Here is the Heritage Take on the top issues today.Please reply to this email to arrange an interview.

Why DC Statehood Is a Bad Idea <[link removed]> – There are historical and practical reasons why converting the current District into a new state is a bad idea. More importantly, there are compelling reasons why doing so in this manner—via simple legislation—is unconstitutional. But even if we assume ... that statehood for D.C. is necessary or desirable, there is still the question of whether this method—statehood by legislation—is constitutional. The Justice Department during the Carter administration thought not, saying, ‘If [the original reasons for the creation of the District] have lost validity, the appropriate response would be to provide statehood for the District by constitutional amendment rather than to ignore the Framers' intentions.’ Heritage expert: Zack
Smith <[link removed]>

White House unveils plans for high-profile climate summit <[link removed]> – Americans want abundant access to reliable, affordable energy that improves their quality of life,
fuels the economy, and protects the environment. The Biden energy plan consists of mandates, subsidies, and regulations that pave the way for higher prices and more cronyism with minimal environmental benefit. Eliminating subsidies, empowering choice, and removing barriers to competition will deliver more economic and environmental benefits than a top-down approach. Heritage
expert: Nick Loris <[link removed]>
Amnesty Via Reconciliation Would Be Radical Move By Biden, Congress <[link removed]> – Amnesty would only throw gasoline on the fire already raging at the southern border. Promising full citizenship to illegal aliens would result in more illegal aliens crossing our border. It would also impose massive social costs for U.S. taxpayers and rip employment opportunities away from the poor and working Americans who need them most, especially as we try to recover from the pandemic. It is unconscionable that the U.S. government would allow illegal aliens to 'jump the line' past legal immigrants who have played by the rules, but that is exactly what the left is proposing. Those who care about protecting poor and working Americans, preserving our rules-based immigration system, and respecting the law should stand up and unequivocally condemn and prevent efforts to undermine them all.
Time for Joe Biden to Become a Realist on Border Crisis <[link removed]> – A first step in the right direction would be restoring the common-sense Trump policies that he revoked. Yes, immigration remains a highly charged political issue on both sides of the Atlantic, with strong voices advocating everything from virtually open borders all the way to strict border enforcement and a reduction in legal immigration and refugee numbers. But reality dictates that every government that respects the rule of law must police its borders, get illegal immigration under control, and make and enforce an immigration policy that is in its national interest and acceptable to its citizens. Heritage expert: Lora
Ries <[link removed]>
Takeaway From Chauvin Trial: Where Do We Go From Here? <[link removed]> – The big question the jurors had to decide, though, was whether Chauvin’s indefensible conduct rose to the level of
criminally culpable conduct. They clearly thought it did, because they convicted him on all three counts. The legal standards applicable to each of the three charges are thorny. In fact, the trial judge had originally thrown out the third-degree murder charge until an appellate court ordered him to reconsider that decision. Chauvin and his lawyers surely will raise that issue, among others, on appeal. One of the most troubling issues that they will likely raise on appeal involves the
comments of Rep. Maxine Waters, D-Calif., over the weekend before the jurors began their deliberations. Heritage expert: Zack Smith <[link removed]>
Fact-Checking 3 Claims From Senate Hearing on Voting <[link removed]> – On Tuesday, the Senate Judiciary Committee, controlled by Democrats, held a hearing on state election integrity laws provocatively titled
“Jim Crow 2021: The Latest Assault on the Right to Vote.” “Jim Crow” was the shorthand term for a series of laws in Southern states that made it not only nearly impossible for black citizens to vote, but also reinforced a system of segregation. The Tuesday hearing included statements from
senators and witnesses that have become common misconceptions regarding the election integrity law recently enacted in Georgia and others like it under consideration in other states. Here are fact checks of three of those claims. Heritage expert: Jarrett
Stepman <[link removed]>
Senate Hearing Pushes Odious ‘Jim Crow’ Comparisons to Cement Liberal Power <[link removed]> – Biden should know better what Jim Crow really was, since he has a history
of palling around with real, live, segregationist senators in the past and even worked with them when they opposed integrating schools through busing. For that part of his record, he was blistered during the recent Democratic Party primaries in a memorable debate moment with one of his competitors, who now happens to be his vice
president. And perhaps Biden is overcompensating these days, since he also infamously eulogized Sen. Robert Byrd, a former Exalted Cyclops in the Ku Klux Klan, saying he was “one of my mentors” and that “the Senate is a lesser place for his going.” It’s no secret why Democrats are engaged in such odious and indefensible overstatements: They desperately want to pass HR 1, which is the federalization of election law and the
ticket to their electoral success for decades to come. And to do that, they also need to eliminate the filibuster, which sets an unreachable bar of 60 votes for passage in the Senate. Heritage expert: Tim Murtaugh <[link removed]>

-