House Ethics Committee finds substantial evidence of Matt Gaetz's violation of statutory rape law
- The House Ethics Committee concluded an investigation into former Rep. Matt Gaetz, finding substantial evidence of sexual misconduct involving a minor.
- Testimony revealed that Gaetz had sexual contact with a 17-year-old in 2017 without knowing her age.
- The allegations point to a broader pattern of Gaetz engaging in inappropriate relationships with young women, raising serious ethical concerns.
In December 2024, the House Ethics Committee released a report following an extensive investigation into former Representative Matt Gaetz of Florida. The bipartisan committee concluded that there was substantial evidence supporting allegations of sexual misconduct involving a minor, specifically that Gaetz engaged in sexual activity with a 17-year-old in 2017 when he was serving as a congressman. This report marked the first time direct testimony from the victim was made public, along with corroboration from other witnesses. The report described a pattern of behavior by Gaetz that included taking advantage of vulnerable young women, allegedly compensating them for sexual encounters without knowing their ages. Although Gaetz maintained his innocence — claiming that he was merely generous — this claim was dismissed by the committee as reflective of deeper concerns regarding ethical behavior. Despite the serious nature of the allegations, the report did not find sufficient evidence that Gaetz breached federal sex trafficking laws. Investigators ruled that while he did cause women to be transported across state lines for commercial sex, there was no evidence to suggest that any were underage during those transactions or that such acts involved coercion or force. The committee undertook significant actions during its investigation, which included conducting interviews, issuing subpoenas, and reviewing thousands of documents. Gaetz filed a federal lawsuit against the committee, aiming to stop the report's release, arguing that it was defamatory and infringed on his rights as a public citizen. He claimed he had not received proper notice regarding the report's release and described the investigation and subsequent report as politically motivated. This situation led him to withdraw from consideration for a position as attorney general, as he stated that the ongoing investigation was becoming a distraction during the transition to the Trump administration.