What did the FBI and House Ethics Committee conclude in their reviews of allegations against Ilhan Omar?
This fact-check may be outdated. Consider refreshing it to get the most current information.
Executive summary
The Office of Congressional Ethics (OCE) reviewed allegations that Representative Ilhan Omar omitted required information from her financial disclosures and may have received an advance royalty payment, and the OCE’s board recommended dismissal of the omission allegation because there was not substantial reason to believe a violation occurred, a report the House Committee on Ethics later published after receiving the referral [1] [2]. Reporting shows claims that the FBI investigated Omar have circulated — including statements by Trump administration officials — but the material provided does not contain a public, documented FBI finding clearing or charging Omar; some outlets and fact‑checkers note the core family‑marriage fraud claim lacks credible evidence [3] [4].
1. OCE’s review and the House Ethics Committee’s handling
The Office of Congressional Ethics investigated referrals alleging Representative Omar may have omitted required financial disclosure information and may have received an advance royalty payment related to her memoir, and the OCE’s Board concluded there was not substantial reason to believe she omitted required information, recommending dismissal of that allegation [1]. The Committee on Ethics acknowledged receipt of the OCE referral on December 22, 2021 and on March 22, 2022 issued a statement noting a majority of the Committee did not vote to dismiss the matter at that time and that, pursuant to House rules, it published the OCE’s report relating to the allegations [2]. The public record provided shows the Committee published the OCE report and that the OCE recommendation was to dismiss the omission claim for lack of substantial reason to believe misconduct occurred, but the Committee’s statement also reflects procedural steps rather than a criminal determination [1] [2].
2. What the OCE did and did not find
The OCE’s published report describes its review of whether Omar received an advance royalty payment and whether she omitted reportable financial information, and the Board recommended dismissal of the omission allegation because the evidence did not meet the Board’s threshold for substantial reason to believe a violation occurred [1]. The OCE’s recommendation pertains to House disclosure rules and standards of conduct, not to criminal liability, and the report’s narrow conclusion addresses specific disclosure allegations rather than sweeping claims about immigration or family‑relationship fraud [1].
3. Claims about FBI investigations and what the record shows
Public statements from Trump administration figures revived allegations that federal investigators were probing Omar for immigration‑related fraud, and some commentators tied potential legal exposure to claims of marriage fraud; for example, Border Czar Tom Homan said the administration was investigating alleged immigration fraud and an investigator claimed “no doubt” fraud was being committed [3]. However, among the sources provided there is no contemporaneous, public FBI report or DOJ filing presented that documents an FBI conclusion either charging Omar or publicly exonerating her; the materials instead show political assertions and media coverage of calls for investigation [3] [5]. Independent fact‑checks and investigative summaries carried in the record assert the central claim that she married her brother lacks credible evidence, undercutting the factual basis for some of the immigration‑fraud allegations [4].
4. Political context, competing narratives and reporting limits
Republican officials and some advocacy groups continue to press for deeper probes and have framed the matter as potentially criminal, arguing the allegations could implicate federal marriage‑fraud and other statutes if proven true [5] [6]. Conversely, the OCE’s finding that there was not substantial reason to believe disclosure rules were violated, and fact‑checks questioning the credibility of the marriage‑to‑brother claim, push back against the most serious public allegations [1] [4]. The reporting assembled here does not include a primary, public FBI statement concluding its review of Omar, so it is not possible on this record to assert any final FBI determination; available documentation supports an administrative ethics dismissal recommendation on the disclosure question and shows contested, politically charged calls for criminal inquiry [1] [3].