House Ethics Committee finds Rep. Sheila Cherfilus-McCormick violated House rules
House Ethics subcommittee ruled against Rep. Sheila Cherfilus-McCormick, D-Fla., after a marathon hearing Thursday that stretched into the night, finding that she violated ethics rules.
Objective Facts
The committee said in a statement Friday that 25 of the 27 counts Cherfilus-McCormick was accused of were "proven by clear and convincing evidence." She was indicted in November over allegations she stole $5 million in disaster relief funds and used it to bankbank her 2021 special election campaign. Federal prosecutors allege she funneled money to support her campaign using FEMA overpayments distributed to Trinity Healthcare services, her family's company. The subcommittee found that 25 of 27 counts were "proven by clear and convincing evidence." But the subcommittee was not convinced by count 16, finding insufficient proof that her conduct was improper around money laundering allegations tied to Florida-based company Petrogaz-Haiti. It also rejected count 27, which accused her of a lack of candor and diligence during the investigation. Now the full Ethics Committee will meet to recommend a punishment, which it will do "shortly after the House returns from the April recess," according to the release.
Left-Leaning Perspective
After meeting into early Friday morning following a seven-hour hearing, the ethics panel of four Democrats and four Republicans found that Cherfilus-McCormick had committed 25 ethics violations, including breaking campaign finance laws. House Democratic leaders have declined to condemn Cherfilus-McCormick and said they wanted to see the ethics process play out. Some believe the ethics process was rushed and will interfere with Cherfilus-McCormick's coming day in court. And with tight margins in the House, losing a Democrat would give Speaker Mike Johnson and his GOP majority more breathing room. House Democratic leadership has argued such a step should not be taken until Cherfilus-McCormick's criminal trial is resolved — though their members are growing increasingly uncomfortable with the situation. A number of rank-and-file Democrats have reservations, warning that a blanket defense of Cherfilus-McCormick could send the message that the party views matters of criminal justice through a partisan lens — and weaken their campaign message that Republicans are the party of fraud and corruption. "How do you maintain your integrity and objectivity — you're sitting as a judge now — so how do you maintain that credibility if you're going to treat Democrats better than Republicans?" Rep. Stephen Lynch (D-Mass.) said. A couple of members of the Congressional Black Caucus, one of the most powerful groups of Democratic members, also showed up to the start of the ethics hearing Thursday in an apparent show of support for Cherfilus-McCormick. Democratic leadership's position emphasizes process and due process rights during the ongoing criminal trial, but this stance creates internal party division and undermines broader anti-corruption messaging.
Right-Leaning Perspective
A Democratic congresswoman is facing possible expulsion following a grueling seven-hour Ethics Committee hearing Thursday over allegations she diverted millions of dollars in emergency COVID-19 relief funds into her campaign. Republican Florida Rep. Greg Steube is prepared to offer a resolution to expel Democratic Florida Rep. Sheila Cherfilus-McCormick after her rare public Ethics Committee hearing in which the panel examined 27 counts of alleged House rules violations. The Daily Caller quoted Steube saying "This is disgraceful. The American people deserve better than corruption in Congress." Democrats' refusal so far to condemn Cherfilus-McCormick has prompted sharp criticism from Republicans. "So-called 'Leader' Hakeem Jeffries talks a big game on corruption, but when it's one of his own, he suddenly loses his voice," NRCC spokesman Mike Marinella said in a statement. Some Republicans have also complained about a double standard with the chamber's treatment of Cherfilus-McCormick by making comparisons to former Rep. George Santos, R-N.Y. The scandal-plagued lawmaker was expelled from Congress in 2023 before an ethics hearing or criminal conviction. "It seems like what happened to George was just like a runaway freight train up here," Rep. Byron Donalds, R-Fla., said Wednesday. "They didn't even give George an opportunity to get fully through ethics. And so this one's been a little bit more deliberate." "I think going forward, how this one's been conducted is how it should go," Donalds added, referring to the anticipated Cherfilus-McCormick hearing. The committee's counsel also testified that Cherfilus-McCormick's counsel presented little evidence to counter the committee's findings. Republican framing emphasizes the severity of the violations, the double standard compared to Republican expulsions, and calls for swift removal or resignation.
Deep Dive
The House Ethics Committee began conducting its own investigation of Cherfilus-McCormick in 2023, after the nonpartisan Office of Congressional Ethics said the committee should probe the matter. In December, the Ethics subcommittee tasked with investigating Cherfilus-McCormick adopted a statement of alleged violations against the Florida Democrat. It detailed 27 counts in which the subcommittee determined there was "substantial reason to believe" that she violated House rules, regulations or the law. The investigative subcommittee "reviewed over 33,000 documents totaling hundreds of thousands of pages of materials and conducted 28 witness interviews" before making its determination. It was a rare moment for the typically secretive Ethics panel, as a public "trial" unfolded for the first time since 2010. In a packed room that started to empty out over several hours, Cherfilus-McCormick sat next to her attorney, William Barzee, who is also representing her in her separate criminal case. She listened silently as committee lawyers accused her of campaign finance offenses and using a "straw donor scheme" as she ran for Congress. Cherfilus-McCormick's attorney moved to delay the hearing or keep it behind closed doors, arguing a public hearing could jeopardize his client's potential jury pool in her criminal case. Committee members disagreed, with the Ethics panel's chairman finding the delay request offensive given the two-year investigation. Barzee made the case that Cherfilus-McCormick's prior counsel advised her not to participate with the probe over concerns of self-incrimination, and he repeatedly called for bringing witnesses before the panel for him to cross-examine. The core tension is real: an ethics process investigating House rule violations versus protecting constitutional rights in a separate federal criminal proceeding. Left-leaning commentators have a legitimate point about the collision of these two processes, but right-leaning critics are correct that the committee gave substantial opportunity for cooperation over two years and that Cherfilus-McCormick repeatedly changed counsel and avoided engagement. The hearing got testy at times, with committee members venting that Cherfilus-McCormick spent years dodging their requests for testimony and evidence and repeatedly switching up her legal team. The Ethics Committee said it will hold a hearing after the House's two-week spring recess to determine any possible sanctions, which could include censure, removal from committees or expulsion. The Democratic Party faces a credibility test: it has built campaigns on anti-corruption messaging and the George Santos expulsion, yet internal pressure exists to protect a fellow party member pending criminal trial. The critical next step is the full Ethics Committee's punishment recommendation in mid-April, which will determine whether expulsion becomes viable.