How many House votes to expel Eric Swalwell?
Short Answer
Both the model and the market expect Above 218 votes for Eric Swalwell's expulsion, with no compelling evidence of mispricing.
1. Executive Verdict
- 2023 ethics investigation found no 'disorderly behavior' by Eric Swalwell.
- Few Democrats publicly define expulsion thresholds for their party members.
- House Freedom Caucus has not stated an explicit position on Swalwell's expulsion.
- Institutional Republicans worried George Santos's expulsion set a dangerous precedent.
- DOJ investigation into Eric Swalwell began in mid-April 2026.
Who Wins and Why
| Outcome | Market | Model | Why |
|---|---|---|---|
| Above 218 | 2.0% | 0.7% | The House Ethics Committee closed a prior investigation without action and had not issued a formal report recommending expulsion or disorderly conduct from a new investigation by the deadline, making it highly improbable to garner 218+ votes for expulsion. |
| Above 230 | 2.0% | 0.7% | The House Ethics Committee concluded one investigation into Eric Swalwell without action and issued no report recommending expulsion from a second investigation by the deadline, strongly indicating the outcome of 230+ votes is highly improbable, thus aligning with the market's low probability. |
| Above 330 | 1.0% | 0.3% | The House Ethics Committee concluded its 2023 investigation without action and had not issued any formal report recommending expulsion from its 2026 inquiry prior to June 2026, strongly indicating no official basis for an expulsion vote, which supports the market's very low probability for "Above 330" votes. |
| Above 250 | 1.0% | 0.3% | The House Ethics Committee has not issued a formal report recommending Eric Swalwell's expulsion as of June 2026, which makes it highly improbable that the House would even hold such a vote, let alone garnering over 250 votes. |
| Above 270 | 2.0% | 0.3% | The House Ethics Committee concluded its first investigation into Eric Swalwell without action and had not issued any formal report recommending expulsion from a second inquiry by the deadline, making a high vote count for expulsion highly improbable and thus overwhelmingly supporting a lower probability for the "Above 270" outcome. |
2. Market Behavior & Price Dynamics
Historical Price (Probability)
Outcome probability
Date
This market has demonstrated a prolonged sideways trading pattern, indicating a stable consensus among participants. The price has been confined to a very narrow range, fluctuating between a low of 1.0% and a high of 7.0%. The current price of 2.0% sits near the established support level of 1.0%, which also served as the market's opening price. The 7.0% mark has acted as a clear resistance ceiling that has not been breached. The overall price action suggests a consistent and unwavering belief that the event is highly improbable.
Given the absence of specific news or external catalysts provided in the context, the minor fluctuations within this 1-7% channel appear to be driven by internal market dynamics rather than reactions to specific events. The total trading volume of over 239,000 contracts is significant, suggesting a liquid market with active participation despite the low probability. This high volume, coupled with the stable, low price, indicates strong market conviction in the low likelihood of a successful expulsion vote.
Overall, market sentiment is decidedly bearish on the prospect of a House vote to expel Eric Swalwell. The price chart reflects a strong and persistent consensus that this event has a very low probability of occurring before the market's resolution date. The price has consistently found support at the 1% level and has failed to sustain any upward momentum toward the 7% resistance, reinforcing the market's low expectations.
3. Market Data
Contract Snapshot
This market resolves to Yes if more than 218 House members vote Yea on a resolution to expel Representative Eric Swalwell before June 1, 2026. If 218 or fewer votes occur, or if no such vote happens by the deadline, the market resolves to No. The outcome must be from a full chamber vote and is verified via the Library of Congress, with vote alterations after market expiration not being considered.
