Fierce Democratic critics of Rep. George Santos have officially triggered another push to expel him — the most serious threat against the indicted lawmaker to date.

The privileged motion, led by Reps. Robert Garcia (D-Calif.) and Dan Goldman (D-N.Y.), means the House must act on expulsion within two legislative days. That’s almost exactly two weeks after the release of a damning bipartisan House Ethics Committee report that found “sufficient evidence” of Santos’ criminal wrongdoing.

“The time has finally come to remove George Santos from Congress. If we’re going to restore faith in government, we must start with restoring integrity in the U.S. House of Representatives,” Garcia said in a statement.

Although their effort is unlikely to succeed, with Republicans loath to remove one of their own on a Democratic resolution, it puts pressure on House Ethics Committee Chair Michael Guest (R-Miss.), to act on his own expulsion effort. Guest has already introduced his resolution, but not under the process that forces a quick vote, though he has told POLITICO that he plans to do so.

Santos, for his part, has denounced his critics and said he would face the expulsion vote rather than resign. Congress last expelled Ohio Democrat Rep. Jim Traficant in 2002 after his conviction on federal corruption charges.

Expulsion requires a two-thirds majority of the House, and a growing number of lawmakers on both sides of the aisle who had previously voted against booting Santos have signaled they would now support doing so.

The measure is the second Democratic-led push to boot Santos from Congress after an earlier attempt was punted to the House Ethics panel in May. New York Republicans forced another vote in October, which garnered more Republican support but still failed.

Two intelligence chiefs, one current and one former, are expected to separately brief the House Judiciary Committee Tuesday night on proposed changes to a controversial surveillance law.

Director of National Intelligence (DNI) Avril Haines and former Trump administration DNI John Ratcliffe will join a steady stream of experts appearing before Judiciary members as Congress remains divided on reauthorizing part of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA), according to two people with knowledge of the matter. The law is one tool used by the intelligence community to track threats, which security experts argue is essential to national security.

Lawmakers have until the end of the year to reauthorize Section 702, a surveillance authority under FISA that is meant to target foreigners abroad but has become highly controversial because of its ability to sweep in Americans’ data.

Both the House Judiciary and Intelligence Committees are expected to soon unveil separate bills to renew Section 702 with new guardrails and limits. And a bipartisan group — including Sens. Mike Lee (R-Utah), Ron Wyden (R-Ore.) and Andy Biggs (R-Ariz.) — have already introduced sweeping legislation that would not only overhaul Section 702 but also tie in broader, unrelated adjustments to spy powers, including preventing data brokers from selling consumer information to law enforcement. (The Biden administration immediately came out against the bicameral bill.)

As lawmakers prepare for that debate, both committees have been briefed by former and current intelligence officials, as well as conducted a quiet education effort with their colleagues, many of whom will be voting on surveillance authorization for the first time.

Republicans on the two committees spent months negotiating behind closed doors to try to find a path forward. And while they found agreement in several areas — including new penalties and new reporting and auditing requirements — they are divided over when to require a warrant to search 702-collected data for Americans’ information.

Ratcliffe was among the first to raise concerns about FISA abuse before he joined the Trump administration, while he was a House member on the Judiciary Committee. He joined former Rep. Trey Gowdy (R-S.C.) in being an early voice questioning aspects of the process used to obtain surveillance warrants on Carter Page, a former Trump campaign aide whose Russian ties served as a basis for the government’s federal probe into Russian interference in the 2016 presidential election.

While initial claims of FISA malpractice were batted away by House Democrats, the intelligence community’s inspector general conducted an independent investigation that found “significant inaccuracies and omissions” in the government’s application to monitor Page.

While the Page warrant isn’t related to the section of FISA that Congress currently needs to reauthorize, Republicans have used it to make their case that lawmakers should also include changes to the broader surveillance law.

Senate Judiciary Committee Chair Dick Durbin plans to take up subpoenas for conservative judicial activist Leonard Leo and Texas billionaire Harlan Crow during the panel’s Thursday morning meeting.

“That’s the plan,” Durbin told reporters on Tuesday.

Durbin had said on Monday that there is “no evidence” either of the targets of the subpoenas are cooperating with the panel’s inquiry into financial and social ties influencing Supreme Court justices.

The committee is seeking documents and information related to its ongoing investigation into ethics at the high court, including the potential conflicts of interest posed by undisclosed gifts and other personal ties that justices maintain with activists and donors.

Durbin abruptly ended a meeting earlier this month before senators could try to vote on the two subpoenas. Republicans had filed dozens of amendments proposing to subpoena scores of people associated with the Biden administration and others in a bid to draw out the debate.

Some of those Republican proposals could be on the table Thursday, Durbin said: “We’re going to take a look at each one and decide whether it’s germane and proceed from there.”

