- Top Congressional Races in 2016: The West
- Murphy to Announce He'll Seek Rematch With Blum (Updated)
- Top Races to Watch in 2016: The South
- When the Second Time Isnt the Charm
- State Senator Considering Run for Arizona Open House Seat
The Senate Ethics Committee on Tuesday hired a special counsel for its investigation of Sen. John Ensign, but individuals on and off Capitol Hill cautioned the decision is not necessarily an indication of a more serious inquiry.
The Ethics Committee announced Tuesday that attorney Carol Elder Bruce, a partner at the law firm K&L Gates, will serve as special counsel in the inquiry, which has been ongoing since at least October 2009.
Although the committee is permitted to hire special counsel, the panel rarely invokes that option and has not done so in nearly two decades.
But Ethics Chairwoman Barbara Boxer (D-Calif.) told reporters Tuesday that the panel brought Bruce on to “expedite” the inquiry.
“The committee, on a bipartisan basis, decided this was an appropriate step,” Boxer said, according to the Washington Post. “The committee has done a lot of work, and at this stage, we think it’s appropriate in order to expedite things, to move it through. This is what we’re doing and to have the expertise we need.”
Ethics Vice Chairman Johnny Isakson (R-Ga.) declined to comment Tuesday, referring to a statement issued Tuesday: “The press release speaks for itself. I’m not at liberty to make any other comment.”
That statement did not offer specifics but said the committee is “examining allegations against Senator Ensign that he violated Senate rules and federal law.”
Criminal defense attorney Robert Bennett, who served as special counsel to the Ethics Committee on three other cases, explained that the committee itself decides the counsel’s role.
“It’s a very difficult question because it doesn’t have any fixed meaning,” Bennett said. “The rights and authority of the special counsel depend on what the committee asks the special counsel to do.”
Bennett, a partner at the law firm Hogan Lovells, noted that he was asked to “investigate, make recommendations, issue a report,” in each of the three cases he was involved with.
But he noted: “So much depends on what the committee authorizes counsel to do. Do they want the counsel to have some independence, or do they want the counsel in an advisory role?”
Bennett added that Bruce “is a lady of tremendous ability, tremendous experience, and ... they should give her a lot of authority and get the job done.”
Several individuals familiar with the Senate ethics process said that the chamber’s insular culture could present challenges for Bruce, but that she may also be more free to challenge lawmakers than a career aide.
Melanie Sloan, executive director of the watchdog group Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington, suggested that whatever recommendations Bruce ultimately makes to the committee — although confidential — could be difficult to reject outright.
“They’ve done serious investigations without an outside counsel,” Sloan said, but she added, “Whatever she comes back with is going to be harder to argue with.”
But the committee is not bound to follow Bruce’s recommendations.