Available Contracts
Market options and current pricing
| Outcome bucket | Yes (price) | No (price) | Last trade probability |
|---|---|---|---|
| Above 218 | $0.03 | $0.98 | 2% |
| Above 230 | $0.03 | $0.98 | 2% |
| Above 270 | $0.02 | $0.99 | 2% |
| Above 310 | $0.02 | $0.99 | 2% |
| Above 250 | $0.02 | $0.99 | 1% |
| Above 290 | $0.02 | $0.99 | 1% |
| Above 330 | $0.02 | $0.99 | 1% |
Market Discussion
The market reflects a strong consensus that Eric Swalwell will not be expelled, with a very low probability (1-2%) of expulsion votes exceeding 218, 230, or 250. The main argument for this viewpoint is the belief among traders that Eric Swalwell has already resigned, making an expulsion vote moot. Some also note the difficulty of achieving a high number of votes given the current House composition.
4. Did Ethics Investigations Find Eric Swalwell's Actions Disorderly?
| May 2023 Investigation Outcome | Closed with no action taken [^] |
|---|---|
| New Investigation Announced | April 2026 [^] |
| Formal Report on Disorderly Behavior/Expulsion by June 2026 | None issued [^] |
No formal report from a 2023 ethics investigation cited 'disorderly behaviour.' In May 2023, the House Committee on Ethics concluded an investigation concerning Representative Eric Swalwell [^] . The committee announced that it took no action following this investigation [^]. Consequently, no specific recommendation or conclusion was made in any formal report from this period stating that Swalwell's actions constituted 'disorderly Behaviour' worthy of expulsion [^].
A 2026 ethics inquiry did not produce a formal report by June 2026. Separately, the House Ethics Committee announced an investigation into Representative Eric Swalwell in April 2026, focusing on allegations of sexual misconduct [^]. Although this inquiry commenced before June 2026, the available sources do not indicate that a formal report detailing specific recommendations or conclusions, such as deeming his actions 'disorderly Behaviour' or recommending expulsion, was issued by the committee prior to the June 2026 deadline [^]. Therefore, as of the specified timeframe, no such report explicitly stating 'disorderly Behaviour' worthy of expulsion has been issued concerning Eric Swalwell's conduct.
5. Which Democrats Publicly Defined Expulsion Thresholds For Party Members?
| Calls for Swalwell's Resignation/Expulsion | From a growing number of House members and some lawmakers [^] |
|---|---|
| Democrats Prepared to Abandon Member | Some Democrats preparing to abandon Rep. Cherfilus-McCormick [^] |
| Rep. Scholten's Statement | Issued a 'Statement on Votes to Expel Swalwell, Gonzales' [^] |
Few Democrats have publicly defined clear expulsion thresholds for party members. While some Democratic members have publicly called for Representative Eric Swalwell to resign or be expelled, the available research does not extensively detail specific Democrats who have publicly defined a clear threshold for such action. These thresholds might include a specific Ethics Committee finding or a criminal indictment, for voting to expel a member of their own party [^]. Although various reports mention a "growing number of House members" and "some lawmakers" advocating for Swalwell's removal, these sources typically do not provide names alongside explicitly defined conditions for expulsion [^].
No identified Democrats from specific groups defined clear expulsion criteria. The research does not identify specific Democratic members who are part of the Problem Solvers Caucus or represent districts won by Donald Trump and have also publicly articulated clear expulsion thresholds for fellow party members. For example, Representative Hillary Scholten (D-MI) issued a "Statement on Votes to Expel Swalwell, Gonzales," but the available details from this source do not specify the explicit criteria she or other identified Democrats have established for such a vote [^]. Furthermore, the precise conditions or criteria for taking action against party members, such as those mentioned regarding Rep. Cherfilus-McCormick, are not articulated by named Democratic individuals in the provided research [^].
6. What is House Freedom Caucus's Stance on Swalwell Expulsion Vote?
| HFC Leadership Resolution Stance | Not explicitly detailed in research [^]. |
|---|---|
| HFC Designated Expulsion Trigger | None identified from leadership statements [^]. |
| Swalwell's Expulsion Outcome | Resigned, avoiding an expulsion vote [^]. |
No explicit position from House Freedom Caucus leadership was found. The provided research does not explicitly detail the position of the House Freedom Caucus leadership regarding the use of a privileged resolution to force an expulsion vote to the floor concerning Eric Swalwell. Furthermore, the sources do not indicate any specific event or finding from their internal communications or public statements that would serve as a trigger for such an action by the House Freedom Caucus leadership.
