Skip to main content

Politicians make promises on their stump — we watch and hold them accountable.

Help keep the record honest →Create an account
Fully KeptJudiciary and Judicial Nominations

Committed to preserving the Senate 'blue slip' tradition for judicial nominees and to opposing efforts to abolish it, which functionally requires home-state senators' sign-off before certain nominees advance.

Sources (click to view full provenance)

Propose an edit to this promise's details

Suggest a sourced correction to the promise text, topic, scope, significance, or dates. Changing the promise text requires a source. Your suggestion is reviewed before it changes the record.

Sign in and complete the Contributor Agreement to propose an edit.

Assessments

evidence-backed verdicts

These are sourced verdicts from fact-checkers or community evidence reviews — not opinions.

Fully KeptFact-checker reviewConfidence: 60%

The cited PBS NewsHour article (Aug 26, 2025) verifiably documents Tillis publicly opposing abolition of the Senate blue-slip tradition: as a Judiciary Committee member he posted on X that getting rid of the blue slip 'is a terrible, short-sighted ploy' and told fellow Republicans they 'shouldn't fall for it.' This directly supports the promise's core commitment to oppose efforts to abolish the blue slip, so the promise is upheld. However, the source does NOT establish leadership (no bill, amendment, or organized effort sponsored/authored/led by Tillis), so CHAMPIONED overstates the evidence. The article frames Chairman Chuck Grassley — who controls the process and refused Trump's pressure — as the central actor, with Thune also opposing; the rating's claim that Tillis acted as 'the decisive Judiciary Committee vote, going further than any other senator' is not supported by the cited source. Downgraded from CHAMPIONED to FULL: genuine, on-record public opposition consistent with the promise, but not championing/leadership.

Your opinion on this assessment(clearly labeled opinion)

Sign in to vote.

Discussion

community opinions

Comments are user opinions — not verdicts. They do not affect the official assessment.

Sign in to join the discussion.

Propose a correction

community accountability

See an error in the promise text, status, significance, or missing source? Submit a sourced correction — a reviewer will evaluate and apply it if accurate. Your submission must cite evidence; unsourced changes are not accepted.

Sign in or create an account to propose a correction.

Debate

sourced community arguments

These are sourced community arguments — not StumpWatch assessments. Each cites a source and is community-contributed; it does not change the official status or rating above.

No arguments yet

Be the first to weigh in. Every argument cites a source and is reviewed before it publishes. Create an account to add one and help keep this promise honest.

Add a sourced argument

Cite a source for your point. Submissions are held for reviewer approval before they appear.

Sign in or create an account to add an argument.

StumpWatch is live, and the record is still growing. Many promises and positions aren’t tracked yet, and some features are still in beta. Add a sourced promise and help keep the record honest.

Help keep the record honest →