New Mexico Rule of Professional Conduct 8.4(d) provides it is professional misconduct for a lawyer to engage in conduct prejudicial to the administration of justice. That is a MR provision. New Mexico also has a Rule 8.4(h), which provides that it is misconduct for a lawyer to "engage in any conduct that adversely reflects on his fitness to practice law." Comment 3 to Rule 8.4 states "Lawyers holding public office assume legal responsibilities going beyond those of other citizens. A lawyer's abuse of public office can suggest an inability to fulfill the professional role of attorney."
These provisions are relevant to the claim that Senator Domenici called then-U.S. Attorney David Iglesias to inquire about a possible indictment of high-profile Democrats. Iglesias felt he had be leaned on to issue the indictments in time for them to influence an election. Domenici concedes making the call but denies asking whether the indictments would issue before the election date. He claims to have called at the request of constituents, which Senate rules apparently permit.
The call was at best bad judgment. A staffer could have called to inquire about the status of a matter. The senator's personal attention signaled personal interest, and he must have known it would. (That he called Iglesias at home would add to that impression.) Even if he did not mention the timing of the election, it would not take much to put the call and that date together. Domenici should have known that, too, and expected that Iglesias would perceive the call as pressure to move things along. A lawyer who did not know that much about how the world works would not be much of a lawyer.
Powerful people rarely say things as crass as "I want them indicted before the election so we will win." They don't have to; that's part of what it means to be powerful. They say things equivalent to "will no one rid me of this meddlesome priest?" In such cases, literalist defenses are misleading.
Whether this is such a case has not been determined, but it should be. Iglesias testified under oath; Domenici concedes at least the call. The proper administration of justice is at issue. Assuming the senator remains a member of the New Mexico bar, there are facts enough to warrant investigation by its disciplinary branch, as well as (one hopes) by the Senate. It will be interesting to see whether one is conducted.
DM