First, a correction. I said in a previouis post that it would take a 2/3 vote of the House to not seat him. That's not correct - he has to be seated. SCOTUS ruled in 1968 or1969 in a case involving another NY Representative who was denied seating due to ethics questions that the House's ability to discipline or remove its members is "post facto" - they have to be seated before they can be disciplined. Once they are seated the House, by a 2/3 vote, can remove them from office - but unless they resign first, they have to be seated before any action be taken against them.
I doubt that 2/3 of the House would vote to expel him, so unless he is shamed into resigning, he's a Congressman for the next 2 years. The leader of the Republican Party in Nassau County has already said he will not support Santos for re-election in 2024. The GOP leader in the House, as far as I know, has maintained radio silence.
Also, it turns out that someone WAS aware of Santos' questionable background prior to the election. A tiny local paper staffed by part-timers and only publishing once a week raised the alarm in
September - but no one listened. This article is from the Washington Post - I copied it as a gift, so you should have no trouble accessing it through their paywall:
http://wapo.st/3G4eBo3
|
