Censuring and condemning Delegate Stacey Plaskett and removing her from the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence for conduct that reflects discreditably on the House of Representatives for colluding with convicted felony sex offender Jeffrey Epstein during a congressional hearing.

SI-generated grade · five published checks · not individually reviewed by a person · methodology

The House acted within its explicit constitutional authority under Article I, Section 5, Clause 2 to determine the rules of its proceedings and punish its Members for disorderly behaviour. Censure and removal from a committee are internal disciplinary measures, less severe than expulsion, and do not deprive Delegate Plaskett of her seat, her status as Delegate, or any private right. The resolution targets official misconduct—coordinating with a convicted sex offender during an official hearing—and does not infringe the Bill of Rights, individual sovereignty, or due process.

• ✓ Passes · Enumerated powers
  Article I, Section 5, Clause 2 expressly empowers each House to determine the Rules of its Proceedings and to punish its Members for disorderly Behaviour. Censuring a Delegate and removing her from a House committee is a disciplinary exercise well within that authority, particularly because the Constitution does not require expulsion for lesser discipline. For Delegates, the House’s control over i…
• ✓ Passes · Bill of Rights
  No provision of the Bill of Rights is infringed. The resolution does not punish speech or association based on viewpoint; it addresses coordinated official conduct with a convicted sex offender during a congressional hearing. Internal congressional discipline is not a bill of attainder because Article I, Section 5, Clause 2 is itself a constitutional authorization for such discipline. The Speech o…
• ✓ Passes · Individual sovereignty
  The resolution does not restrict Delegate Plaskett’s private person, property, speech, labor, or belief. She retains her position as Delegate, her compensation, and her capacity to participate in the House to the extent its rules allow. Committee assignment is an institutional role, not a private right. The House has a compelling constitutional interest in preserving the integrity, impartiality, a…
• ✓ Passes · Decentralization
  House committee assignments and internal discipline are uniquely federal legislative matters. No individual, local government, or territorial government could remove a Delegate from a U.S. House committee. The House is the minimum and proper level of government for this decision, and there is no upward consolidation beyond the House itself.
• ✓ Passes · Due process and takings
  The Fifth Amendment’s Due Process and Takings Clauses are not implicated. A House committee assignment is not a life, liberty, or property interest requiring a federal civil trial; internal congressional discipline operates under the House’s own constitutional authority and procedures. The resolution also refers the matter to the Committee on Ethics for further investigation. No property is taken …

Sources: Official text: HRES 888 (Introduced in House)