{"database": "press", "table": "releases", "rows": [["https://edwards.house.gov/media/press-releases/edwards-files-occ-complaint-against-ethics-committee-leaders-circumventing", "Edwards Files OCC Complaint Against Ethics Committee Leaders for Circumventing Their Own Rules", "2026-09-15", "2026", "2026-09", "Republican", "House", "NC", "Chuck Edwards", "E000246", "edwards.house.gov", "edwards", "https://edwards.house.gov/media/press-releases", "scraper", "WASHINGTON, D.C.\u2014 Congressman Chuck Edwards (NC-11) announced that he has filed a formal submission with the Office of Congressional Conduct against House Ethics Committee Chairman Michael Guest and Ranking Member Mark DeSaulnier, alleging that they circumvented the Committee\u2019s own rules to recommend his censure.\n\n\u201cThe Ethics Committee demanded that I be punished for supposedly violating the \u2018letter and spirit\u2019 of House rules while its own leaders treated those same rules as optional,\u201dEdwards said.\u201cThere was nothing ethical about this process. They decided the outcome, adopted their report before receiving my response, denied me the procedures designed to test their accusations, and then publicly attacked my character based on findings that were never subjected to an adjudicatory hearing or the required clear-and-convincing-evidence standard.\u201d\n\nAccording to the complaint, the Committee voted to adopt its report on July 22, 2026, 12 days before receiving Edwards\u2019 formal response. The Committee did not provide the draft report to Edwards\u2019 counsel until July 31. By that point, its factual findings, credibility determinations, conclusions, and recommendation of censure had already been approved.\n\n\u201cAllowing me to append a response to a decision they had already made was not due process, and it shamelessly abandons the Committee's claim to 'provide a fair procedural framework for the conduct of the Committee's activities,\" Edwards said. \u201cIt was window dressing intended to create the appearance of fairness after the verdict had already been written.\u201d\n\nThe complaint further alleges that the Committee relied upon a purported waiver to bypass the regular disciplinary process even though Edwards never executed a waiver satisfying Committee Rule 26(b). That rule expressly requires any waiver request to be in writing, signed by the respondent, and to identify the specific procedural rights or steps being waived. Edwards submitted and signed no such document.\n\n\u201cChairman Guest and Ranking Member DeSaulnier cannot manufacture a waiver that does not exist,\u201dEdwards said. \u201cNor can they use an oral communication with counsel as a license to discard their own rules. Rule 26(b) is unambiguous: a waiver must be written, signed by the respondent, and specific about the rights being waived. None of that occurred.\u201d\n\nWithout a valid waiver, the Committee proceeded without establishing an Investigative Subcommittee, issuing a Statement of Alleged Violation, permitting an answer to specific charges, conducting an adjudicatory hearing, allowing Edwards to confront adverse testimony and introduce evidence, determining that any count was proved by clear and convincing evidence, or holding a sanction hearing.\n\nThe Committee\u2019s report found no sexual activity, no explicit sexual proposition, no quid pro quo harassment, and no violation of federal sexual-harassment law. Nevertheless, it recommended censure based upon broad interpretations of the \u201cletter and spirit\u201d of House rules.\n\n\u201cThey could not prove that I violated the law or identify sexual conduct,\u201d Edwards said.\u201cSo they relied on insinuation, selective evidence, and subjective assumptions\u2014while denying me the very process their rules establish for separating facts from accusations. They invoked the \u2018spirit\u2019 of the rules to condemn me while violating the unmistakable letter of their own.\u201d\n\nThe OCC complaint asks for an independent investigation into whether Guest and DeSaulnier violated House standards by authorizing a sanction recommendation through a process the Committee\u2019s rules did not permit. It also requests preservation and examination of all communications concerning the purported waiver, correction of the public record, appropriate disciplinary action, and a public apology for the grave and lasting damage inflicted upon Edwards\u2019 character, dignity, reputation, family, and public service.\n\n\u201cNo Member of Congress, Republican or Democrat, should be subjected to a process in which the investigators write the verdict first and hear the defense later,\u201d Edwards said.\u201cIf the Ethics Committee cannot be trusted to follow its own rules when a Member\u2019s reputation and dignity are at stake, then it has forfeited the moral authority to sit in judgment of anyone else. Chairman Guest and Ranking Member DeSaulnier must be held accountable.\u201d", 1, "2026-09-16T09:43:13Z", "2026-09-16T09:44:22Z"]], "columns": ["url", "title", "date", "year", "month", "party", "chamber", "state", "member_name", "bioguide_id", "domain", "scraper", "source", "date_source", "text", "has_text", "collected_at", "updated_at"], "primary_keys": ["url"], "primary_key_values": ["https://edwards.house.gov/media/press-releases/edwards-files-occ-complaint-against-ethics-committee-leaders-circumventing"], "units": {}, "query_ms": 0.8506858721375465, "source": "dwillis/congress-press", "source_url": "https://github.com/dwillis/congress-press", "license": "MIT", "license_url": "https://github.com/dwillis/congress-press/blob/main/LICENSE"}