When you have a judicial nominee whose name has been put forward by the subject of an ongoing criminal investigation and by someone who has been named in open court as directing other criminal activity, in the event that those criminal investigations should ultimately come before the Court and the nominee of that subject and that named co-conspirator is then on the Court, it is fair to say, is it not, that the question of recusal is a very live and legitimate issue?
Editor's note · Context
Senator Whitehouse raises concerns about judicial nominees linked to ongoing criminal investigations.
Share & report
More from Sheldon Whitehouse
There is a doctrine or a principle that is kind of a tedious economic term, ``marginal utility of money.'' What it means, in very plain terms, is that if you make $60,000 a year, your last thousand dollars of income is a big deal to you…
In yet another of many attempts to unravel protections for human health and the environment, and in their endless quest to accommodate the country's biggest polluters, Republicans in the Senate are seeking congressional disapproval for…
The good news is that the American people hate dark money with a passion, and they hate it just as much, if not more, in districts that went for Trump as in districts that went for Biden.
I ask for the yeas and nays. The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there a sufficient second? There appears to be a sufficient second? The clerk will call the roll. The legislative clerk called the roll.