Broader conservative calls for Swalwell's expulsion were noted. While the research did not identify specific statements from House Freedom Caucus leadership on the procedural mechanism of a privileged resolution, several sources discuss growing calls for expulsion votes against Eric Swalwell from "conservative lawmakers" [^]. These calls were generally attributed to ongoing scandal and new allegations against Swalwell [^]. However, none of these sources specifically named the House Freedom Caucus leadership as having an explicit stance on this particular procedural approach.
Swalwell resigned, ultimately avoiding a formal expulsion vote. It is important to note that Eric Swalwell ultimately resigned from his position, which averted the need for a formal expulsion vote [^].
7. What Precedent Did George Santos's Expulsion Set for the House?
| Precedent Broken | Nearly 200-year precedent for expulsion without criminal conviction [^] |
|---|---|
| Institutional Concern | Lowered bar potentially leading to a "free-for-all" of expulsions [^] |
| Potential Abuse | Process could be "weaponized for political gain" resulting in "tit-for-tat expulsions" [^] |
Institutionalist Republicans expressed significant concerns that George Santos's expulsion set a dangerous precedent. His removal, notably without a prior criminal conviction, caused significant apprehension among these members [^]. This decision broke a nearly 200-year precedent for expelling members who had not been criminally convicted [^]. The primary fear is that this action lowers the threshold for removal, potentially leading to an "explosion of House expulsion votes" and a "free-for-all" where expulsions are pursued for political reasons rather than solely for severe criminal misconduct [^].
A lower expulsion threshold risks political weaponization and destabilization of the House. Institutionalists believe a higher bar is essential to prevent "weaponizing the process for political gain" and to avoid "future tit-for-tat expulsions" between parties [^]. The prospect of an expulsion vote for Eric Swalwell, prior to his resignation, intensified these worries, signaling a continuation of expulsions based on ethical controversies rather than criminal convictions [^]. Centrist Republicans and Democrats alike have expressed nervousness about the dangerous precedent of removing a member without a criminal conviction, fearing the destabilizing effect on the House if such actions become commonplace [^].
8. What is the status of the Eric Swalwell DOJ investigation?
| Investigation Focus | Sexual assault allegations concerning Eric Swalwell [^] |
|---|---|
| Primary Investigating Body | Department of Justice (DOJ) [^] |
| Congressional Resignation Date | April 13, 2026 [^] |
The Department of Justice initiated an investigation into Eric Swalwell in mid-April 2026. The Department of Justice (DOJ) commenced this investigation into Eric Swalwell around mid-April 2026 [^]. This federal scrutiny primarily concerns sexual assault allegations, which multiple sources confirm [^]. Shortly after these reports emerged, Eric Swalwell resigned from Congress on April 13, 2026 [^].
Despite his resignation, the DOJ investigation into Eric Swalwell remains ongoing. While Swalwell's resignation removes the immediate context for a House expulsion vote, the Department of Justice investigation is described as continuing [^]. The available information does not specify an expected timeline for the investigation's conclusion or any potential federal indictment. Beyond the DOJ's focus, Swalwell is reportedly facing "all the investigations," indicating broader scrutiny [^].
9. What Could Change the Odds
Key Catalysts
Catalyst analysis unavailable.
Key Dates & Catalysts
- Expiration: June 01, 2026
- Closes: June 01, 2026
10. Decision-Flipping Events
- Trigger: Catalyst analysis unavailable.
12. Historical Resolutions
No historical resolution data available for this series.
Get Real-Time Research Updates
Sign up for early access to live reports, historical data, and AI-powered market insights delivered to your inbox.
