Santos fights to conceal identities of people helping him remain free while under indictment

NEW YORK — Rep. George Santos is seeking to keep private the identities of the people who guaranteed his bail bond by appealing a federal magistrate judge’s ruling earlier this week that ordered their names be made public.

The first-term Republican from Long Island was indicted last month and pleaded not guilty to 13 counts of wire fraud, money laundering, theft of public funds and other charges. He was released on a $500,000 bail bond — but only on the condition that several individuals, known as sureties, guaranteed the bond, meaning they would be legally responsible for the money if Santos were to flee.

When the sureties appeared in court, his lawyers moved to redact their names and seal the proceedings. On Tuesday, a magistrate judge ruled that the sureties’ identity should be made public after a group of news organizations requested the release of their names.

The judge, however, ordered that the information remain sealed until Santos had the opportunity to appeal her decision.

In a court filing Friday, Santos’ lawyer, Joseph Murray, suggested that publicly identifying the sureties would subject them to harassment and intimidation. Murray wrote that three people had initially offered to guarantee his client’s bond, but that in the wake of the “media frenzy” surrounding Santos’ indictment, one of the three “had a change of heart and backed out.”

Murray said Santos has been the target of attacks that are “extremely angry, anti-gay, anti-Republican and all around anti-social,” arguing that his sureties, if publicly named, would be vulnerable to similar behavior.

“It is reasonable to conclude that if Defendant’s suretors are identified, that the attacks and harassment will commence against them too,” Murray wrote. “Moreover, given the political temperature in this Country and acts of political violence that occur, the privacy interests of these suretors are far more concerning, especially considering their ages and respective employment.”

The government took no position on either the initial sealing of the sureties’ identities or the news organizations’ effort to unseal the documents.

In a filing to the court prior to the magistrate judge’s decision, Santos’ lawyer said his client was willing to go to jail to protect their privacy. He also shared a letter from the House Ethics Committee seeking the names of the sureties to determine whether their guarantee of his bond constitutes an improper gift to the congressman. In Santos’ response to the committee, he suggested the sureties were family members and therefore not subject to the same gift restrictions.

In his filing Friday, Murray proposed a remedy that he suggested could appease the committee. “To the extent that it may be possible to unredact a portion of the sealed judicial bond records or proceedings to reveal the existence of a ‘family’ relationship between Defendant and suretors without identifying the name or type of family member, Defendant would have no objection.”