Congressman to Convict: George Santos’ Sentencing
By Olivia Marcoccia ‘28
Former Congressman George Santos has been in the news hundreds of times since he was elected as representative for New York's third congressional district. Mostly, these stories discuss Santos' many lies. For instance, Santos once said he was Jewish, but that was soon disproved. Defending himself, Santos responded with, "I said I was Jew-ish". The thirty-six-year-old has also been caught lying about what college he went to, his past jobs, and his involvement in a musical production of Spider-Man. In 2023, however, Santos' larger fibs were exposed. This led to the Department of Justice reviewing 170,000 pages of Santos' emails, text messages, FEC reports (Federal Election Commission), etc. After that investigation, Santos was expelled from Congress and eventually sentenced to seven years in prison.
In 2022, Santos flipped a House seat for New York from Democrat to Republican. He was sworn into office in January of 2023 and expelled from Congress in December of that same year. Santos' expulsion arose from fraudulent and unethical conduct while in and running for office, including using campaign funds for personal purchases. The House also found substantial evidence that Santos knowingly filed false and incomplete FEC reports. These reports are meant to disclose candidates' and campaigns' financial activities. By doing so, campaigns are less likely to commit unethical acts and get away with it. These fraudulent reports began the steamrolling of Santos' career.
What Did He Do?
In a press release from April 25th, 2025, the United States Attorney's Office for the Eastern District of New York outlined George Santos' crimes. Specifically, Santos was charged with aggravated identity theft and wire fraud. Identity theft means knowingly and unlawfully using another person's identifying information, like their name, bank information, social security number, or address. It is a crime under 18 U.S.C. §1028A. The "aggravated" part is applied when the information acquired via identity theft is used to commit a felony. In Santos' case, the felony committed was wire fraud. Wire fraud is the act of electronically taking information or money under false pretenses. Within the indictment, only three schemes were set out to be the causes of his charges.
The party program scheme, as the Attorney's Office calls it, involved falsifying FEC reports with donations from family members. These eleven family members of Santos and his treasurer, Nancy Marks, had not given to the Santos campaign. Despite this, their names were listed on FEC reports next to large sums of money. Along with these fake donations, Santos himself claimed that he loaned money to the campaign on these forms. It has been proven that he did not do this and couldn't have even if he wanted to, because he didn't have the money. To qualify for a program by the NRCC (National Republican Congressional Committee) that would provide financial and logistical support to Santos' run for office, Santos had to show that his campaign had received $250,000 in a single quarter. The total amount of false donations and loans led the campaign to qualify.
Aside from his fake donors, Santos also received support from real people. Unfortunately, donors who gave to his campaign from July 2020 to October 2022 were at risk of having their credit card information stolen. Donors' cards were charged without authorization. The funds were transferred to Santos' campaign, other politicians' campaigns, and Santos' personal bank account. Many of the victims suffered cognitive impairment, a purposeful move on Santos' part. Approximately $44,000 was stolen during this scheme. In one instance, a singular card was charged $12,000; the prosecution noted that most of this money went to Santos' personal account.
In the "Fraudulent Political Contribution Solicitation" scheme, Santos directed his campaign employees to misrepresent the use of contributions to donors. After being told that the funds would be used to support Santos' run for office, a sum of $50,000 was donated by various people. Instead of using this money to pay for advertisements or election costs, Santos spent the funds on designer clothes and personal debts.
Santos' Sentencing Memorandum
A sentencing memorandum is a document written by the defense in which they argue that the defendant's sentence should be shortened. It is meant to present a fuller story to the judge, outside of just the defendant's crimes. In Santos' sixteen-page memorandum, his defense attempts to convince the judge to give Santos just two years in prison. They rationalize this request in three prominent ways.
