Swalwell and Gonzales both resign as House Ethics probes open
Both resignations triggered by bipartisan expulsion threat on same day
Rep. Eric Swalwell, a seven-term California Democrat who had represented the state's 14th Congressional District since 2013, announced on April 13, 2026, that he would resign from Congress. The resignation came hours after CNN and the San Francisco Chronicle published allegations from four women accusing him of sexual misconduct. A former staffer told CNN and the Chronicle that Swalwell raped her twice while she worked directly for him — once in Washington, D.C. and once in his Bay Area home — on nights when she was heavily intoxicated and unable to consent. Three other women alleged he sent unsolicited explicit messages, nude photos, or made unwanted sexual advances. Swalwell denied all allegations and said he would fight back.
Key Concepts
Essential concepts and terms to understand this topic
Congressional Enforcement
Congress''s authority to enforce the Fourteenth Amendment and other constitutional guarantees.
Congressional Power Over Punishment
Each chamber''s power to discipline or expel its own members for misconduct.
Judging Member Qualifications
Each chamber of Congress's power to decide whether its own members meet requirements for office
Congressional Special Election
An election held to fill a vacant congressional seat outside of the regular November election cycle.
Congressional Expulsion
The constitutional process by which the House or Senate removes one of its members by a two-thirds vote.
Speaker and Officers
House leaders elected to run proceedings and administrative functions
Expulsion of Members
Each chamber can vote to remove a member with a two-thirds majority.
Removal from Office
Constitutional procedure to expel an official before their term ends
Congressional Ethics
Rules governing member conduct and preventing conflicts of interest in Congress.
House Expulsion
The process by which the House of Representatives removes one of its own members by a two-thirds vote.
House Ethics Committee
The bipartisan House committee responsible for investigating and recommending punishments for ethics violations by members of Congress.
Key People
8ES
Eric Swalwell
U.S. Representative, D-CA-14 (resigned April 13, 2026)
Announced his resignation from Congress after four women accused him of sexual misconduct, including rape. He had ended his California governor campaign the day before as Democratic allies withdrew endorsements. He denied all allegations and framed his resignation as preventing distraction from his constituents rather than admitting wrongdoing. Criminal probes opened in New York City and Alameda County, California. At the time of his resignation, he was a seven-term member and considered a leading contender for California's governorship.
Tony Gonzales
U.S. Representative, R-TX-23 (resigned April 13, 2026)
Announced his resignation about an hour after Swalwell. He had admitted in March 2026 to an affair with a former staffer, Regina Ann Santos-Aviles, who later died by suicide. Additional allegations emerged in April that he had requested nude photos from another campaign staffer in 2020. His Texas district covers Eagle Pass and Del Rio along the U.S.-Mexico border, making it a high-profile seat in immigration policy debates. His resignation left the district vacant pending a special election.
Michael Guest
U.S. Representative, R-MS; Chairman, House Ethics Committee
Jointly announced with Ranking Member DeSaulnier the formal Ethics Committee investigation into Swalwell on April 13, 2026. The announcement came hours before Swalwell resigned. Guest has chaired the Ethics Committee since January 2025. The committee's jurisdiction over Swalwell ended immediately upon his resignation, closing the investigation without findings or sanctions.
Mark DeSaulnier
U.S. Representative, D-CA-11; Ranking Member, House Ethics Committee
Co-signed the bipartisan Ethics Committee investigation announcement into Swalwell alongside Chairman Guest. As ranking member, DeSaulnier's co-signature gave the investigation explicit Democratic support and made clear it wasn't partisan. He represents a Northern California district adjacent to Swalwell's. His involvement signals that ethics investigations can be pursued on a bipartisan basis even when members are from opposing parties.
Anna Paulina Luna
U.S. Representative, R-FL-13
Agreed to draft the expulsion resolution targeting Swalwell as part of a cross-party accountability push coordinated with Democrat Teresa Leger Fernández. Luna's willingness to sponsor an expulsion against a Democrat, while Fernández sponsored one against a Republican, was intended to give both resolutions bipartisan legitimacy and avoid claims that either party was acting defensively or retaliating along party lines.
