It's "absurd" that Clarence Thomas refused to comply with Graham's subpoena, according to experts.
In a brief Supreme Court docket entry
Thomas, who has jurisdiction over the lower court that rendered the initial decision
Halted the order so Graham could give testimony.
Legal professionals criticised Graham's unwillingness to testify and reliance on the Speech and Debate Clause as justification.
His reasoning was deemed "absurd" by Barb McQuade, a former US attorney and professor of law at the University of Michigan.
Graham's refusal to even show up for the trial has no legitimate justification.
He may object to any topic that interferes with legislative proceedings under the speech or debate provision.
But this probe focuses on election interference rather than legislative actions.