������'s good for the goose is good for the gander

“In the larger picture, I think we do have to be careful that we don’t create an institutional practice here of either quid pro quo or ‘what’s good for the goose is good for the gander; they did this, so we can do this’ — that’s not a good practice for the institution, and generally, I would be opposed to something like that,” he said.

Sen. Ted Cruz said it right out loud when he told his podcast audience that Democrats had used impeachment "for partisan purposes to go after Trump because they disagreed with him. And one of the real disadvantages of doing that … is the more you weaponize it and turn it into a partisan cudgel, you know, what's good for the goose is good for the gander."

She quotes Sen. Ted Cruz arguing that "Democrats weaponized impeachment" and "what's good for the goose is good for the gander."

And one of the real disadvantages of doing that... is the more you weaponize it and turn it into a partisan cudgel, you know, what's good for the goose is good for the gander.

That proposal is probably legally sound and serves the dual purpose of tweaking Texas and somewhere down the line forcing the Supreme Court to decide if what’s good for the goose is good for the gander when it comes to vigilante justice.