House panel finds Florida Democrat guilty of ethics violations : NPR

Rep. Sheila Cherfilus-McCormick, D-Fla., arrives for a House Ethics Committee subcommittee hearing on a motion for summary judgment regarding the charges against her, in the Longworth Building on Thursday, March 26, 2026.

Tom Williams/CQ-Roll Call, Inc via Getty Images

hide caption

toggle caption

Tom Williams/CQ-Roll Call, Inc via Getty Images

The House Ethics Committee found “clear and convincing evidence” that Rep. Sheila Cherfilus-McCormick violated House rules, following a rare marathon public hearing Thursday evening.

The Florida Democrat was indicted in November over allegations she stole $5 million in disaster relief funds and used it to finance her 2021 special election campaign. Federal prosecutors say she funneled money to support her campaign using FEMA overpayments distributed to Trinity Healthcare Services, her family’s business. She pleaded not guilty.

“After careful deliberation which lasted well after midnight, the Judgment Subcommittee concluded that counts 1 to 15 and 17 to 26 of the SAV [Statement of Alleged Violations] had been proven”, a committee statement read.

Cherfilus-McCormick has repeatedly denied any wrongdoing.

“I look forward to proving my innocence,” she said in a statement to NPR Friday morning. “In the meantime, my focus remains where it belongs: standing alongside the great people of Florida’s 20th District who sent me to Washington to fight for them.”

Investigators from a bipartisan subcommittee have been looking into the matter for two years. They alleged the congresswoman committed 27 violations, including improper receipt of funds and commingling of personal and campaign funds.

The subcommittee reviewed more than 33,000 documents and conducted 28 witness interviews.

In April, the committee will recommend a sanction to be voted on by the full House, something that could range from censure to removal from committees or expulsion itself.

THE the last member to be expelled was then the representative. George SantosRY, in 2023. Santos was later convicted of wire fraud and identity theft. President Trump commuted his prison sentence.

Expulsion requires a two-thirds vote of the chamber.

Some Republicans have already announced plans to call for Cherfilus-McCormick’s expulsion and at least one Democrat, Washington Rep. Marie Gluesenkamp Perez, has said Cherfilus-McCormick should resign or be removed from office.

William Barzee, attorney for Rep. Sheila Cherfilus-McCormick, speaks during a House Ethics Committee hearing at the U.S. Capitol on March 26.

Michael Brochstein/Sipa United States via Reuters Connect

hide caption

toggle caption

Michael Brochstein/Sipa United States via Reuters Connect

Attempt to delay

Cherfilus-McCormick’s new legal counsel, William Barzee, repeatedly told lawmakers that he had less than three weeks to work with his client and needed more time to prepare.

He decided to delay the hearing or keep it behind closed doors, arguing that a public hearing could jeopardize his client’s potential jury in her criminal case.

“The pool of potential jurors who are going to hear this criminal case are going to be inundated with information about what’s going on within this committee,” Barzee said during the ethics hearing. “How can she go to court and get a fair trial if her jurors have already learned that she was found guilty by the House of Representatives?”

The criminal trial is expected to begin in April, but Barzee said it could be delayed until the fall summer.

Ray Rhatican, an attorney for the ethics committee, said there is “no guarantee that the respondent’s criminal trial will take place this year or soon thereafter.”

The panel, made up of equal parts Republicans and Democrats, rejected the request.

“At a time when public trust in our institution is so low, this committee’s role in upholding the congressional ethics process and defending the integrity of the House could not be more important,” said Rep. Mark DeSaulnier, the panel’s top Democrat.

Barzee argued that Cherfilus-McCormick’s previous attorney advised him not to participate in the investigation due to concerns of self-incrimination, and he repeatedly called for witnesses to appear before the panel so it could cross-examine them.

“You know you could have called witnesses today, right?” asked Rep. Suhas Subramanyam, D-Va.

Barzee responded that he was aware but needed more time to prepare as a new council.

At one point, Speaker Michael Guest, R-Miss., pushed back on Barzee’s suggestion that the process didn’t give the congresswoman enough time.

“For you to now allege that all of this information is new, that we haven’t tried to collect this information in the last two years, I find that offensive,” he said.

Brittney Pescatore, the subcommittee’s director of investigations, said Cherfilus-McCormick had numerous opportunities to cooperate.

“She could have provided a list of witnesses that she wanted to call here today, she did not submit a list of witnesses,” Pescatore said. “She also had every possible opportunity throughout the two-year investigation, because the investigation is not a prosecution, but an effort by her colleagues to understand what happened.”

Charges itself

Panel investigators alleged that Cherfilus-McCormick improperly pumped millions of dollars into her campaign, directly and through intermediaries.

Committee attorneys provided diagrams illustrating how millions of dollars in Florida Department of Emergency Management funds allegedly flowed from the congresswoman’s family business to her campaign, as well as a diagram showing how the money allegedly flowed from the Haitian government to her campaign suppliers.

Barzee, the congresswoman’s lawyer, said they “do not accept the facts as alleged by staff.”

He argued that Cherfilus-McCormick was entitled to the money transferred from the family business and referenced a profit-sharing agreement to support that claim.

“She was entitled to every penny she received from Trinity,” Barzee said.

Rep. Nathaniel Moran, R-Texas, pointed out that the agreement Barzee showed the panel was not signed.

“I think it’s frankly offensive that you would suggest that an unsigned agreement should actually be considered a profit-sharing agreement,” he said. “If, in fact, your client was entitled to this under a profit sharing agreement, I would think that from day one I would say, hey, give me the signed profit sharing agreement, let me hand it over. And your client hasn’t done this in two years, even though her attorney asked her to do it at the very beginning.”