Teresa Leger Fernández
U.S. Representative, D-NM-3
Agreed to draft the expulsion resolution targeting Gonzales as the Democratic half of the cross-party effort alongside Luna. Her sponsorship of a resolution against a Republican demonstrated Democratic willingness to pursue accountability regardless of party affiliation. Leger Fernández has been an outspoken advocate on sexual harassment policy in Congress and workplace protections for staff.
Gavin Newsom
Governor of California
Holds sole authority under California law to call a special election for Swalwell's vacated 14th Congressional District seat. He has discretion over both whether to call an election and when to do so. California law requires that a special election be held between 126 and 140 days after the governor issues a proclamation. If he calls one immediately, the earliest election could be held would be mid-August 2026. If he declines, the seat remains vacant until January 2027.
Nancy Pelosi
Former U.S. Representative, D-CA-12 (retired 2023); former House Speaker
Withdrew her endorsement of Swalwell and called on him to step aside from the California governor's race on April 11, 2026. Pelosi said the allegations "must be respected and heard" and should be investigated outside the gubernatorial campaign. Her move carried significant weight as Pelosi had been a close political ally and mentor to Swalwell, and her withdrawal of support accelerated his decision to leave the race and then resign from Congress.
Claims & Perspectives
True
True
Both Swalwell and Gonzales resigned to avoid expulsion votes
Both men announced their resignations on April 13, 2026 — the same day the House Ethics Committee opened formal investigations and after bipartisan expulsion resolutions were actively being drafted. Swalwell's statement explicitly referenced "efforts to bring an immediate expulsion vote," saying it would be "wrong" without due process but also acknowledging that constituents shouldn't "have me distracted from my duties." Gonzales announced his resignation within an hour of Swalwell's announcement. Historically, members facing expulsion almost always resign before a vote rather than forcing the House to proceed with formal removal. George Santos resigned after two failed expulsion votes, then was expelled on the third attempt in December 2023 after the House Ethics Committee released a damaging investigative report. James Traficant was expelled in 2002 (420-1 vote), and Michael Myers was expelled in 1980 (376-30 vote) — both after being convicted of crimes, not during the investigative phase. Swalwell and Gonzales resigned during the investigation phase, which is rarer. The Constitution requires a two-thirds vote (290 members, given current vacancies) for expulsion. With current membership at roughly 435, that's 290 votes needed. Numerous members from both parties said publicly they would vote to expel both men, suggesting the two-thirds threshold was likely. By resigning, both avoided the formal record of expulsion that would permanently mark their congressional service.
True
Resigning before expulsion means the Ethics Committee must drop its investigation
The House Ethics Committee's jurisdiction extends only to current members of the House of Representatives. When a member resigns, the committee's authority to investigate, subpoena witnesses, or sanction that former member ends immediately. This rule is codified in the House Ethics Manual and was confirmed by the committee itself when it closed Swalwell's file upon his formal resignation. Criminal investigations by state and federal prosecutors continue independently, since those are governed by law enforcement authority rather than committee jurisdiction. The Manhattan District Attorney's office confirmed it was opening a criminal investigation into Swalwell. The Alameda County District Attorney said it was evaluating whether criminal conduct occurred in the Bay Area. These investigations don't depend on congressional membership or the Ethics Committee's process. This structural feature of the Ethics Committee means that members facing serious allegations can use resignation as a way to end congressional oversight entirely, even if criminal liability remains. It's why the Ethics Committee can't issue formal findings against Swalwell or Gonzales — they're no longer members, so the committee has no power to investigate them.
True
Bipartisan expulsion resolutions prevent the appearance of partisan accountability
Anna Paulina Luna (R-FL) agreed to draft an expulsion resolution targeting Swalwell, a Democrat, while Teresa Leger Fernández (D-NM) agreed to draft one targeting Gonzales, a Republican. This cross-party arrangement was explicitly designed to signal that accountability is pursued regardless of party affiliation. The risk in single-party expulsion efforts is that the opposing party can claim partisan retribution — that the majority is trying to remove a minority party member for political gain rather than genuine misconduct. By having a Republican sponsor the resolution against a Democrat and a Democrat sponsor the resolution against a Republican, both Luna and Fernández demonstrated that this was about accountability for serious allegations, not partisan advantage. Both Swalwell and Gonzales faced credible allegations of sexual misconduct. Because they happened to be from different parties and were investigated on the same day, the cross-party resolution strategy was available. Numerous members from both parties said they would vote to expel both men, and bipartisan support likely reflected genuine concern about the allegations rather than party calculation. If expulsion resolutions are seen as purely partisan tools, they lose legitimacy and weaken the House's ability to police its own members.
