DOCUMENT: CLS-REBUILD · CLASSIFICATION: PUBLIC METHODOLOGY: SYMMETRIC · STATUS: ACTIVE

← Roster

659
Adequate
CHARACTER CREDIT SCORE · 300–850
25/40
Moderate
FOUR PILLARS

Composite 6.39 / 10, weighted per the Constitutional Weight Schedule.

Below the 700 bar, Author's Verdict: not supported.

Lands in the Adequate band at credit 659, below the 700 support line, Author's Verdict: not supported. (See section 7 for the full reasoning.)

★ Service to Country

No military service on record. Career background: law clerk (U.S. District Court, E.D. Missouri); Obama 2012 re-election campaign; White House and U.S. Department of Justice during the Obama second term; deputy chief of staff to Attorney General Merrick Garland until October 2023. Listed as context, not scored.

The 14 measures

Each measure is scored 0–10 against an anchored example, with a cited source. Hover/expand why? for the reasoning.

#MeasureScoreWhy
M01 Duty to Constitution & Rule of Law 6
why?
First-term member seated January 2025 with no documented constitutional-fidelity stand at personal cost yet, but also no process-subversion conduct. Seated after December 2020, he could not have signed the Texas v. Pennsylvania amicus, and no fake-elector or election-overturning conduct is on record. Honest middle: clean but short, no defining test met. Impeachment/certification votes are excluded from scoring per the contamination rule. [source]
M02 Party Over Country 7
why?
One of two freshman Democrats crossing the aisle to give the SCORE Act its bipartisan label, plus bipartisan rural-animal-shelter legislation co-introduced with Rep. Jefferson Shreve (R). Demonstrated willingness to work across party lines early. Held below the top tier only for thin tenure, pattern, not yet a record. [source]
M03 Persons of Equal Worth 6
why?
No documented anti-belonging conduct or rhetoric casting any group as not belonging. Civil-rights family lineage and a stated focus on underserved communities; no high-mark belonging anchor yet either. Clean middle on a short record. [source]
M04 Weaponization of Justice 7
why?
No documented weaponization of state power against rivals or critics; no criterion-class conduct. Former federal prosecutor and DOJ official with no recorded abuse of process. No documented capping conduct. [source]
M05 Incitement / Anti-Belonging 6
why?
No documented pattern of inflammatory or enemy-making rhetoric; public communications track to legislation and constituent service. Short record yields an honest middle rather than a demonstrated high mark. [source]
M06 Fiduciary Conduct 7
why?
No ethics complaints, sanctions, or appearance-of-impropriety findings on record. Campaign committee files quarterly with no reported irregularities. Clean, but a freshman lacks the long accountability track that would justify a higher mark. [source]
M07 Duty to Call Out 6
why?
The higher bar, calling out one's own side at cost, is not yet documented. Bipartisan votes (SCORE Act) show independence from pure party-line behavior, which weighs modestly positive, but no recorded instance of confronting his own party at personal cost. Honest middle. [source]
M08 The Discretion Test 6
why?
No documented discretion-test moment (forgoing a personal benefit for the public good) and no documented self-dealing. Resigned as deputy chief of staff to AG Garland in October 2023 to run; no recorded discretion failure. Neutral middle for lack of a documented test in either direction. [source]
M09 The No-Camera Test 6
why?
No documented gap between private conduct and public posture; no off-record contempt incidents reported. Short tenure limits evidence both ways, honest middle. [source]
M10 Constituent-vs-Donor Vote 6
why?
Constituent-service focus on AL-2 (public safety, economic opportunity, transportation) with no documented donor-over-constituent capture. Campaign funding within ordinary House-freshman norms. Middle for thin record. [source]
M11 Net-Worth Trajectory 7
why?
No office-attributable enrichment on record: no self-dealing, family payments, office-information trades, or foreign-government revenue documented. No individual stock-trade controversy reported. Scored on office-driven enrichment only, per the contamination rule; raw wealth is excluded. Clean, held at 7 for short verification window. [source]
M12 Floor Decorum 7
why?
Vice Ranking Member on Transportation & Infrastructure (Highways and Transit) and Transportation Task Force Chair for the New Democrat Coalition, substantive institutional work over spectacle in his first term. No documented decorum breaches. Upper-middle. [source]
M13 Lying & Misleading 6
why?
No documented sustained-falsehood pattern. No fact-check findings of material misrepresentation on record. Honest middle for a short, clean track. [source]
M14 Knowledge Depth 6
why?
Former federal prosecutor and DOJ deputy chief of staff brings genuine criminal-justice and policy substance; early legislation (family-support/tax-relief bills, transportation reauthorization advocacy) is substantive. Held at the middle because the first-term legislative body of work is still thin. [source]

Why not higher, the points withheld

The standard is the seat; the ceiling is a perfect 10. Every withheld point traces to documented conduct, weighed where the measures and attributes say it belongs, shown openly here, the same way the earned points are.

WhereDocumented conductMitigation weighed
M01 First-term member (seated Jan 2025) with no documented constitutional-fidelity stand at personal cost yet
↳ no defining oath-test met, short tenure
No process-subversion conduct either; could not have signed the 2020 Texas v. PA amicus (seated 2025)
M07 No documented instance of calling out his own party at personal cost
↳ active call-out duty not yet demonstrated
Bipartisan votes (SCORE Act) show some independence from pure party-line behavior
M14 First-term legislative body of work is still thin
↳ substance record not yet deep
Federal-prosecutor / DOJ background supplies genuine policy substance
M11 Short verification window for office-enrichment review
↳ confidence-adjusted, not a finding
No self-dealing, family payments, info-trades, or foreign revenue documented

The Four Pillars, worthy to be followed?

