For members of the Senate Judiciary Committee considering Samuel Alito’s Supreme Court nomination, there are clear and specific responsibilities — weigh Alito’s qualifications, review his record, ask pertinent questions, and decide whether he’s earned a lifetime position on the highest court in the land.
Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.) seems to misunderstand how this works. Instead of acting as an arbiter of Alito’s abilities, Graham has decided to act an advocate. The Wall Street Journal noted yesterday that Graham helped prepare Alito for the confirmation process, joining a “moot court session at the White House” in advance of this week’s hearings. As far as I can tell, this is a first, at least among modern Supreme Court nominees.
I realize that members of the Senate Judiciary Committee have, in large part, already made up their minds. But Graham has a duty to assess Alito’s abilities from a position of alleged neutrality; not as a partisan ally. It’s like a teacher showing a student the questions before an exam.
Indeed, as Think Progress noted, the Senate Ethics manual seems to prohibit exactly what Graham did.
“No Member, officer, or employee shall engage in any outside business or professional activity or employment for compensation which is inconsistent or in conflict with the conscientious performance of official duties.” … The Committee has interpreted this paragraph to prohibit compensated employment or uncompensated positions on boards, commissions, or advisory councils where such service could create a conflict with an individual’s Senate duties due to appropriation, oversight, authorization, or legislative jurisdiction as a result of Senate duties.
It’s far too much to ask that the Senate Ethics Committee review this kind of behavior, but is it unreasonable to wonder whether Graham should be asked to recuse himself when the Judiciary Committee votes on Alito’s nomination?