The House Ethics Committee held a rare public hearing on Thursday to examine a swath of allegations against Rep. Sheila Cherfilus-McCormick (D-Fla.), centering on charges that she used millions in improperly paid federal disaster funds to finance her campaign.
The core of the alleged violations is that $5 million in Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) funds that were improperly paid to her family's company -- millions of which were then transferred to Cherfilus-McCormick and others and used to fund her congressional campaign.
The panel's Adjudicatory Subcommittee adjourned the public hearing late Thursday night after hours of detailed questioning, moving into a private executive session as it decides whether to approve the committee's motion for summary judgment that outlines the 21 ethics violations. Its decision is set to be communicated to the public by a statement from the committee.
Rep. Mark DeSaulnier (D-Calif.), ranking member of the Ethics Committee, called the allegations against Cherfilus-McCormick "extremely serious."
"They not only concern an individual member's conduct, they also implicate the public's confidence in the House's integrity as an institution," DeSaulnier said.
If the subcommittee approves the motion, it increases the likelihood that the whole House will consider a resolution to expel her from the chamber, which would require a two-thirds vote -- if Cherfilus-McCormick did not resign. Before that would happen, though, the full Ethics Committee is expected to consider the matter.
The committee's motion for summary judgment outlined the claims of the congresswoman's conduct that "Does Not Reflect Creditably on the House"; conduct that "Violates the Letter and Spirit of House Rules"; "Failure to Uphold the Laws and Regulations of the United States"; and "Lack of Candor and Diligence in Ethics Investigations."
A presentation from the committee's counsel detailed the complex flow of funds. The committee also said she failed to file accurate financial disclosure forms, accepted improper campaign contributions from others, and provided special favors in connection with community project funding requests.
The Ethics panel's scrutiny comes alongside parallel federal criminal charges. Cherfilus-McCormick in November was indicted alongside three others, including her brother, for stealing $5 million in the FEMA funds that were used not only for her campaign but to enrich herself.
Cherfilus-McCormick has denied any wrongdoing, and her legal counsel argued that the facts in the committee's motion were in dispute -- as well as that the federal charges hindered her ability to respond to the Ethics panel due to concerns about self-incrimination.
Her legal counsel, William Barzee, argued that there was evidence of a "profit-sharing agreement" for the family company that means she was "entitled to every single penny that she received" from her family's company after the improper payment. Lawmakers were skeptical of that argument and of the supporting evidence of a profit-sharing agreement, which amounted to an undated chart.
Cherfilus-McCormick did not speak during the hearing, at times shaking her head or whispering to her lawyer, or passing notes. She wore a prominent peacock brooch on the lapel of her grey suit jacket.
Congressional investigators began probing matters relating to Cherfilus-McCormick long before the federal charges against her. A 242-page memorandum on the summary judgement said that committee had 16,900 pages of materials supporting its ethics charges.
Thursday's hearing started with consideration of a late-stage request to stay the proceedings -- delaying them -- until her criminal matter was resolved, "in order to safeguard her Constitutional right to a fair trial."
The Ethics panel has historically paused proceedings against members accused of wrongdoing if they were under investigation by the Department of Justice or subject to federal criminal proceedings.
But that changed a few years ago when it publicly released its report into fabulist former Rep. George Santos (R-N.Y.) in 2023 -- months before his federal criminal fraud trial -- as members in both parties called for his removal from Congress. While the Ethics Committee did not make a formal recommendation in that case, the House voted to expel Santos shortly after the report's release.
Still, Cherfilus-McCormick’s legal counsel, William Barzee, said that the committee’s goal of expediency is a noble goal; “it’s not more noble than her right to have a fair trial, and it’s not more noble than her fifth amendment right against self incrimination.”
Barzee grew animated when challenged by Rep. Brad Knott (R-N.C.) about his arguments that the Ethics Committee hearing could violate her Constitutional right to a fair trial. It is the responsibility of the court and counsel in a trial, Knott argued, to ensure that a jury only considers the arguments presented at trial.
"If they hear that she's already been found guilty, how can she have a fair trial?" Barzee said.
The first portion of the hearing considered Cherfilus-McCormick's request to stay the matter, delaying consideration of the allegations against her.
Barzee -- who said he only started representing Cherfilus-McCormick two and a half weeks ago -- also argued counsel had not gotten enough time to be fully prepared to address all of the allegations being presented by the committee. Members of both parties on the committee bristled at that suggestion, noting that the congresswoman has cycled through several lawyers and did not want to delay proceedings simply due to her retaining new counsel.
Rep. Michael Guest (R-Miss.), chair of the Ethics panel, noted that the panel had investigated that matter for years -- and that the congresswoman repeatedly declined to provide feedback on the panel's findings.
Guest tore into Barzee for arguing that the committee was hampering the rights of his client.
"For you to claim that we are doing something that is improper, that is wrong," Guest said.
The panel voted in a closed-door session to reject the request for a stay.
DeSaulnier said that the panel had initially refused that request to stay "given our committee's independent mandate to self-regulate" and the "constitutional limitations the executive branch faces investigate members of Congress."
Walking into the hearing, Cherfilus-McCormick told Fox News that she did not request a pardon from President Trump. The Hill previously reported that she went so far as to seek a presidential pardon during last year's White House Christmas party, according to a source familiar with the exchange.
Sitting in the audience right behind the congresswoman was one of her Democratic primary challengers, Elijah Manley, who has made her allegations key to his campaign.
"It's only fair for us to hold her to the same standard that George Santos was held to. I think this process has played out way too long," Manley said. "She's being given much more due process than George Santos was given. So I think the right thing for her to do right now would be to resign, to save herself the embarrassment, save the district the embarrassment, so Congress doesn't have to go through this process again."
Rep. Jasmine Crockett (D-Texas), who is not on the Ethics panel, also attended the first part of the hearing.
Rep. Greg Steube (R-Fla.) is preparing to force a vote on a resolution to expel Cherfilus-McCormick as soon as the Ethics panel makes a formal recommendation to the House, which he expects could come in April.
If Cherfilus-McCormick resigns or is expelled from the House, there would be political implications for the chamber, given Republicans' razor-thin majority.
Republicans can currently afford to lose no more than GOP defection on a party-line vote, assuming all members are present and voting. Without Cherfilus-McCormick, GOP leaders would have ever-so-slightly more breathing room, and could afford two GOP defections. That could make a big difference as Republicans plot a second GOP-only budget bill that is expected to include a funding boost to the Pentagon amid the Iran war.