The defense paints Nancy Marks as the conspiracy organizer. According to the memorandum, Marks planned the party program scheme and played an equal or greater role in the fraud that transpired during Santos's election. This is supported by the fact that both provided the names of their family members for false reporting. This isn't a solid argument, though. There wasn't any debate about Marks’ contribution to the fraud. She pleaded guilty in October 2023. The defense doesn't offer any new evidence that Marks, rather than Santos, directed the plan. Based on the indictment and Department of Justice investigation, there is clear proof that Santos not only knew what fraudulent activities were happening within his campaign but that he willingly engaged in them on multiple occasions. Additionally, George Santos continuously had much more to gain from the fraud conspiracies than Nancy Marks. This tactic might have brought Santos' sentence down if there was evidence to support it, since acting as a leader of the conspiracy enhances the charges, but the evidence does not work in Santos’ favor when it comes to who led the conspiracy.
Offering combative evidence of Santos' character is another way that the defense attempted to limit their client's punishment. The defense states that Santos has "no prior criminal history". This statement is wrong. Santos has no prior criminal history in America, but he was criminally charged with check fraud in Brazil when he started cashing checks from an elderly man's stolen checkbook. Eventually, these charges were dropped when Santos confessed to stealing the checks. He ended up paying $5,000 in fines and restitution. The defense expands on Santos' character by revealing imperfect aspects of his childhood. They establish the former congressman as successful despite his circumstances. Santos' good deeds, like aiding his sister and her autistic daughter, are also mentioned. All of this backstory is supposed to evoke empathy from the judge. On their own, these stories might have sufficed. However, Santos consistently made unremorseful posts on X that shifted the blame to practically anyone else throughout his accusation, plea, and conviction. Even in a letter that Santos sent to the court, he fails to take accountability for his actions: "Saying I’m sorry doesn’t require me to sit quietly while these prosecutors try to drop an anvil on my head." His actions work against him to refute any empathy that the memorandum might have gained.
The memorandum also claims that Santos did not gain anything from the party program scheme. First of all, George Santos did benefit from the scheme. The defense argues that Santos would have received support from the NRCC regardless of the fraudulent donations that he claimed on his FEC reports, but Santos wouldn't have been able to qualify for that program unless he showed that his campaign garnered $250,000 of support. Furthermore, by qualifying for the program, Santos was given significant financial support and recognition. Undoubtedly, this aid increased Santos' chances of winning the House election, which came with its own set of rewards.
Sentencing
The memorandum was futile. The judge elected to sentence Santos to the maximum prison time his charges warranted. George Santos was sentenced to 87 months on Friday, April 25th. He was also ordered to pay $373,749.97 for restitution, meaning that money will go to the NRCC, the New York State Department of Labor, and possibly people who donated to Santos' campaign. Additionally, the judge ordered the expelled congressman to forfeit the property he stole; Santos will have to pay $205,002.97, approximately the profit of his crimes. As of right now, Santos has maintained that his sentencing is too harsh. He has publicly asked President Trump to pardon him, but the president has not responded to this request.
Olivia Marcoccia is a sophomore majoring in English.
Sources
H. Rept. 118-274. (2025). In The Matter of Allegations Relating to Represeative George Santos. congress.gov. https://www.congress.gov/congressional-report/118th-congress/house-report/274
Korteski, K. and Gregorian, D. (2025). Former Rep. George Santos sentenced to more than 7 years in prison. NBC.https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/justice-department/former-rep-george-santos-sentenced-7-years-prison-rcna202397
Marzulli, J. and Hass, D. (2025). Ex-Congressman George Santos Sentenced to 87 Months in Prison for Wire Fraud and Aggravated Identity Theft. Justice.gov. https://www.justice.gov/usao-edny/pr/ex-congressman-george-santos-sentenced-87-months-prison-wire-fraud-and-aggravated
Oladipo, G. and agency. (2025). George Santos given seven-year prison term for fraudulent congressional run. The Guardian. https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2025/apr/25/george-santos-republican-sentenced
The Office of General Counsel U.S. Sentencing Commission. (2013). Aggravating and Mitigating Role Adjustments Primer §§3B1.1 & 3B1.2. USSC.gov. https://www.ussc.gov/sites/default/files/pdf/training/primers/Primer_Role_Adjustment.pdf
United States v. Devolder Santos, 2:23-cr-00197, (E.D.N.Y 2025)
