What were the specific allegations in each ethics complaint filed against Adam Schiff?
This fact-check may be outdated. Consider refreshing it to get the most current information.
Executive summary
Multiple distinct ethics complaints and congressional censure resolutions filed or publicized against Adam Schiff have alleged two broad categories of misconduct: that he repeatedly misled the American public and abused access to sensitive intelligence—claims advanced in several House censure resolutions—and that he engaged in improper real‑estate, residency, tax and mortgage conduct, including allegations of mortgage fraud, voter fraud and residency deception brought by private investigators and advocacy groups (and referred by some agencies) [1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] [7].
1. Congressional censure resolutions: “Misled the public” and “abuse of sensitive information”
House resolutions introduced in multiple Congresses (H.Res.630 in the 116th; H.Res.489 and H.Res.521 in the 118th) accuse Schiff of misleading the American people—specifically of manufacturing or repeating false accounts about President Trump’s call with Ukraine and of spreading false allegations that the Trump campaign colluded with Russia—and direct that the House Committee on Ethics investigate alleged lies, misrepresentations and abuse of sensitive information, with some texts even proposing fines if wrongdoing is found (H.Res.630 condemned him for a “false retelling” of the Trump–Zelensky call and H.Res.489/H.Res.521 call for censure and an ethics probe into alleged misrepresentations and abuse of sensitive material) [1] [2] [3] [8].
2. Partisan advocacy complaints: alleged rule violations over the Russia narrative
Conservative advocacy groups and think tanks have sent letters and complaints asking the Office of Congressional Ethics and the Committee on Ethics to investigate Schiff for allegedly violating House Rule XXIII and related rules by perpetuating what they call false narratives about Trump‑Russia collusion—arguments that lean heavily on the John Durham report and other conservative readings of the probe—and urging disciplinary action up to expulsion (Center for Renewing America’s letter and similar filings request investigations for allegedly abusing his position to promote uncorroborated claims) [9].
3. Private‑filed residency and mortgage complaints: mortgage fraud, voter fraud and residency deception
A separate cluster of complaints, filed by private investigators and individual complainants, alleges that Schiff misrepresented his principal residence over many years—simultaneously or sequentially listing homes in California and Maryland as primary residences—and that those representations produced improper tax, mortgage or voter benefits; these filings accuse him of mortgage fraud, voter fraud, falsified campaign filings, and related tax and insurance improprieties, with reporting citing a 20‑page complaint and specific assertions that properties were listed as primary residence in overlapping periods (reports and filings by Christine Bish, John Stubbins and others summarize those allegations) [4] [5] [6].
4. Allegations about leaking or mishandling sensitive intelligence
Some complaints and censure texts also allege that Schiff improperly used or disclosed sensitive or classified information while serving on the House Intelligence Committee—accusations that range from “abuse of sensitive information” in censure resolutions to whistleblower claims that he orchestrated leaks to promote the collusion narrative—placing potential classified‑information concerns at the center of several formal and informal referrals (these claims appear in the censure language and in reporting summarizing whistleblower referrals) [2] [3] [7].
5. Responses, context and status: competing narratives and limited public record
Schiff’s office has pushed back on the financial‑residency allegations, asserting he accurately represented his occupancy to lenders and disclosed a second home (noting the factual dispute over what constitutes “principal residence”), and Democrats have framed many complaints as partisan attacks tied to broader political disputes over the Russia investigation and impeachment era testimony (Schiff’s statements defending his lender disclosures and Democratic rebuttals appear in coverage and his public communications) [7] [10] [11]. The public record shows multiple filings, letters and House resolutions requesting investigations, and at least one referral to the Justice Department or other agencies has been reported, but full texts of some private complaints, the committees’ internal determinations, and any concluded disciplinary findings are not available in the cited sources, so the precise evidentiary bases and procedural outcomes remain incompletely documented here [5] [7].