Now
72°
Tue
87°
Wed
79°
by The National News Desk
Former Rep. Eric Swalwell, D-Calif., is facing federal scrutiny after investigators seized his phone and laptop and searched his Washington home as part of an investigation involving sexual misconduct allegations that he denies.
The developments have raised questions about the scope of the investigation and what evidence federal authorities presented to obtain warrants targeting the former congressman's electronic devices and residence.
Speaking with The National News Desk, former federal prosecutor Jonathan Fahey said investigators would have needed to establish probable cause before a federal judge authorized the searches.
That standard requires investigators to establish more than a general suspicion of wrongdoing, Fahey explained. Authorities would need to show why they believe the specific phone, computer or other property being targeted contains evidence relevant to the suspected crime.
"It certainly has to be not just he's involved in some illegal conduct, but specifically on these particular devices there would be more evidence of that," Fahey said.
According to the allegations discussed during the interview, investigators are examining whether potential federal civil rights violations occurred in connection with alleged sexual misconduct.
Fahey cautioned that the precise legal theory being pursued by investigators remains unclear, but said one possibility could involve whether someone acting "under color of law" used government authority to deprive another person of constitutional rights.
"What they're looking into are federal civil rights violations here, which is sort of an interesting theory," Fahey said.
Under federal law, acting under color of law generally refers to someone using authority derived from a government position while allegedly violating another person's federally protected rights.
Fahey compared the potential theory to cases involving law enforcement officers accused of abusing their official authority, while emphasizing that his assessment was speculation based on the information publicly available.
He said investigators could also potentially examine whether there was evidence of attempts to prevent someone from speaking about alleged conduct.
"If there's evidence in there that he's telling people to keep quiet or things like that," Fahey said, investigators could explore whether other constitutional issues are implicated.
Swalwell has denied the sexual misconduct allegations. The execution of a search warrant does not establish guilt, and no criminal conviction has resulted from the investigation.
Fahey said another possibility is that evidence collected during the federal investigation could eventually be provided to state authorities if investigators determine potential state crimes are more applicable.
"They could be investigating it and ultimately turn the evidence over to state officials to use in an investigation for sexual assault, if it makes sense," he said.
"It's hard to tell where this thing's actually going," Fahey added, "but it certainly seems like there's a lot of steam behind it."
Investigators reportedly approached Swalwell at San Francisco International Airport, where they seized his phone and laptop, before searching his Washington residence the following day.
Fahey said airports can provide investigators with a predictable opportunity to execute a warrant when they know a person is likely to have electronic devices in their possession.
Authorities may also have wanted an opportunity to question Swalwell, he added.
"They probably wanted to interview him," Fahey said. "You kind of want to catch somebody off guard to get an interview."
The discussion then turned to a separate Justice Department inquiry involving the FBI's August 2022 search of President Donald Trump's Mar-a-Lago residence in Florida.
Investigators are reportedly seeking voluntary interviews with FBI officials connected to the search as authorities revisit how decisions surrounding the operation were made.
Fahey said investigators are likely attempting to reconstruct communications between the FBI and Justice Department and determine whether political considerations influenced investigative decisions.
"Was there political pressure from higher-ups at DOJ, pressuring them to do particular things that they would ordinarily not do?" Fahey said.
Investigators could also revisit information submitted to the federal court that approved the Mar-a-Lago search warrant.
"They're going to look at the affidavits that were signed to see if there was anything that was untrue within there," Fahey said.
A federal magistrate judge approved the 2022 warrant before agents searched Trump's Florida property. The investigation involved government documents retained after Trump left office.
Fahey said any current inquiry would need to distinguish between aggressive investigative decisions and potential criminal conduct.
He said one significant issue would be whether anyone knowingly provided false information in obtaining the warrant.
"If they were told to put something that was false in the warrant that misled the judge," Fahey said, that could substantially change the legal analysis.
Fahey also raised the possibility that investigators could examine whether officials conspired to violate Trump's constitutional rights, although he emphasized those theories would require evidence.
"The other thing would be, is there a conspiracy … to deprive Donald Trump of his constitutional rights," Fahey said, pointing to potential Fourth Amendment issues surrounding searches and seizures.
He also suggested investigators could examine whether actions taken during subsequent prosecutions affected Trump's political activity while he was campaigning for president.
"Are they depriving him of the right to speak?" Fahey asked. "You have a right to run for president if you meet certain qualifications. So were they trying to deprive him of the right to run for office?"
Those questions represent potential investigative theories rather than findings of wrongdoing.
Both matters highlight the high legal threshold investigators face when examining allegations involving current or former public officials. In Swalwell's case, investigators must determine whether evidence collected through the searches supports federal charges or another course of action. In the Mar-a-Lago inquiry, authorities would need evidence demonstrating misconduct beyond disagreements over investigative judgment.
For now, the seizure of Swalwell's devices and the renewed examination of the Mar-a-Lago search remain parts of ongoing investigative processes, and neither establishes criminal wrongdoing on its own.
2026 Sinclair, Inc.
Leave a Reply