It is a majority vote for either House to determine whether a would-be Member or Senator has been duly elected, and should be seated -- after a Committee has held a factual hearing and reported its conclusions. However, expulsion of a Member (Senator( requires a 2/3rds vote and takes place on the floor of the House / Senate.
Neither the courts, nor the other House, nor any other part of the federal government has any role to play in the expulsion consideration and decision. Look at the list of current Senators and consider whether there is a snowball's chance in Hell that a full 2/3rds of them will vote to expel Durbin. I think the answer to that question is no, non, nein, nicht, and nyet.
John / Billybob
The current partisan divide demonstrates the wisdom of the framers in giving Congress the power to Declare war. Bush is operating under a bill that functions similarly but doesn't explicitly use the words "Declaration of War." The minority and the media use that lack to pretend we're not really at war. If Congress had formally used the words this pretense would be much harder to maintain and some of the anti-war forces might actually be charged for the treasons many here believe they are committing. IIRC a few in congress wanted to formally declare war, but they were snowed under by the many who didn't think it was necessary or who were troubled by the question of against whom to declare it. Bush's biggest mistake in the immediate post 911 period was not pushing for what President Jefferson was given against the Barbary Pirates, a non state-centric Declaration of War. Had he made the case in his great speeches then, I believe the public mood would have swamped all opposition and the public would still believe we're at war. As with Jefferson's war, time would have solved the technical problems of the unorthodox declaration.