“It would be a serious violation of judicial ethics for a nominee to the federal bench to say how they would vote in a case before hearing the facts and evidence,” wrote Thiessen.

During Ruth Bader Ginsburg’s 1993 confirmation hearings, Ginsberg explained that “it would be wrong for me to say or preview in this legislative chamber how I would cast my vote on questions the Supreme Court may be called upon to decide.”

“A judge sworn to decide impartially can offer no forecasts, no hints, for that would show not only disregard for the specifics of the particular case, it would display disdain for the entire judicial process,” the late justice added.

“It is perfectly understandable for senators to try to divine how a justice, if confirmed, would rule on a case they care about,” Thiessen wrote. “But it would be a gross dereliction of judicial ethics for a nominee to prejudge a case or give senators any assurances of how they would decide. Which is why they all follow the ‘Ginsburg rule.’ And there is nothing impeachable about that.”