Skip to content
Search

Latest Stories

Top Stories

Ketanji Brown Jackson gets widespread support even as partisan division grows

Ketanji Brown Jackson

Supreme Court nominee Ketanji Brown Jackson speaks during her confirmation hearing on March 22.

China News Service/Getty Images

Ketanji Brown Jackson nearly set a record among Supreme Court nominees for initial public support following her nomination by President Biden.

The Gallup pollsters have asked the public for first impressions of all but four nominees since 1987. When surveyed about Jackson, 58 percent said they support her nomination. Only Chief Justice John Roberts edged out Jackson, pulling 59 percent in 2005.

While Jackson performs well among Democrats and independents, she joins her three predecessors in being the most divisive nominees since Gallup began asking the question.


Not surprisingly, Democrats overwhelmingly support Jackson’s nomination, with 88 percent saying they would vote in favor, while just 31 percent of Republicans and 55 percent of independents back Jackson.

While only one third of Republicans say they would vote for Jackson, she performs better among the GOP than any of Donald Trump’s nominees initially polled among Democrats.

During his presidency, Trump put three justices on the Supreme Court — Neil Gorsch, Brett Kavanaugh and Amy Coney Barrett — and all were initially supported by less than a one quarter of Democrats.

The only nominees to get at least 40 percent support from the opposite party were Clarence Thomas in 1991, Ruth Bader Ginsburg in 1993 and Roberts in 2005.

Made with Flourish

Historically, Supreme Court nominees did not get overwhelming support from the president’s party. With the exception of Roberts, no pre-Trump nominee had initial support from more than three-quarters of the president’s party.

The largest gaps between party support have all occurred since 2017, with Sonia Sotomayor as the only additional nominee to have an initial gap above 50 points.

Brown has more support among independents (55 percent) than any other nominee, just edging out Sotomayor and Roberts.

Opposition to Supreme Court nominees generally grows over the course of the confirmation process, according to Gallup.

The Senate Judiciary Committee is holding confirmation hearings on Jackson’s nomination this week, and public opinion may shift by the time the Senate votes.

Read More

Veterans’ Care at Risk Under Trump As Hundreds of Doctors and Nurses Reject Working at VA Hospitals
Photo illustration by Lisa Larson-Walker/ProPublica

Veterans’ Care at Risk Under Trump As Hundreds of Doctors and Nurses Reject Working at VA Hospitals

Veterans hospitals are struggling to replace hundreds of doctors and nurses who have left the health care system this year as the Trump administration pursues its pledge to simultaneously slash Department of Veterans Affairs staff and improve care.

Many job applicants are turning down offers, worried that the positions are not stable and uneasy with the overall direction of the agency, according to internal documents examined by ProPublica. The records show nearly 4 in 10 of the roughly 2,000 doctors offered jobs from January through March of this year turned them down. That is quadruple the rate of doctors rejecting offers during the same time period last year.

Keep ReadingShow less
Protecting the U.S. Press: The PRESS Act and What It Could Mean for Journalists

The Protect Reporters from Excessive State Suppression (PRESS) Act aims to fill the national shield law gap by providing two protections for journalists.

Getty Images, Manu Vega

Protecting the U.S. Press: The PRESS Act and What It Could Mean for Journalists

The First Amendment protects journalists during the news-gathering and publication processes. For example, under the First Amendment, reporters cannot be forced to report on an issue. However, the press is not entitled to different legal protections compared to a general member of the public under the First Amendment.

In the United States, there are protections for journalists beyond the First Amendment, including shield laws that protect journalists from pressure to reveal sources or information during news-gathering. 48 states and the District of Columbia have shield laws, but protections vary widely. There is currently no federal shield law. As of 2019, at least 22 journalists have been jailed in the U.S. for refusing to comply with requests to reveal sources of information. Seven other journalists have been jailed and fined for the same reason.

Keep ReadingShow less
Democrats Score Strategic Wins Amid Redistricting Battles

Democrat Donkey is winning arm wrestling match against Republican elephant

AI generated image

Democrats Score Strategic Wins Amid Redistricting Battles

Democrats are quietly building momentum in the 2025 election cycle, notching two key legislative flips in special elections and gaining ground in early polling ahead of the 2026 midterms. While the victories are modest in number, they signal a potential shift in voter sentiment — and a brewing backlash against Republican-led redistricting efforts.

Out of 40 special elections held across the United States so far in 2025, only two seats have changed party control — both flipping from Republican to Democrat.

Keep ReadingShow less
Policing or Occupation? Trump’s Militarizing America’s Cities Sets a Dangerous Precedent

A DC Metropolitan Police Department car is parked near a rally against the Trump Administration's federal takeover of the District of Columbia, outside of the AFL-CIO on August 11, 2025 in Washington, DC.

(Photo by Kevin Dietsch/Getty Images)

Policing or Occupation? Trump’s Militarizing America’s Cities Sets a Dangerous Precedent

President Trump announced the activation of hundreds of National Guard troops in Washington, D.C., along with the deployment of federal agents—including more than 100 from the FBI. This comes despite Justice Department data showing that violent crime in D.C. fell 35% from 2023 to 2024, reaching its lowest point in over three decades. These aren’t abstract numbers—they paint a picture of a city safer than it has been in a generation, with fewer homicides, assaults, and robberies than at any point since the early 1990s.

The contradiction could not be more glaring: the same president who, on January 6, 2021, stalled for hours as a violent uprising engulfed the Capitol is now rushing to “liberate” a city that—based on federal data—hasn’t been this safe in more than thirty years. Then, when democracy itself was under siege, urgency gave way to dithering; today, with no comparable emergency—only vague claims of lawlessness—he mobilizes troops for a mission that looks less like public safety and more like political theater. The disparity between those two moments is more than irony; it is a blueprint for how power can be selectively applied, depending on whose power is threatened.

Keep ReadingShow less