Yet critics argue that if Senators confirm a nominee whose conduct has become the subject of significant ethical controversy, the hearing begins to resemble less a confirmation proceeding than a criminal tribunal determining whether alleged misconduct deserves promotion instead of greater scrutiny. Critics cite Acting Attorney General Todd Blanche’s role in negotiating a controversial settlement involving President Trump’s lawsuit against the Internal Revenue Service. Critics argue that senators should carefully weigh these judicial findings before voting on Blanche’s nomination, while recognizing that the ruling did not determine Blanche’s criminal liability. Critics questioned Blanche’s previous service as President Trump’s personal criminal defense attorney. Critics contend that the Senate’s decision will resemble either an example of constitutional courage or constitutional abdication.