that Jews have super powers all out of proportion to their number, that they orchestrated this enormous own goal by the Heritage Foundation, that they have a script which they somehow disseminate to everybody who somehow manage to simultaneously keep it secret from everybody else. If you have a copy of this script, show it. If you don't, blame it on the Jews for not sending you a copy, and then tell us how you know what the script says without having a copy.
As for what happened, it's dead simple, as you failed to refute in that other thread you lost.
https://reason.com/volokh/2025/12/22/breaking-cully-stimson-and-hans-von-spakovsky-resign-from-heritage/?comments=true#comment-11324494
You still object to people objecting, as if you are the only one in the world qualified to object to anything, and you still blame it on the Jews.
I read the complaints about Heritage. There is an occasional complaint about Ukraine or some other issue, but 95% of it is about Jews. Not only that, but they are complaints of the sort that only Jews would make.
The about complaint says "Carlson wasted time lobbing softball questions". Only a Jew would make such a complaint. All podcasters waste time. Are you really going to raise a fuss because a podcaster wasted time?
All you have is name-calling. If you have a point, make it.
Hey moron, "wasting time" is not the complaint. When you softball some people and ask tough questions of others, it shows whom you agree with.
IOW, it's the bias and implicit agreement, stupid.
Fuentes says he admires Hitler and Stalin. Both enemies of this country. That makes him a lover of America? Only in fevered dreams.
And, yeah, I'm a proud Jew. Go F--- yourself. Preferably with a crowbar. A rusty one.
I guess you are agreeing with me that the complaints about Heritage are primarily Jewish issues.
No he isn't and neither is anyone else. You are the one bringing up Jew conspiracies, and yet you refuse to show this script you claim everyone is following. You're hollow. Even your anti-Semitic bile can't fill that bottomless pit of hatred.
So now I'm a Jew? You can tell that? What script did I follow? You must have a copy I didn't get. Damn Jews, only sending the script to you and no one else.
What do you define as name-calling? Isn't calling everyone a Jew some form of name-calling?
No, Jew is not a derogatory term. You are anonymous here, and you are welcome to post your own summary of the complaint against Heritage.
You use Jew as derogatory ALL THE TIME.
I'm in general agreement with your thesis, but I'm not seeing how complaints about wasting time is a "Jewish thing." Maybe complaining in a restaurant about the service, but not wasting time. Jews are masters of wasting time, and they're proud of it (look at how they proudly reference the "long Jewish goodbye")
Another bigot. Since you despise Jews for wasting time, dang buddy, I hate to break the news to you, but wasting your time on a comment like that must mean you have just self-identified as a Jew.
Roger isn't anonymous. His lineage is storied and ignominious. In his defense, his brother, an erstwhile VC commenter, is even more deranged than he is.
To be fair, he's not anonymous; he's Roger Schlafly, degenerate son of 1970s proto-MAGA Phyllis Schlafly. Who was also an antisemite. And also a bigot in many many other ways.
“But will they draw the right lessons from it?”
No.
I am thoroughly shocked that the right wing isn’t a welcoming place for Jewish people. Never could have seen that coming.
In the USA today, right-wingers are much more welcoming to Jews than left-wingers. Left-wingers regularly accuse Jews of genocide in Gaza.
Then how do you explain... well... you?
What I say is mild in comparison. I do not accuse the Jews of genocide.
Well this deserves a big F you.
"I hope Josh, Pence, and other conservatives will come to recognize more fully that the root of the problem is the Trump-era shift of most of the American right towards ethno-nationalism."
When all else fails play the race card? There's that "most" bullshit line again.
Carlson and Fuentes and a couple others are racists so be sure to call everyone who might support Trump or his policies that are fixing America and turning back the Marxist Obama Auto Pen "un"democratic party push to destroy it, racist?
Did you have dinner with Killary last night?
Marxist! Killary! Throw a couple more cliches on there, and I could fill out my bingo card.
Your president recently called Somali immigrants "garbage", and has a long history of similar comments about immigrants. Is that racist?
He called those involved with the theft and fraud garbage. Are they not?
This is the biggest issue. People trying to make mountains out of mole hills purposely distorting other's comments and misconstruing what was said. Never mind the horrible edits to push a lie.
