Eric Swalwell and Three Others Could Be Expelled from Congress in Plan Reportedly Being Considered By Both Sides: ‘Get the Garbage Out of Here’

The United States House of Representatives is bracing for a period of internal upheaval as lawmakers prepare to vote on the potential expulsion of Representative Eric Swalwell (D-CA). Following a series of harrowing allegations involving sexual misconduct and rape, a movement is gaining momentum within both parties to remove the California Democrat from office. According to reports from Axios, the atmosphere in the Capitol has reached a boiling point, with some members calling for a systemic "house cleaning" to restore the integrity of the institution. The allegations have not only jeopardized Swalwell’s tenure in Congress but have also effectively derailed his campaign for the governorship of California, leading to a mass resignation of his political and legislative staff.

The push for expulsion is being led by Representative Anna Paulina Luna (R-FL), who announced her intention to force a privileged resolution to remove Swalwell when the House reconvenes. This move comes in the wake of explosive reports detailing accusations of sexual assault spanning several years. However, the movement to purge the House appears to be expanding beyond a single member. Democratic leadership is reportedly considering a counter-maneuver to expel Representative Tony Gonzales (R-TX), and sources suggest that Representatives Cory Mills (R-FL) and Sheila Cherfilus-McCormick (D-FL) could also face similar expulsion votes. This potential "bloodletting," as described by Capitol Hill insiders, reflects a growing exasperation among lawmakers over a recent spate of ethics and sex scandals that have overshadowed legislative business.

Detailed Chronology of the Allegations

The current crisis surrounding Representative Swalwell intensified rapidly following a report published by the San Francisco Chronicle. In that report, a former staffer alleged that Swalwell raped her on two separate occasions. The first incident reportedly occurred in 2019, while the second allegedly took place during a trip to New York City in 2024. The details of these claims were further corroborated and expanded upon in a subsequent CNN interview conducted by Pamela Brown.

During the interview, the accuser, whose identity was protected by keeping her face in shadow, provided a graphic account of the 2024 incident. She described a scene of aggression, stating that she had "flashes" of the evening where Swalwell was on top of her and she was attempting to push him off. When asked directly by Brown if she had said "no," the accuser replied affirmatively, stating that she recalled saying "no" while physically resisting the assault.

The timeline of the public fallout is as follows:

Late Week: The San Francisco Chronicle publishes the initial report containing the rape allegations from a former staffer.
Friday: CNN reports that multiple women have come forward with similar allegations of sexual misconduct against Swalwell.
Friday Afternoon: A mass exodus occurs within Swalwell’s gubernatorial campaign, with high-level staffers resigning in protest of the allegations.
Saturday Morning: The Manhattan District Attorney’s office announces the launch of a formal probe into the 2024 rape accusation, citing the alleged incident occurred within their jurisdiction.
Saturday Afternoon: Staffers from Swalwell’s congressional office and gubernatorial team issue a joint statement expressing horror at the accusations and declaring their support for the victims.
Sunday: Representative Anna Paulina Luna confirms she will force a vote for expulsion, while Axios reports on the potential for a broader bipartisan purge of the House.

The Political and Legal Fallout

The legal implications for Representative Swalwell are significant. The announcement by the Manhattan District Attorney’s office indicates that the 2024 allegation is being treated with the utmost seriousness. A criminal investigation in New York adds a layer of complexity to the House’s internal disciplinary process. While the House Ethics Committee often handles such matters, the severity of the criminal claims and the public nature of the staffer testimony have accelerated calls for immediate removal rather than a lengthy internal investigation.

Politically, the damage appears irreparable. Swalwell, who had positioned himself as a frontrunner to succeed Gavin Newsom as Governor of California, has seen his campaign infrastructure collapse. The statement released by his own staff was particularly damaging. In an industry where loyalty is often the primary currency, the decision by his employees to publicly side with his accusers is almost unprecedented. The staffers stated they were "horrified" by the details emerging and felt a moral obligation to "stand with" the women who came forward.

Swalwell has denied all allegations, characterizing them as politically motivated attacks timed to damage his gubernatorial aspirations. "These allegations are false and come on the eve of an election against the frontrunner for governor," Swalwell told the Chronicle. However, the bipartisan nature of the frustration in Washington suggests that his defense is finding little purchase among his colleagues.

