WASHINGTON — Members of the House Ethics Committee on Thursday will hold a rare public hearing on a sitting member of Congress.The hearing concerns its investigation into Rep. Sheila Cherfilus-McCormick, D-Fla., who was indicted on charges she stole millions in federal relief funds and used the money to bankroll her congressional campaign.The congresswoman has consistently denied the allegations of wrongdoing and pleaded not guilty to the charges. Her office did not immediately respond Thursday to a request for comment.Such Ethics meetings are typically conducted in private. But the committee has decided to bring this issue out into the open — the House’s version of a court trial — due to the fact that she has decided to fight the allegations rather than resign, and the ethics case is moving faster than the judicial system.Thursday’s televised hearing is what’s known as an “adjudicatory” subcommittee hearing, and the lawmakers participating have been tasked with determining if any of the alleged violations by Cherfilus-McCormick have been proven by the monthslong Ethics Committee investigation.If she is found guilty of violating multiple House rules, the Ethics Committee could recommend her censure, reprimand, removal from committees or even expulsion from the House.The Justice Department indicted Cherfilus-McCormick in November on charges that she stole and laundered $5 million in Federal Emergency Management Agency funding. Her family’s health care company had been working with FEMA through a Covid-19 vaccination contract, but then received a $5 million overpayment. The Justice Department alleged she and her brother never paid it back, routed it through multiple accounts and then used it to fund her successful 2022 special election campaign.Her attorney said at the time they would “fight to clear her good name.”The House Ethics Committee — which is made up of an equal number of Republicans and Democrats — had been conducting its own investigation of the congresswoman since 2023, after the nonpartisan Office of Congressional Ethics said the committee should probe the matter.In December, the Ethics investigative subcommittee tasked with investigating Cherfilus-McCormick adopted its Statement of Alleged Violations against the Florida Democrat. It detailed 27 counts in which the subcommittee determined there was “substantial reason to believe” that she violated House rules, regulations or the law.The investigative subcommittee “reviewed over 33,000 documents totaling hundreds of thousands of pages of materials and conducted 28 witness interviews” before making its determination. In January, the Ethics panel formed a separate, special adjudicatory subcommittee to evaluate the other subcommittee’s findings.The Ethics Committee, whose members have the difficult task of investigating and judging their own peers, is known for its secrecy. It’s very uncommon that the details of an ethics probe would be discussed out in the open.Since 1991, there have only been four instances of the committee reaching the adjudicatory subcommittee stage. And there have only ever been two completed adjudicatory hearings, according to the committee.The most recent was a 2010 televised hearing focused on the ethics investigation into then-Rep. Charlie Rangel, D-N.Y., the once-powerful Ways and Means Committee chairman who had been stripped of his gavel amid a two-year probe into his personal finances.Rangel appeared at his House trial, but he didn’t stay long after lamenting that he hadn’t been given enough time to find new counsel. A special Ethics subcommittee found Rangel guilty on 11 of 13 charges. The House subsequently voted to censure him, and he continued to serve in Congress until his retirement in 2017.In Thursday’s case, Cherfilus-McCormick’s counsel has made a request to delay the panel’s proceedings “until the resolution of the pending criminal matter” and to hold the hearing behind closed doors rather than in public.“If the Member wishes to defend herself before the Committee, she will be doing so at her own peril because anything she does to defend herself before the Committee could end up prejudicing her in a subsequent criminal trial,” her lawyer wrote. “If the Member wants to preserve and protect her Fifth Amendment rights, she must remain silent before the committee.” Democratic leaders are letting the process play out. When Republicans threatened to expel her in January, Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries, D-N.Y., said Cherfilus-McCormick was “entitled to the presumption of innocence.””She’s going through the process right now, and any effort to expel her lacks any basis, at this moment, in law, fact or the Constitution,” Jeffries said.Speaker Mike Johnson, R-La., said he also is not rushing to judgment, though he suggested it looks bad for Cherfilus-McCormick.”Look, I believe in due process; we’re intellectually consistent on that. We’re awaiting for the developments,” Johnson told reporters before the hearing. “This is a very serious matter. I think even many Democrats … have publicly said that the evidence is so stark and irrefutable that it’s almost presumed guilt,” he said. “But we have to process this internally and see how this goes.”