Skip to content
Search

Latest Stories

Top Stories

Rep. Cherfilus-McCormick Faces Expulsion Over Pocketing Overpayment

News

​U.S. Rep. Sheila Cherfilus-McCormick, sitting behind a desk, appearing for a hearing.

U.S. Rep. Sheila Cherfilus-McCormick (D-FLA) appears for a hearing of the House Ethics Committee on Capitol Hill on March 26, 2026 in Washington, DC.

Getty Images, Andrew Harnik

Rep. Cherfilus-McCormick (D-FL20) has been charged by the federal government with “stealing federal disaster funds, laundering the proceeds, and using the money to support her 2021 congressional campaign.” The House Ethics Committee additionally is investigating her for incorrectly filing financial disclosures, accepting voluntary services for work that should have been paid, and of using her position to direct community project funding requests.

It all started with two extra zeros. Cherfilus-McCormick’s family business Trinity Health Care billed the state of Florida for $50,578.50 but mistakenly received $5,057,850.00. Rather than return the overpayment, she and other family members seem to have used most of that overpayment to fund her election campaign. She is also accused of setting up straw donor systems and filing false 2021 tax returns.


The House Committee on Ethics’s Statement of Alleged Violations runs 59 pages long, but is summarized in this Ethics Committee slide (apologies that the text is not very legible here):

Investigations Timeline

2023: The Office of Congressional Conduct (OCC), a separate group from the House Committee on Ethics, forwarded to the Ethics Committee in September 2023 a report in which the OCC had concluded there was substantial reason to investigate Cherfilus-McCormick for accepting voluntary work that should have been paid and routing funds to a state political action committee, both violations of House rules. In November and December 2023, Ethics announced the existence of an investigation and the creation of an Investigatory Subcommittee.

2024: The Ethics Committee expanded its investigation to include new allegations in a 2024 OCC report. This report alleged that Cherfilus-McCormick may have accepted campaign contributions in exchange for community project funding (aka earmarks), may have misreported campaign contributions and may have tried to direct earmarks to for-profit companies. All are violations of House rules and probably also criminal violations.

2025: The Ethics Committee continued its investigation. In November, the Department of Justice indicted Cherfilus-McCormick for having kept, and used in campaigns, the $5 million dollar overpayment to her family company as well as for setting up straw donors and filing false tax returns.

2026: The Ethics Committee announced the creation of an Adjudicatory Committee to assess the Investigative Subcommittee’s formal Statement of Alleged Violations and in March held an Adjudicatory Hearing (part 1 and part 2). The Adjudicatory Committee voted to sustain all but one of the statements of alleged violations.

On Tuesday, April 21, the Ethics Committee is expected to decide on what kind of discipline Cherfilus-McCormick should face. She might only be censured, but there’s a good chance that the Ethics Committee will recommend expulsion. (Some legislators are also seeking the expulsion of three other legislators. More on that below.)

What Were the Issues Argued at the Hearing?

Cherfilus-McCormick’s attorney, William Barzee, argued that having this hearing at all, but especially in public, would harm Cherfilus-McCormick’s constitutional right to a fair trial (coming up probably this summer) by prejudicing potential jurors and harming her Fifth Amendment right against self-incrimination. Were the committee to find that Cherfilus-McCormick had committed the violations described above, the use of “guilty” to describe the outcome would be especially problematic in advance of the trial, he argued.

Committee staff argued that because a) only the House can enforce its own rules and b) they have different standards of proof, c) the sanctions, at most, will mean expulsion from Congress and no loss of personal freedom via incarceration and d) they’ve been investigating since 2023, they will not harm her rights with respect to the criminal case.

While many elements do overlap, just because Chefilus-McCormick is found to have violated House rules on campaign contributions, say, by using that $5 million dollar overpayment, that doesn’t mean a jury would agree given standards of evidence in criminal cases. Further, for allegations that don’t overlap, such as failure to properly disclose finances and a lack of candor, there is no other venue to sanction her.

Barzee also argued that Cherfilus-McCormick, by virtue of how Trinity Health Care was structured, was entitled to whatever profits the company made, even if the profit was a mistake. We found this argument bizarre.