A separate axis from the 14 measures. The measures ask did their conduct meet the standard; the Pillars ask is this someone worthy to be elevated and followed at all. The two can diverge, when they do, the divergence is the finding.

#PillarScoreWhy
I Trust & Loyalty
  • Would I follow them into uncertainty or adversity?
  • Would I trust them with my life or reputation?
  • Would I trust them to lead others honorably when the stakes are high?
6
why?
Attributes: Selfless Service, Steadiness, clean first-term conduct with no loyalty-to-country failures and no documented courage-at-cost test yet. Middle reflects a short record, not a drag toward the opposites.
II Aspiration & Integrity
  • Do I admire their values and how they live them?
  • Do they reflect the kind of person I hope to become?
  • Do I feel challenged to be better because of their example?
6
why?
Attributes: Conviction, Authenticity, consistent stated focus on voting rights, public safety, and economic opportunity, with bipartisan follow-through. Held at middle for lack of a long Self-Reflection/Teachability track to evaluate.
III Protection & Influence
  • Would I trust this person to protect what I love most?
  • Would I trust them to influence someone I care deeply about?
  • Would those under their authority be safer and better for it?
7
why?
Attributes: Protection, Stewardship, Accountability, substantive committee and coalition roles (Transportation) and no documented exploitation of power. Slightly above the others on demonstrated institutional work.
IV Legacy & Virtue
  • Would I be proud if my child grew up to be like them?
  • Do they embody the virtues I want carried into the future?
  • If their influence continued in others, would the world be better or worse?
6
why?
Attributes: Integrity, Justice, civil-rights family lineage and a clean early record; legacy is unwritten on a first-term member. Middle, no drag toward Favoritism/Ego documented.
TOTAL: Moderate 25/40

Total 25/40, Adequate-leaning. The pillars sit in the honest middle because the record is short and clean: no documented drags toward the opposites, and no extraordinary character anchors yet. Confidence-adjusted for a freshman seated January 2025.

What the Four Pillars are & the questions behind each →

In their own words

“His father bankrupted the Klan; he came to Congress to continue the fight, focused on voting rights, public safety, and economic opportunity for underserved communities.”

On taking office for Alabama's 2nd district · Capital B News / House biography · CIVIC · cite

“Joined Republicans to make the SCORE Act bipartisan and co-introduced rural-shelter legislation with Rep. Jefferson Shreve.”

Documented cross-aisle legislative work in his first term · Sportico · PRINCIPLED · cite

Full personnel file

1. Identity

Shomari Coleman Figures (born September 3, 1985, Mobile, Alabama). U.S. Representative for Alabama's 2nd congressional district since January 3, 2025 (first term, 119th Congress); member of the Democratic Party, first elected in 2024. Son of civil-rights attorney and Alabama state senator Michael Figures and state senator Vivian Davis Figures. University of Alabama (B.A. criminal justice and history, 2006; J.D., 2010). Former federal law clerk, Obama campaign and administration staffer, and deputy chief of staff to U.S. Attorney General Merrick Garland until October 2023.

2. Voting / Legislative Profile

First-term House member (119th Congress). Vice Ranking Member, Transportation & Infrastructure Subcommittee on Highways and Transit; Transportation Task Force Chair, New Democrat Coalition. Documented bipartisan work: one of two freshman Democrats supporting the SCORE Act (giving it bipartisan status) and bipartisan rural-animal-shelter legislation with Rep. Jefferson Shreve (R-IN). Early sponsored bills include family-support/tax-relief and baby-product-accessibility measures. Voteview/Lugar Bipartisan Index data are limited by short tenure; party/caucus alignment is excluded from scoring per the contamination rule.

3. Constitutional Moments

None of the capping kind, in either direction. Seated January 2025, Figures could not have signed the December 2020 Texas v. Pennsylvania amicus, and no fake-elector, election-overturning, or other process-subversion conduct is on record. No documented constitutional-fidelity stand at personal cost yet either, a short record with no oath-test met in either direction.

4. Rhetoric & Discourse Profile

No documented pattern of inflammatory or enemy-making rhetoric. Public communications track to legislation, committee work, and constituent service. No documented sustained-falsehood pattern. Short record; no high-mark rhetorical anchor yet either.

5. Fiduciary Profile

No office-attributable enrichment on record: no self-dealing, family payments, office-information trades, or foreign-government revenue documented; no individual stock-trade controversy reported. Campaign committee files quarterly with no reported irregularities. Scored on office-driven enrichment only; raw wealth is excluded per the framework. Clean, with the usual short-tenure confidence caveat.

6. Severity-Class Conduct

No documented Severity-class conduct under any of the eight criteria. Seated after December 2020, Figures is not on the Texas v. Pennsylvania signatory list and has no fake-elector, incitement, or process-subversion conduct on record. Flag count: zero.

7. What The Framework Says

A clean but short first-term record. Figures shows early cross-aisle work (the SCORE Act, the Shreve shelter bill) and substantive institutional roles on Transportation, with no documented ethics, rhetoric, or process-subversion concerns. The standard does not reward what has not yet been tested: there is no documented constitutional stand at personal cost, no own-side call-out, and only a thin legislative body of work. The result is an honest middle, confidence-adjusted for a member seated January 2025, neither a high mark earned nor any drag toward the opposites established.

8. Sources & Where To Look Deeper

Tier 1 (primary): Congress.gov member profile · House Financial Disclosure (Clerk)

Tier 2: Ballotpedia · OpenSecrets campaign finance · Sportico, SCORE Act bipartisanship

Research links: Congress.gov member profile · Ballotpedia · House office, About · GovTrack · OpenSecrets · Wikipedia

Scores derive from the fixed Constitutional Weight Schedule. The bar does not move. Conduct, not party.

SHARE THIS DOSSIER: