The House Ethics Committee announced Monday that it has opened a formal investigation into allegations that Rep. Eric Swalwell (D-CA) engaged in sexual misconduct with a member of his own staff, a bipartisan move that lands on a congressman already facing calls for expulsion and a gubernatorial campaign he abruptly suspended just one day earlier.
Committee Chairman Michael Guest, a Mississippi Republican, and Ranking Member Mark DeSaulnier, a California Democrat, issued a joint statement confirming the probe. The fact that a Democrat signed onto the announcement alongside the Republican chairman signals that Swalwell’s own party is not shielding him from scrutiny.
The investigation centers on whether the 45-year-old California Democrat violated the Code of Official Conduct or other applicable standards “in the performance of his duties or the discharge of his responsibilities,” specifically with respect to allegations of sexual misconduct “including towards an employee working under his supervision,” as reported by Breitbart News.
The allegations trace back to a former staffer who told the San Francisco Chronicle that Swalwell, 17 years her senior, had sexually assaulted her on two occasions. Her account describes a pattern of escalating conduct that began during her employment in his office.
She said that one night, after a donor meeting, she drove Swalwell home and he tried to kiss her in her car. Weeks later, she said, he pulled out his penis in the car and asked her to perform oral sex. She said she complied, in a parking lot.
The second alleged assault she described took place in September 2019. She said Swalwell invited her out for drinks and that she became so severely intoxicated she could not remember the rest of the night. She said she woke up naked in Swalwell’s hotel bed and could feel the effect of vaginal intercourse.
Five years later, at an April 2024 charity gala where Swalwell was being honored, the woman said they met for drinks afterward. She said she remembered only snippets of the evening, including pushing Swalwell away and telling him “No” while he allegedly forced himself on her.
Those are grave allegations. The Ethics Committee’s decision to move forward with a formal investigation suggests the panel found enough initial basis to proceed, though the committee itself cautioned against premature conclusions.
Guest and DeSaulnier stated in their joint release:
“The Committee, pursuant to Committee Rule 18(a), has begun an investigation and will gather additional information regarding the allegations that Representative Eric Swalwell violated the Code of Official Conduct or any law, rule, regulation, or other applicable standard of conduct in the performance of his duties or the discharge of his responsibilities, with respect to allegations that he may have engaged in sexual misconduct, including towards an employee working under his supervision.”
They added a standard but notable caveat:
“The Committee notes that the mere fact that it is investigating these allegations, and publicly disclosing its review, does not itself indicate that any violation has occurred. No other public comment will be made on this matter except in accordance with Committee rules.”
That boilerplate language is routine for ethics probes. But the public disclosure itself is not routine. The committee chose to announce this investigation openly rather than handle it behind closed doors, a choice that carries its own weight.
Just one day before the Ethics Committee went public, Swalwell announced on Sunday that he had suspended his campaign for governor of California. The timing is difficult to read as coincidental. A sitting congressman does not walk away from a statewide race on a Sunday and face an ethics investigation announcement on Monday without the two events being closely linked.
Swalwell has not been quoted responding to the specific allegations in the material reviewed for this report. That silence, paired with the campaign suspension, leaves voters and colleagues to draw their own conclusions while the investigation proceeds.
The congressman’s troubles extend well beyond sexual misconduct claims. Federal authorities have separately investigated Swalwell over allegations that he used campaign funds to pay for a nanny, a matter that raised its own set of legal and ethical questions about how the congressman managed donor money.
Many lawmakers are now calling for Swalwell’s expulsion from the House. That is an extraordinary step, the Constitution sets a two-thirds vote threshold to remove a sitting member, but the breadth of the allegations has clearly shifted the political calculus.
Rep. Anna Paulina Luna has already moved to expel Swalwell from Congress following the surfacing of the sexual assault allegations, putting formal legislative pressure behind what had been informal calls for accountability.
The Ethics Committee’s investigation will now run on its own track, gathering evidence and testimony under Committee Rule 18(a). Whether the probe results in formal charges, a public report, or a referral for further action remains to be seen. The committee has committed to silence beyond its initial disclosure.
Swalwell’s case arrives at a moment when the political class faces intensifying scrutiny from multiple directions. Partisan legal battles continue to shape Washington, with investigations and subpoenas flying in both directions across the aisle.
But the Swalwell matter stands apart in one respect: the alleged victim was a subordinate. She worked under his supervision. That power imbalance, a congressman and a staffer, 17 years apart in age, is precisely the kind of dynamic that congressional ethics rules exist to police.
For years, Congress has told the public it takes workplace misconduct seriously. Post-#MeToo reforms were supposed to ensure that members could not exploit their positions without consequence. The Ethics Committee now has a chance to prove those reforms were more than a press release.
The details the former staffer described to the San Francisco Chronicle, the escalation from an unwanted kiss to alleged assault, the alleged incidents involving severe intoxication, the claim that she said “No” and was forced, paint a picture that, if substantiated, would represent serious criminal conduct, not merely an ethics violation.
Whether this investigation moves with the urgency the allegations demand, or whether it quietly stalls behind procedural curtains, will tell the public everything it needs to know about whether Congress polices its own. Accountability has been a recurring theme across federal institutions this year, from courtrooms to agency budgets.
The Ethics Committee has said it will gather additional information. It has not disclosed a timeline, named witnesses, or indicated whether it will hold hearings. The panel’s commitment to make “no other public comment” means the next update may not come for weeks or months.
Several open questions hang over the investigation. Has Swalwell offered any formal response or denial? Will the former staffer cooperate with the committee’s probe? Are there other witnesses or complainants? And will the expulsion effort in the House advance on a parallel track, or wait for the committee’s findings?
None of those answers are available yet. What is available is a bipartisan committee statement, a set of detailed and disturbing allegations reported by a major newspaper, a governor’s race abandoned overnight, and a congressman who has gone quiet.
When the people who make the rules face credible accusations of breaking them, the system either works or it doesn’t. Swalwell’s colleagues, in both parties, now own the answer.
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.