The Heritage clerkship program raises 3 distinct issues: 1. Whether it's wrong for pre-clerks to get training that reflects an ideology; 2. Whether its wrong to participate in a program w/non-public contents; & 3. Whether it's problematic that Heritage takes positions on issues.
Of the 3 issues, I have seen the most concern with #1, but I find that the least objectionable. If students want to take con law from a professor who pushes a very specific ideology --and there are many-- we don't see that as problematic. The debate should be re 2 & 3, I think.
Oh, I accidentally left out (4), the apparent requirement that training not be used "for any purpose contrary to the mission or interest of The Heritage Foundation." That's just bizarre. If you're a judge, you don't want your employees having signed that.
And it looks like they won't, at least as of a few minutes ago.
