Nicholas Ganjei, currently serving as the U.S. Attorney for the Southern District of Texas, has caught attention after being nominated by President Donald Trump to a federal judgeship in the Southern District of Texas.
During a Senate Judiciary Committee hearing, Senator Adam Schiff (D-CA) grilled Ganjei on a pressing issue. He asked, “Without congressional approval or a formal declaration of war, are military actions against ships implicated in drug trafficking legal or constitutional?” It was a direct inquiry relating to military actions ordered by the president.
[For context: Trump has initiated over 20 military strikes on vessels in the Caribbean linked to Venezuelan drug traffic. Recently, on the Senate floor, Schiff highlighted the U.S. military presence escalating near Venezuela and questioned if the Trump administration sought to push America into yet another conflict. He raised concerns about warships being dispatched to the area, suggesting skepticism regarding the stated mission of intercepting speedboats.]
In response, Ganjei stated, “Senator, that scenario is highly dependent on specific facts, and should those strikes be legally contested, I might face that issue if I’m confirmed. So, I don’t think I can provide my opinion on that.”
Schiff pressed further, asking, “Do you believe the War Powers Act is constitutional?” Ganjei replied carefully, stating, “Senator, that may also come before me.”
Schiff countered, observing, “I assume many legal questions will come your way. That shouldn’t stop you from sharing your views, especially regarding broad legislation like the War Powers Act.” Ganjei’s continued response was, “My answer remains the same, Senator.”
Many observers expressed their frustration at Ganjei’s reluctance to answer Schiff’s fair queries. Legal expert Tracey Gallagher tweeted, “It was a straightforward question he refused to engage with.” Another attorney, Sandy Taylor, noted, “It’s outright unacceptable for a nominee not to have or share informed opinions on reasonable inquiries.”