What Happens Next?

Since Friday April 10, things have gotten a bit more complicated. There have been ongoing complaints among House members about the lack of action in Ethics Committee investigations of Rep. Gonzales (R-TX23) and Rep. Mills (R-FL7), both accused of sexual harassment as well as other House rules violations. Then on Friday, several women went public with allegations of sexual harassment and rape by Rep. Swalwell (D-CA14).

On Monday April 13, both Reps. Swalwell and Gonzales announced they would be leaving Congress, although neither indicated when and as of this writing, no official resignations have been submitted. Because Swalwell is a Democrat and Gonzales a Republican, their resignations, if simultaneous, will have no effect on the margins needed for Republicans to pass legislation. In the meanwhile, all four are facing potential expulsion.


Rep. Cherfilus-McCormick Faces Expulsion Over Pocketing Overpayment was originally published by GovTrack and is republished with permission.


Read More

​Christa Pike

Christa Pike in an undated photo.

(Tennessee Department of Correction/ZUMA Press/TNS)

How death penalty opponents share the blame for botched executions

“Botched” is a perfectly fine word for golf, cooking, or home repair. It seems inadequate for the taking of a life, even the life of Christa Pike, a heinous murderer.

In 1996, a jury found Pike guilty of the torture and murder of her Jobs Corps classmate, Colleen Slemmer. Pike was sentenced to death. In the 30 years since, her case has gone through at least seven major rounds of appeal and judicial review, including four petitions to the Supreme Court. All were rejected. This doesn’t even include the many more attempts to reopen or reverse her sentence that went nowhere. She is guilty, lawfully and rightly convicted.

Keep ReadingShow less
Donald Trump

President Donald Trump speaks before signing the Secure America Act in the Oval Office of the White House on June 10, 2026 in Washington, DC.

(Photo by Alex Wong/Getty Images)

Federal Court Blocks Trump’s ‘Loyalty Question’ on Civil Service Job Applications

A court’s decision to block the Trump administration from including a “loyalty question” on federal job applications was a win not only for the nonpartisan civil service, but also for the communities public employees serve, said one labor leader whose union was among the plaintiffs in the case against the Office of Personnel Management.

Patrick Moran, president of the American Federation of State, County, and Municipal Employees (AFSCME) union, said Friday that the loyalty questions the OPM placed on job applications for public servants were a “blatantly illegal attempt to hire partisan cronies who would endanger our communities by putting politics before people, rather than dedicated, qualified public service workers.”

Keep ReadingShow less
​U.S. standard certificate of live birth application form next to flag of USA.

U.S. standard certificate of live birth application form next to flag of USA.

Getty Images

Birthright Citizenship Explained: History, SCOTUS Rulings & Executive Orders

Birthright citizenship has been part of American law for more than 150 years. As the American public continues to see challenges against its constitutionality, brought on by the Trump administration, it is important to remember why.

After the Civil War, Congress adopted the 14th Amendment in 1868 to overturn Dred Scott v. Sandford (1857), which had denied citizenship to Black Americans, dampening their federal protections. While the 13th amendment had abolished slavery a few years earlier, Free Black Americans were considered noncitizens by many, and thus had to work around a separate set of laws, meaning they could never be fully integrated as members of American society. In response to this issue, the 14th Amendment declares that all persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to its jurisdiction, are citizens of the United States.

Keep ReadingShow less
Scales of justice
a golden scale with an eagle on top of it

A Real Test for “Lawfare” Must Protect Allies and Enemies Alike

“Lawfare” is becoming a word that ends arguments instead of clarifying them. When Donald Trump or his allies are prosecuted, many on the right call the case political. When the Trump administration investigates critics, many on the left call it retaliation or “score-settling.” Sometimes those accusations are justified. Sometimes they are partisan reflexes. A label that changes with the identity of the defendant is not a rule of law.

The hard cases are not the ones with a public order to punish an enemy. They are cases with mixed facts: a real investigative predicate, a politically active target, disputed timing, later changes in treatment, and no contemporaneous record the public can inspect. Those cases require something better than “trust the prosecutors” or “trust the accused.” They require an auditable standard.

Keep ReadingShow less