NEW YORK — U.S. Rep. George Santos has until noon Thursday to decide whether he’ll go to jail to shield the names of the people who helped him post his $500,000 bond.
Rep. George Santos, R-N.Y., and his lawyer have been fighting to keep secret the names of the people who secured his bond in his federal fraud case. J. Scott Applewhite/Associated Press
Santos and his lawyer have been fighting to keep secret the names of the people who secured his bond in his federal fraud case, but on Tuesday a Long Island U.S. District Court judge sided with several media outlets and ordered that their names must come out.
Santos’ lawyer Joseph Murray said in a previous court filing that the first-term congressman would rather go to jail and let the suretors back out than be forced to reveal their names.
On Tuesday, Judge Joanna Seybert ordered that “all previously sealed documents, including the Bond, are to be unsealed to the extent that the names of defendant’s suretors are to be disclosed.”
She added, “It is further ordered that the aforementioned documents shall be kept under seal until Thursday, 22 June at 12:00 PM during which time defendant may move to modify the conditions of his release, should the suretors seek to withdraw from serving as suretors.”
Murray did not immediately return a message seeking comment Tuesday.
The Long Island Republican was released on bail on May 10 after pleading not guilty to wire fraud, money laundering, theft of public funds and making false statements to Congress, but his suretors never appeared in open court to sign his bond.
Suretors in federal cases don’t have to pay upfront to secure a defendant’s release, but they’re on the hook to fork over the bond amount if the defendant skips court, and will often put up homes or other assets as collateral.
They typically have to appear in person or via a remote feed during a public proceeding in criminal cases, and the media outlets argued that Santos shouldn’t be given special treatment, citing First Amendment concerns.
The secrecy led to speculation over whether Santos’ bond was being funded by people who may have some sway over him as a lawmaker.
Murray said in later court filings that the suretors were family members who were entitled to anonymity because of the intense public scrutiny surrounding the case and the potential for threats against them.
The legal showdown over identifying the suretors began after Federal Court Magistrate Anne Shields, who presided over Santos’ arraignment, sided with media outlets and called for the public identification of the people who put up the money for his release. Murray appealed to Seybert shortly after.
The allegations against Santos include a 2020 scheme to collect COVID-related unemployment funds while working as an investment firm director; a campaign finance fraud operation in which he used donor money to buy designer clothes and pay his personal debts; and a string of lies to Congress about his assets and income.
Send questions/comments to the editors.