False
False
House expulsion requires a simple majority vote
Article I, Section 5 of the Constitution requires a two-thirds vote of the House to expel a member, not a simple majority. With the House at roughly 435 members, that requires approximately 290 votes. A simple majority (218 votes) can censure a member, which is a formal rebuke and public reprimand, but censure does not remove the member from office or their salary. Expulsion is the highest formal sanction the House can impose. It's extremely rare — only six House members have ever been expelled in U.S. history. The most recent was George Santos in December 2023, expelled 311-114 (73% of those voting) after the House Ethics Committee released a critical investigative report. Before Santos, James Traficant was expelled 420-1 in 2002 after being convicted of multiple corruption charges. Michael Myers was expelled 376-30 in 1980 after being convicted of bribery in an FBI sting operation. The other three were Confederate sympathizers expelled in 1861 at the start of the Civil War. The two-thirds requirement exists to ensure expulsion is truly bipartisan and reflects serious consensus, not partisan majorities. Even in the case of George Santos — where over 100 Republicans joined Democrats to expel him — House Speaker Mike Johnson initially opposed the expulsion, saying the Constitution didn't require expulsion only after conviction, but arguing it set a bad precedent to expel members before trial.
Misleading
Misleading
Both seats could remain vacant for more than a year
California's Swalwell seat could remain vacant until January 2027 if Gov. Newsom declines to call a special election, which is within his legal discretion. The timing for Texas is different under state law. This claim conflates two different processes. California law requires that a special election be held between 126 and 140 days after the governor issues a proclamation calling for one. If Newsom calls a special election immediately after Swalwell's resignation, the earliest an election could be held is mid-August 2026 — about four months away, not more than a year. If Newsom declines to call a special election, the seat remains vacant until a new representative is sworn in on January 3, 2027, a duration of roughly nine months. The Texas seat would likely be filled faster under state law. Texas uses a top-two runoff system, and the governor calls special elections with implementation typically within 45 to 90 days after the proclamation. So Gonzales's district in Texas would probably have a filled seat sooner than Swalwell's in California. Calling either seat vacant for "more than a year" is accurate only if Newsom chooses not to call a special election for California, and then only to January 2027. The phrase overstates the likely timeline because governors typically do call special elections promptly, aware that a widely-divided House where every vote matters means vacant seats affect legislative arithmetic.
Misleading
When members resign from the Ethics Committee investigation, they avoid all accountability
Members who resign avoid congressional accountability via the House Ethics Committee, but they don't avoid criminal accountability. This distinction is important because it determines who has real power to sanction them. The Ethics Committee can issue formal findings of misconduct, recommend sanctions, and create an official record that follows a member's career. Once a member resigns, the committee loses that power. Neither Swalwell nor Gonzales will face an ethics investigation finding or formal House sanction. However, criminal prosecutors aren't bound by congressional membership or the Ethics Committee's process. The Manhattan District Attorney and Alameda County District Attorney opened criminal probes into Swalwell. State prosecutors in Texas can investigate Gonzales. Criminal convictions carry real consequences: imprisonment, fines, restitution, and a felony record. Unlike Ethics Committee findings, criminal convictions survive resignation and can result in actual punishment. The accountability gap is this: if prosecutors decline to bring charges or lose in trial, then Swalwell and Gonzales will have avoided both congressional and criminal accountability. The Ethics Committee's inability to continue investigating after resignation means there will be no formal congressional record of misconduct, even if the allegations are never disproven. That's why ethics advocates and some lawmakers argued that allowing resignations to kill investigations creates perverse incentives — members facing serious allegations can simply leave Congress and end all congressional oversight.