Sorry you are stuck on Maddow with a side of Reid while sipping on Morning Joe.
Only the gullible, naive, or the uninformed believe the first line out of their mouths and then regurgitate them even after the authors of those words admit they were wrong and retracted their statements.
Or the willfully ignorant. Which one are you?
The problem is he implied they were ALL involved in theft and fraud.
Somin is a Russian Jew. Of course he plays the race card.
You love Hitler and Stalin. Of course you play the Jew card.
Somin already played the Jew card. He is a Jew, and his entire post is about supposed anti-Semitism. He says the "immediate cause of the exodus" is certain perceptions of anti-Semitism. The whole thing is a Jewish grievance. Maybe he is still mad about what happened on Moses in the Bible.
Wrong again. Why are non-Jews complaining if the "whole thing" is a Jewish grievance?
I would think that the Volokh Conspiracy, home of Josh "Trump Is Always Right" Blackman and David "Destroy the Universities" Bernstein would be the one to learn a lesson. Then again, the Trotskys make the revolution, the Bronsteins pay the price, so who knows.
"Then again, the Trotskys make the revolution, the Bronsteins pay the price, so who knows.
Funny you should say that since your own comments about Columbia and other campuses in the wake of 10/07/23 have generally been supportive of the young Trotskys rather than the Bronsteins. Indeed, you have effectively called the Bronsteins' complaints largely not credible.
Old-fashioned believers in democratic self-governance, free expression, and limited government like myself have no consistent friends, not at Heritage, not at Columbia, and not at the Volokh Conspiracy. Hence the constant cry from others that I have betrayed them, when I have simply been consistent in my principles.
I think a moderate nationalism, in which the state caters to a dominant culture but tolerates minority cultures, can potentially work. But the emphasis has to be on moderate.
I also think we need to be forthright aboutt people, most people anyway, needing to be part of something and have a sense of identity by belonging to a group that helps order and structure their lives. I think libertarians wish this away at peril.
In his book the Lion and the Unicorn, George Orwell said that he had come to accept the British monarchy as a way to provide symbols of belonging addressing deep human emotional needs without authoritarianism.
Tolerates minority cultures?
The Statue of Liberty would like to speak to you.
For more than half a century after the Statute of Liberty was built, welcomng immigrants consisted of efforts to Americanize them, getting them to drop foreign habits and adopt American ones.
When a group of Orthodox rabbis organized a march on Washington to protest the Holocaust, Jewish leaders were ao horrified at the idea of unAmericanized, foreign-looking Jews appeaaring in public and embarassing them that they made every effort to derail it.
I am not suggesting going back to that. I am suggesting it may not be such a good idea for minority groups to demand equal recognition with the majority culture - if you make Christmas a public day off, you have to do it for Dewali, Rosh Hashana, etc. etc. or you can’t do it. It’s one thing to be allowed to do your own thing. It’s another to insist the majority not do its unless it also does yours because it makes you feel like you don’t really belong. It’s not the job of the majority to alter its behavior to make you feel like you really belong. Your feelings are your business.
No one who would write an article condemning antisemitism without distinguishing between it and anti-Zionism, or, at minimum, establishing that the author understands that distinction, deserves to be taken at all seriously on the subject. Particularly when the author also claims to be libertarian. That failure could also justifiably raise suspicions that the false equivalence implied between the two disparate viewpoints is the direct result of funding sourced in Jerusalem. I once was in the employ of a devout Jewish gentleman who was an Elder of his Conservative congregation, and who was also adamantly opposed to the establishment and support of Israel as a governing nation; was Irving also an antisemite?
"The immediate cause of the exodus was Heritage President Kevin Roberts' defense of anti-Semitic "influencer" Tucker Carlson and his support of Nick Fuentes, an even more virulent anti-Semite." For a person of such intellectual prowess, it's not a good look for Somin to casually and generally spew -- without any examples -- that Tucker Carlson is 'anti-semitic' and 'supported' Fuentes. If Somin can't tell the difference between an anti-Zionist critic of Israel and an anti-semite, or can't tell the difference between asking someone like Fuentes softball questions in an interview and "supporting" their arguably rotten views, then he is either too sloppy, dishonest or too blinded by his own biases to be trusted on whatever else he has to say (spew).