Pete Sessions: “Well, I think that is exactly correct. I will say that whether or not being a high official in this administration…”

“Well, I think that is exactly correct. I will say that whether or not being a high official in this administration, which is so committed to passing this legislation, whether that in itself legally requires a person to recuse themselves on the Supreme Court from hearing such a case, I am not prepared to say at this moment, but it makes me uneasy. I believe a judge who decides that question must be impartial and cannot be corrupted by friendship or empathy or bias in favor of the person who appointed them. That is important. Secondly, I ask Senator Barrasso, our question goes to a more specific situation that could mandate recusal, and that is whether the nominee has participated in any discussions, strategies, or making legal advice designed to promote this legislation. I think that would be a clear situation that would require recusal. Also, specific questions could come up regarding to what extent have these lawsuits that have been filed affected her and has she expressed any opinions concerning the lawsuits. Finally, I do not believe the President is entitled to launch onto the Supreme Court a political loyalist who will be a legal rubberstamp for anything that gets proposed, whether it is the takeover of AIG or of automobile companies or other things that may be decided. I think we need to be careful about this. This nominee needs to answer those questions because what the Senator is hearing is what I hear.”