Debate and votes on a significant number of amendments could delay a vote into the afternoon or evening. The Senate is scheduled to be in on Friday, but typically finishes up business by early Thursday afternoon.

Burgess Everett contributed.

Two lawmakers announced their district offices were targeted by protesters who object to their pro-Israel stances on the ongoing conflict with Hamas.

“They might dress it up and try to make it look cute, but really it’s just insidious language that makes us all less safe,” said Rep. Greg Landsman (D-Ohio), who represents a Cincinnati-area district. “Peaceful protests can be powerful, but vandalism and dangerous rhetoric are wrong, and ineffective.”

The vandalism, shown in images posted on X, say “this Ken supports genocide” and “racist and supports ethnic cleansing.”

Rep. David Valadao (R-Calif.) disclosed his district office in Hanford, Calif. had similar vandalism on Monday.

“In a democracy, harassment and intimidation is not how you make your voice heard,” Valadao wrote in a post on X, formerly known as Twitter.

Threats against members of Congress — and their staff — have reached historic highs in recent years.

Hunter Biden’s legal team demanded that he be allowed to testify publicly in response to a House GOP subpoena. James Comer quickly shot it down.

A Biden lawyer sent a letter to the House Oversight Chair Tuesday morning, saying the president’s son would appear publicly before the committee on Dec. 13. That ran counter to a stipulation of the subpoena, which called for a private deposition with lawmakers and aides.

“A public proceeding would prevent selective leaks, manipulated transcripts, doctored exhibits, or one-sided press statements,” Abbe Lowell, Hunter Biden’s attorney, wrote in the letter. He added that they were also amenable to any other date next month the two sides could agree on.

Comer denied the request in a statement Tuesday, saying it “won’t stand with House Republicans.”

“Our lawfully issued subpoena to Hunter Biden requires him to appear for a deposition on December 13,” Comer continued. “We expect full cooperation with our subpoena for a deposition but also agree that Hunter Biden should have the opportunity to testify in a public setting at a future date.”

Typically, House panels insist on a private deposition before allowing a public appearance. The Jan. 6 select committee denied several requests to testify publicly, including one from Rudy Giuliani.

The demand from Biden’s lawyers to testify publicly marks the latest salvo in an increasingly public back-and-forth between the president’s son and House Republicans, who view him as their top witness in a sprawling impeachment investigation focused on President Joe Biden. It has primarily focused on the business deals of Hunter Biden and other family members.

Lowell had initially indicated, in the immediate wake of Comer’s subpoena last month, that Hunter Biden was willing to speak with the committee “in a public forum and at the right time.”

The president’s son is just one of several targets of House GOP impeachment inquiry subpoenas or interview requests made in the last month. Comer also subpoenaed James Biden, Joe Biden’s brother, to appear for a deposition next month and Rob Walker, a Hunter Biden business associate, to appear for a deposition on Wednesday. Several other Biden family members received requests to voluntarily appear before the panel for questioning.

House Republicans are months deep into their multi-pronged investigation, with Republicans looking to make a decision early next year on whether or not to pursue impeachment articles against Joe Biden.

And while Republicans have found examples of Hunter Biden involving his father to try to boost his own profile and poked holes in some of Joe Biden’s and the White House’s previous statements, they’ve struggled to find a direct link that shows Joe Biden took official actions as president or vice president to benefit his family’s business deals.

At the same time, impeachment advocates are still facing skepticism from a coalition of centrists and old-school conservatives who support the investigations but don’t believe they’ve met the bar for impeachment, at least not yet. Given that no House Democrats are likely to back impeaching Biden, Republicans will need almost near unity in their conference.

In addition to Biden family business deals, Republicans are probing other avenues, including the years-long federal investigation into Hunter Biden and Joe Biden’s handling of classified documents, which is also the subject of a special counsel investigation.

Kyle Cheney contributed to this report.

With Republicans insistent any aid package for Israel and Ukraine contain major border policy changes, perhaps the biggest thing to watch in the chamber this week will be the fate of talks with the “Gang of Six” border negotiations.

One of the main players involved, Sen. Thom Tillis (R-N.C.), said Monday there had been “good progress” on a major pain point — asylum claims — but an impasse on how to treat parole system used by some coming into the U.S.

It’ll be just one item for Democrats to discuss at their weekly lunch. Also look for lawmakers to discuss the idea of conditioning aid to Israel as part of the supplemental. (Senate Foreign Relations Chair Ben Cardin (D-Md.) came out forcefully against the idea.) And we’d expect Republicans to discuss potential options for ending Sen. Tommy Tuberville’s (R-Ala.) ongoing blockade of pending military promotions.

As for the floor itself, lawmakers will vote on two pending judicial nominees throughout the day, beginning at 11:30 a.m. And they’ll consider Jose Javier Rodriguez’s nomination for a Department of Labor role.

