The fallout from Princeton professor Robert P. George's resignation from the Heritage Foundation's board of trustees intensified this week, as a Wall Street Journal editorial Tuesday sharply criticized the think tank's leadership and warned that Heritage is drifting from its long-standing conservative principles.
George's departure — alongside growing unrest among donors, policy fellows, and allied organizations — has become a flash point that underscores deeper ideological and cultural rifts within the influential institution.
George, a widely respected conservative scholar and moral philosopher, announced Monday that he could no longer serve on Heritage's board following what he described as an insufficient corrective response to President Kevin Roberts' recent comments defending podcaster Tucker Carlson.
Roberts had accused Carlson's critics — including those disturbed by Carlson's flirtations with antisemites such as Nick Fuentes — of acting on behalf of a "venomous coalition" serving "someone else's agenda," language George said demanded a full retraction.
Although Roberts apologized for some aspects of his video statement, he declined to withdraw it entirely.
In explaining his decision to resign, George emphasized the gravity of the moment.
"I could not remain without a full retraction," he said, noting that the president's comments did not represent the Heritage he had long supported.
For decades, George has been one of America's most prominent conservative intellectuals, a mentor to generations of right-of-center scholars and lawyers and a steward of a principled, Judeo-Christian conservatism. His departure marks a profound symbolic loss for the institution.
The WSJ editorial board, echoing sentiments emerging on the right, argued that Roberts' response to the controversy has "damaged the institution's reputation" and that George's resignation underscores a deteriorating commitment to Heritage's foundational values.
Roberts has steadfastly refused to criticize Carlson for numerous statements seen as being antisemitic or to disassociate the think tank from the podcaster.
The editorial warned that "a 'conservatism' that plays footsie — or worse — with antisemitism and white identity politics ... doesn't merit the name," insisting that criticism of Roberts is not equivalent to criticism of former President Donald Trump or the broader MAGA movement.
George is not the first major Heritage-affiliated figure to distance himself from the organization in recent months.
Economist Stephen Moore, long associated with Heritage's economic policy research, has reportedly grown uneasy with the think tank's combative new posture, particularly as it shifts away from its traditional free-market orientation.
Chris DeMuth, the former president of the American Enterprise Institute and a senior figure in conservative intellectual circles, has also expressed private concerns about Heritage's direction under Roberts, according to individuals familiar with board discussions.
Both publicly resigned from Heritage in the wake of Roberts' decision to defend Carlson for his interview with Fuentes.
Outside organizations are also exerting pressure.
The Zionist Organization of America has called for Roberts to resign over what it described as his "minimization" of antisemitism and his willingness to defend figures like Carlson even after they platform extremist voices.
ZOA leaders have urged donors to suspend contributions to Heritage until the board installs new leadership and recommits to unequivocal opposition to antisemitism.
Some defenders of Roberts have cheered George's departure as an overdue purge of what they consider outdated or overly "respectable" conservatism.
But to many longtime observers, the celebration is itself evidence of the institution's ideological fracture. The WSJ editorial lamented the loss of George's influence and warned that Heritage's crisis "may be owed in some part to his sense that Heritage's commitments were already deteriorating during Mr. Roberts's tenure."
© 2025 Newsmax. All rights reserved.