The High Bar for Expulsion: Supporting Data and Precedent

Expelling a member of Congress is the most severe form of discipline available to the House of Representatives. Under Article I, Section 5, Clause 2 of the U.S. Constitution, "Each House may determine the Rules of its Proceedings, punish its Members for disorderly Behaviour, and, with the Concurrence of two thirds, expel a Member."

The two-thirds majority requirement is a high evidentiary and political bar that has rarely been met in American history. To put the current situation into context, consider the following historical data:

Total Expulsions: In the entire history of the House of Representatives, only six members have ever been expelled.
Civil War Precedent: Three of the six expulsions occurred in 1861, involving members who supported the Confederate rebellion (John B. Clark, John W. Reid, and Henry C. Burnett).
Modern Expulsions: In the modern era, expulsion has been reserved for members convicted of serious federal crimes or those facing overwhelming evidence of corruption.
- Michael "Ozzie" Myers (1980): Expelled following his conviction in the Abscam bribery scandal.
- James Traficant (2002): Expelled after being convicted of ten felony counts, including racketeering and bribery.
- George Santos (2023): Expelled following a scathing House Ethics Committee report and a federal indictment involving wire fraud, money laundering, and theft of public funds.

The fact that House members are even entertaining a vote for Swalwell—as well as Gonzales, Mills, and Cherfilus-McCormick—suggests a significant shift in the internal culture of Congress. The "two-thirds" requirement means that for Swalwell to be expelled, a substantial number of Democrats would have to vote against one of their own, or vice versa for the Republican targets.

Bipartisan Frustration and the "Tit-for-Tat" Dynamic

The Axios report highlights a sense of "catharsis" that some lawmakers feel at the prospect of a "proverbial bloodletting." This sentiment is driven by a perception that the House has become a magnet for scandal, which in turn diminishes the public’s trust in the federal government. One House Democrat, speaking anonymously, expressed a desire for a "full house cleaning," referring to the embroiled members as "jerks" who are "destroying Congress."

However, the process is also deeply entangled in partisan warfare. The Democratic plan to counter the Swalwell vote by targeting Representative Tony Gonzales suggests that expulsion is being used as a strategic weapon. Gonzales has faced internal party criticism and was recently censured by the Texas Republican Party, though the specific grounds for a House expulsion vote would likely involve separate ethics concerns. Similarly, Representatives Cory Mills and Sheila Cherfilus-McCormick have faced their own respective controversies, ranging from financial disclosure issues to conduct unbecoming of a member.

This "tit-for-tat" approach raises concerns about whether the expulsion process is being devalued. If expulsion votes become a regular occurrence used to retaliate against the opposing party, the constitutional gravity of the act may be diluted. Conversely, proponents argue that the severity of the allegations against Swalwell—specifically the charge of violent sexual assault—necessitates immediate action regardless of the political fallout.

Broader Implications for the Legislative Branch

The potential expulsion of multiple members would have immediate and profound effects on the narrow margins of power in the House. With a slim majority currently held by Republicans, every seat is vital for passing legislation. If Swalwell and Cherfilus-McCormick were removed, the Democratic caucus would shrink further, potentially giving Republicans more breathing room. However, if Gonzales and Mills were also removed, the Republican majority would become even more precarious.

Beyond the numbers, the scandal reflects a crisis of vetting and accountability within the political parties. The fact that Swalwell’s own staff felt the need to issue a public condemnation suggests a breakdown in the internal systems meant to manage conduct and ethics. For the American public, the spectacle of multiple expulsion votes serves as a reminder of the ongoing volatility within the nation’s capital.

As lawmakers return to Washington, D.C. next week, the House floor is expected to become a theater of high-stakes political maneuvering. The Manhattan District Attorney’s probe will likely loom over the proceedings, providing a legal backdrop to the legislative debate. Whether the House can reach the two-thirds threshold required for expulsion remains to be seen, but the move alone marks a historic moment of internal reckoning.

The coming days will determine if the House of Representatives chooses to proceed with a broad purge of its ranks or if the high constitutional bar for expulsion will once again protect members from removal. Regardless of the outcome, the allegations against Representative Swalwell have already left a permanent mark on his career and have forced the House to confront the limits of its own tolerance for scandal and misconduct.