Congressman Swalwell Faces Federal Probe Over Nanny Hiring

Allegations of immigration and employment law violations in keeping a live-in nanny without proper work authorization

Apr. 13, 2026 at 12:06am by

Got story updates? Submit your updates here. ›

A dynamic, abstract painting in shades of blue, grey, and red depicting the fractured silhouette of a politician's head in motion, conveying a sense of turbulence and investigation surrounding the subject.The federal investigation into Rep. Swalwell's alleged hiring practices adds to the growing political turmoil surrounding his gubernatorial campaign.San Francisco Today

Rep. Eric Swalwell, a Democratic candidate for California governor, is under federal investigation over allegations that he violated immigration and employment laws to keep a live-in nanny in the U.S. while she lacked proper work authorization. Complaints filed with the Department of Labor and Department of Homeland Security accuse Swalwell and his wife of lying to keep the nanny employed and paying her with campaign funds.

Why it matters

The investigation into Swalwell's alleged hiring practices raises concerns about potential abuse of power and disregard for immigration laws, especially for a high-profile political figure. It also comes as Swalwell faces separate allegations of sexual assault from former staffers, potentially complicating his gubernatorial campaign.

The details

According to the complaints, Swalwell hired a Brazilian national named Amanda Barbosa as a live-in nanny in 2021 after she came to the U.S. on an au pair visa. Barbosa was paid $3,914 in campaign funds in 2021 and $46,930 in 2022, raising allegations that this was a workaround to keep her employed despite lacking proper work authorization. In late 2022, Swalwell began the process of sponsoring Barbosa for a green card as her visa was set to expire. The Department of Labor later approved the labor certification in 2024, and Barbosa received an additional $38,905 in campaign funds from Swalwell in 2025.

  • In 2021, Swalwell hired Amanda Barbosa as a live-in nanny after she came to the U.S. on an au pair visa.
  • In 2021, Barbosa was paid $3,914 in campaign funds.
  • In 2022, Barbosa was paid $46,930 in campaign funds.
  • In December 2022, Swalwell began the process of sponsoring Barbosa for a green card as her visa was set to expire.
  • In 2024, the Department of Labor approved the labor certification for Barbosa.

The players

Rep. Eric Swalwell

A Democratic congressman from California who is running for governor.

Brittany Swalwell

Eric Swalwell's wife.

Amanda Barbosa

A Brazilian national who was hired by the Swalwells as a live-in nanny in 2021 while she lacked proper work authorization.

Joel Gilbert

A California filmmaker and political activist who filed a complaint with the Department of Homeland Security about the Swalwells' alleged hiring practices.

U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS)

The government agency that confirmed it has referred the matter to the Department of Homeland Security for investigation.

Got photos? Submit your photos here. ›

What they’re saying

“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.”

— USCIS Spokesperson

“They are absolutely false. They did not happen. They have never happened. And I will fight them with everything that I have.”

— Rep. Eric Swalwell

What’s next

The Department of Homeland Security and Department of Labor investigations into the allegations against Swalwell are ongoing.

The takeaway

This case highlights concerns about potential abuse of power and disregard for immigration laws, especially among high-profile political figures. It also raises questions about the vetting of campaign staff and the use of campaign funds for personal expenses.