U.S. Rep. George Santos (R-NY) heads to the House for a vote on a Republican motion to refer a Democrat-sponsored resolution to expel Santos from the House to the House Ethics Committee instead of an immediate expulsion vote, May 17, 2023 on Capitol Hill in Washington.
Evelyn Hawkstein | Reuters
Republican Rep. George Santos (R-N.Y.) asked a federal court Friday morning to quash a judge’s order to disclose the identities of people who secured a $500,000 bond in his criminal fraud case.
Lawyers for Santos, a scandal-plagued freshman congressman charged with multiple financial crimes, argued that the identities of supporters should be kept secret for fear they would be attacked and harassed by the “media frenzy” surrounding the case.
“It is respectfully noted that the court failed to recognize the importance of these surety privacy issues,” attorney Joseph Murray wrote in a statement. court filing In the U.S. District Court on Long Island.
“Given the political temperature and political violence that has occurred in this country, the privacy interests of these sponsors are all the more concerning, especially given their age and respective employment status,” Murray wrote.
Three days ago, Magistrate Anne Shields granted requests from news outlets who argued the public had a right to know the identities of sureties. Shields gave Santos until noon Friday to file his appeal.
Santos, 34, has pleaded not guilty to charges of defrauding his campaign supporters, lying to obtain unemployment benefits and making false statements on congressional disclosure forms. The allegations come before the congressman takes office in January, already dragged down by a series of scandals.
He has vowed not to resign and is seeking re-election despite previously admitting he lied about his record during the campaign.
Lawyers for The New York Times have argued that the large bail, backed by unidentified individuals, “presents a clear opportunity for political influence,” not least because Santos is “accused of being involved in the abuse of the political process for personal gain.”
But Murray said there were “countervailing elements” in favor of keeping the identities of bail supporters secret. He said Santos, his staff and others had been “hate-attacked” through the case.
“These attacks are outrageous, anti-gay, anti-Republican and anti-social,” Murray wrote.
“It is reasonable to conclude that, if the defendant’s sureties were identified, the assault and harassment would have begun against them as well,” the attorneys argued.
That atmosphere prompted a third potential sponsor to “change his mind and drop out,” Murray wrote.
He added that if the identities of the other two supporters were made public, they would likely decide “that they have to step down and act as sureties”.
“The health, safety and well-being of our two sureties are of great concern and regrettably Judge Shields did not share this, at least as a factor of their privacy concerns,” Murray wrote.