U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services has referred allegations against Rep. Eric Swalwell, D-Calif., to Department of Homeland Security law enforcement for investigation, confirming that federal authorities are now probing whether the congressman violated immigration and employment laws by keeping a Brazilian national employed as his family’s live-in nanny while she lacked work authorization.
The referral follows two formal complaints, one filed with the Department of Labor and another filed in February with DHS, that accuse Swalwell and his wife, Brittany Swalwell, of misleading officials and using campaign funds to pay nanny Amanda Barbosa during a period when she allegedly had no legal right to work in the United States.
A USCIS spokesperson laid out the agency’s position in blunt terms, as Fox News Digital reported:
“USCIS has been collecting information on the allegations involving Congressman Eric Swalwell hiring of a Brazilian national as a nanny without lawful work authorization. These allegations are serious… Federal law prohibits employers from knowingly hiring aliens who are not authorized to work in the United States. No employer, including a member of Congress, is above the law. DHS will continue to aggressively enforce statutes to uphold the rule of law and protect American workers.”
That is not a vague bureaucratic hedge. It is a federal agency naming a sitting congressman and declaring that the law applies to him, too.
Federal Election Commission records paint a detailed picture of how Barbosa was compensated. She received $3,914 in campaign funds in 2021 and $46,930 in 2022, according to FEC data cited in the complaints and confirmed across multiple reports. In 2025, Barbosa received another $38,905 from Swalwell’s campaign, FEC records show.
But the payments did not flow continuously under Barbosa’s name. After direct disbursements to her stopped, the New York Post reported that $52,262 in campaign expenses labeled “childcare” were instead reimbursed to Swalwell himself. The DHS complaint alleges this was a workaround, a way to keep Barbosa off the books while she was not authorized to work in the U.S.
That allegation, if substantiated, would mean a member of Congress used donor money to pay an employee who could not legally hold the job, then restructured the payments to obscure the arrangement.
Barbosa first came to the United States from Brazil on an au pair visa and was hired by Swalwell in 2021. A labor certification application reviewed by the Post showed that Swalwell began sponsoring Barbosa for a green card in December 2022, as her visa was set to expire. The Department of Labor told the Post that the labor certification was approved in 2024.
The gap between visa expiration and green card approval is where the complaints focus. Barbosa later enrolled at a community college, and under student visa rules, she was not permitted to work off campus. Yet the DHS complaint filed by California filmmaker and political activist Joel Gilbert alleges she continued working for the Swalwell family during that period.
The complaint cited social media evidence. As Breitbart reported, the filing stated that “Barbosa appears in numerous social media photos with the Swalwell family throughout 2023 and 2024, indicating continued close association and ongoing childcare responsibilities despite the absence of known lawful work authorization.”
Gilbert did not mince words about what he believes happened. “It’s a brazen disregard for the law. He’s harboring and employing an illegal,” he said.
The Washington Examiner reported that DHS confirmed it is investigating Swalwell after USCIS referred the case. The department posted on X: “No one is above the law, including a member of Congress.”
That public statement from DHS removes any ambiguity about whether the matter is being taken seriously at the federal level. This is not a political opposition research dump sitting in a filing cabinet. It is an active referral to law enforcement.
Fox News Digital reported that it reached out to Swalwell’s congressional office, as well as the Departments of Labor and Homeland Security and the Federal Election Commission for comment. The article did not include a response from Swalwell’s office addressing the nanny allegations specifically.
The immigration and campaign-finance probe lands on Swalwell at a moment when he is already facing separate, unrelated allegations. The San Francisco Chronicle first reported claims from a former staffer involving sexual assault allegations. CNN later reported that three additional women came forward with misconduct claims.
Swalwell addressed those allegations in a video posted Friday, denying them forcefully. “A lot has been said about me today through anonymous allegations, and I thought it was important that you see and hear from me directly. These allegations of sexual assault are flat-out false,” he said. He added: “They are absolutely false. They did not happen. They have never happened. And I will fight them with everything that I have.”
Those denials concern the sexual assault claims, not the nanny investigation. The two matters are distinct, but they are compounding at the same time, and both carry serious political consequences for a congressman who is already facing calls for expulsion from Congress and is actively running for governor of California.
Federal law prohibits employers from knowingly hiring individuals who are not authorized to work in the United States. The USCIS statement explicitly cited that prohibition. If Swalwell continued to employ Barbosa, and pay her with campaign funds, during a period when she lacked valid work authorization, that would represent a straightforward violation of employment law by a sitting member of Congress.
The campaign-finance dimension adds another layer. FEC records show tens of thousands of dollars flowing from Swalwell’s campaign to Barbosa, and then tens of thousands more reimbursed to Swalwell himself under the label “childcare.” The DHS complaint alleges this shift in payment structure was designed to conceal the arrangement. Whether that allegation holds up will depend on what investigators find, but the pattern, laid out in public filings, raises questions that demand answers.
Several key questions remain unresolved. What was Barbosa’s precise immigration status at each point between 2021 and 2025? Did Swalwell or his wife know her work authorization had lapsed when payments continued? What role, if any, did Brittany Swalwell play in the labor certification process? And why did the payment structure shift from direct disbursements to Barbosa to reimbursements to Swalwell himself?
None of those questions have been answered publicly. Swalwell has not, based on available reporting, responded to the nanny-related allegations directly.
Eric Swalwell has built a political brand on holding others accountable. He sat on the House Intelligence Committee. He ran for president. He is now running for governor of the nation’s most populous state. And he has spent years positioning himself as a vocal critic of those he accuses of flouting the rules.
Now federal investigators are examining whether Swalwell himself flouted immigration law, employment law, and possibly campaign-finance rules, all to keep a nanny in his home. The FEC data is public. The complaints are filed. The referral to DHS law enforcement is confirmed. The agency’s own words, “no employer, including a member of Congress, is above the law”, hang over the entire matter.
Swalwell has faced calls to drop his gubernatorial bid. Whether he does or not, the federal investigation will proceed on its own timeline, indifferent to campaign calendars.
Americans who follow the law, pay their own nannies out of their own pockets, and never dream of billing their employers for household help are entitled to wonder: who exactly do the rules apply to in Washington?
By signing up, you agree to receive our newsletters and promotional content and accept our Terms of Use and Privacy Policy. You may unsubscribe at any time.