The House: Lawmakers get back into town Tuesday night and will consider a number of suspensions. Among them are two resolutions — one affirming Israel’s right to exist and another calling for Hamas to immediately release hostages taken during its October attack in Israel.

And back to full strength: The House will be back to full strength for the first time in months Tuesday night upon the swearing in of Rep.-elect Celeste Maloy (R-Utah). But it won’t last long: Already two members — Reps. Brian Higgins (D-N.Y.) and Bill Johnson (R-Ohio) — are expected to resign next year for new gigs.

Former President Donald Trump’s renewed push to scrap Obamacare if he returns to the White House is falling flat with the Senate Republicans who’d have to pass it.

The GOP conference is still scarred from its 2017 attempt with Trump to repeal and replace the Affordable Care Act, which failed on the Senate floor. And the Republican presidential frontrunner’s weekend announcement that he’s “seriously looking at alternatives” to the Affordable Care Act didn’t exactly thrill GOP senators during interviews on Monday evening.

Yes, Republicans still say they dislike Obamacare and want to bring health care costs down. But as far as scrapping the law? “I don’t see that as being the rallying cry. I really don’t,” Sen. Shelley Moore Capito (R-W.Va.) said.

“Boy, I haven’t thought about that one in a while,” Senate Minority Whip John Thune (R-S.D.) said. “I just don’t know what [Trump’s] thinking or how we would go about doing that. That fight, as you know, was six years ago now. And so, if he’s got some ideas, we’re open to them.”

In a Truth Social post over the weekend, Trump dinged the Senate GOP’s failure to repeal the law as a “low point for the Republican Party, but we should never give up!” Yet Republicans say they don’t feel the same political pressure to get rid of the 13-year-old law anymore.

“I don’t hear any Republicans talking about it,” said Sen. Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa), who visits all of his state’s 99 counties and is a senior member of the Finance Committee. “I’m going to spend my time on rural health care and getting more doctors and stuff like that.”

Indeed, many Republicans said if their party can reclaim the White House as well as Senate majority in 2025, they will probably try to take some action on health insurance costs, drug prices and transparency.

But as far as ripping up Obamacare, as the GOP once vowed to do?

Well, that ship has sailed.

“We’ve gotten so far down the road now that it’s almost technically impossible to do that. But there is a way to get rid of all the bad and hopefully put some good back in place,” Sen. Thom Tillis (R-N.C.) said.

The group of senators trying to cut a bipartisan deal on border security has made progress on one of their main sticking points, according to one of the lead negotiators.

The Senate “Gang of Six” is closer to a deal on asylum reform than it was a couple weeks ago, Sen. Thom Tillis (R-N.C.) said. Still, he added that there’s now a big split over how to address the parole system used by some people seeking to get into the United States.

“We’ve made progress on asylum, some of the other reforms that I think would reduce future flows. But you just can’t have a wide open parole policy that this administration or future ones could abuse after a political cycle,” Tillis told reporters on Monday evening.

Republicans say they are unwilling to pass a massive supplemental spending bill to aid Ukraine, Israel and Taiwan without big border changes. That’s led to a new round of border talks among Tillis and Sens. James Lankford (R-Okla.), Chris Murphy (D-Conn.), Michael Bennet (D-Colo.), Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.) and Kyrsten Sinema (I-Ariz.).

Tillis said negotiators in both parties are zeroing in on an agreement to raise the standard for asylum claims — a move that could reduce flows of people across the southern border — and called it “good progress” in the tricky talks. But he warned that if “you don’t make progress on parole … it’s not enough.”

“It’s not like the Democrats are completely against it, but drafting it and getting something that makes sense and satisfies Republicans is difficult,” Tillis said.

Democratic leaders say they are open to the border talks but also warned Republicans about taking too hard a line.

“This is a big ask by the Republicans, that we deal with a fundamental issue of immigration policy which has eluded us for 30 years,” Senate Judiciary Committee Chair Dick Durbin (D-Ill.) said. “I hope cooler heads prevail.”

Senate Foreign Relations Chair Ben Cardin said Monday he does not support placing conditions on U.S. aid to Israel amid its ongoing battle against Hamas, a wedge issue that’s divided congressional Democrats.

“I don’t think there’s a need for conditionality,” Cardin (D-Md.) told reporters, acknowledging “war is horrible” amid thousands of civilian casualties.

Cardin, who’s retiring following this term, also said he would not support pursuing a permanent ceasefire in the conflict beyond the days-long pause in fighting currently underway.

“We’re negotiating to get hostages released that never should have been taken in the first place, which is outrageous,” Cardin said. “War is terrible, but Hamas is terrible itself. The future of the Palestinians and Israelis is very much linked to Hamas not being empowered.”

Congress is working on a supplemental package that could include aid to Israel, as well as funding for Ukraine and Taiwan and changes to border security policy.