Is newsom under investigation by the House committee?

Checked on January 24, 2026
Disclaimer: Factually can make mistakes. Please verify important information or breaking news. Learn more.

Executive summary

House Oversight Committee Republicans, led by Chairman James Comer, have opened or expanded multiple probes that touch on California programs and officials — and have previously sent letters and launched inquiries involving Gov. Gavin Newsom — but reporting shows these are a mix of targeted examinations of specific programs (high-speed rail, federal spending) and political oversight, not a single, public criminal indictment-style investigation of Newsom himself [1] [2] [3].

1. What the committee has formally announced: program- and state-level oversight, not a single “Newsom” probe

Chairman Comer’s office has publicly announced hearings and requests focused on alleged fraud in Minnesota social services and on other matters that implicate federal funding and state programs; the committee’s press releases and schedule show hearings and document requests tied to program oversight rather than a lone, open criminal probe that names Governor Newsom as the subject [1] [4] [5].

2. Specific actions that have involved Newsom or California programs

Republican Oversight members have previously sent letters to Newsom and requested records in relation to protests, federal communications and other oversight matters, and the committee has announced an inquiry into federal funds tied to the California High-Speed Rail Authority — a probe that explicitly targets the project’s federal funding applications and representations [3] [2].

3. Headlines and partisan framing have stretched “under investigation” into multiple meanings

Some outlets and commentators have framed committee activity as an investigation into Newsom personally or into “California” broadly; Fox News and conservative commentators have suggested the Minnesota fraud probe will expand to California and named Newsom as “next” — language that mixes committee intentions, journalistic speculation and political messaging [6] [7].

4. The administration and other actors are amplifying scrutiny of California spending

The White House and Department of Justice responses, along with statements by Trump administration officials, indicate a broader directive to federal agencies to look at federal spending programs in multiple states, including California, which has been cited as a focus for audits and potential prosecutions; that position contributes to the impression of escalating scrutiny but is an executive branch posture rather than a committee’s formal criminal referral [8].

5. Independent and local outlets caution against conflating allegations, reports and formal committee action

State-based and nonpartisan outlets have flagged that linking Minnesota’s alleged fraud to California’s programs — and by extension to Newsom — is often speculative or politically motivated; commentary in CalMatters and reporting by investigative outlets note that claims tying the two cases together rely on preliminary reports, viral videos and partisan narratives rather than on a disclosed, conclusive committee finding that Newsom committed wrongdoing [9] [7].

6. Bottom line: active oversight and inquiries that touch Newsom, but not a single, public criminal investigation naming him

The record shows Republicans on the House Oversight Committee have opened multiple lines of inquiry that involve California programs and have at times directly requested information from Governor Newsom, yet the evidence in available reporting supports describing the situation as oversight investigations and requests — including probes into the high‑speed rail project and letters to Newsom — rather than a single, formal criminal investigation by the committee explicitly treating Newsom as the criminal target [3] [2] [1]. Reporting notes political motivations and media amplification on both sides, and major outlets and official committee releases should be read together to distinguish program-focused oversight from claims that Newsom himself is formally “under investigation” in a criminal sense [6] [9].

Want to dive deeper?
What specific records has the House Oversight Committee requested from Governor Gavin Newsom and the California High‑Speed Rail Authority?
How have Republicans and Democrats on the Oversight Committee described their separate investigations into state and federal spending in California?
What evidence links the Minnesota fraud allegations to specific programs in California, and how have independent audits evaluated those claims?