California’s 2026 gubernatorial race has taken a dramatic turn as questions swirl around Democratic frontrunner Rep. Eric Swalwell’s residency, sparking heated exchanges, legal wrangling, and anxiety within the state’s political establishment. With the June primary just months away, the contest has become a high-stakes battleground not only for policy but also for personal credibility and eligibility under California law.
At the heart of the controversy is Swalwell’s claim that he has lived since 2017 in a modest, 1,350-square-foot home on Michell Court in Livermore, California—a requirement for anyone seeking the state’s highest office. State law mandates that a gubernatorial candidate must have been a California resident for five years immediately before the election. Residency, in this context, is defined as a fixed place where a person lives and intends to remain. Yet, as California Post and PEOPLE magazine have reported, neighbors on Michell Court say they have never seen or met Swalwell, despite some living there for over five years. Gita Prusty, a resident of the street, remarked, “I’ve never seen him.” Lauren Antony, who has lived two doors down from the listed address her entire life, echoed the sentiment: “Never seen” him, even after being shown his picture.
Swalwell, who is married with three children, primarily resides with his family in a $1.2 million home in Washington, D.C. His campaign claims he rents a room in the Livermore house as a place to stay when back in his district. Yet, campaign spending records obtained by California Post reveal frequent charges for luxury hotels in and around his district, including 24 hotel charges in San Francisco during 2023 and 2024 and 19 separate stays at the upscale Rosewood Sand Hill in Menlo Park. Such records have only fueled skepticism about his true residency.
These doubts have not gone unnoticed. Lee Fink, an Orange County attorney and delegate for the California Democratic Party, told California Post, “There’s red flags all over the place—that his neighbors don’t know he’s there suggests that he’s not actually there. If the campaign records show that he’s staying at a hotel nearby, it means he doesn’t have a permanent place of abode in California. That’s critical.” Fink added, “That’s a huge problem for the Democratic Party, because Swalwell is at or near the top of the polls. The last thing any Democrat wants is some right-winger like Steve Hilton or Chad Bianco to fall into the governor’s chair because the leading candidate is disqualified.”
Republican commentator Steve Hilton, currently polling in second place, has seized on the controversy, calling for Swalwell’s immediate disqualification. “Swalwell’s fake residency disqualifies him from running for CA Governor!” Hilton’s campaign tweeted on March 12. “This fraud doesn’t even live in California!” The sentiment has found traction among conservative voters, but it’s the Democratic infighting that has made headlines.
The dispute escalated sharply when billionaire environmentalist and fellow Democratic gubernatorial candidate Tom Steyer publicly questioned Swalwell’s eligibility. On March 5, Steyer filed a petition with the California Secretary of State, urging robust legal proceedings to determine if Swalwell meets the state’s residency requirements. The petition, published by Politico, included a list of addresses associated with Swalwell and personal details about his landlord. Swalwell responded with outrage, accusing Steyer of endangering his family by making his address public. “I receive hundreds of death threats every year. My children are not allowed in the yard. That’s why my address is private,” Swalwell posted on X (formerly Twitter) on March 11. “And now Tom Steyer has not only put my life at risk but also my family’s by releasing my address.”
Swalwell’s campaign consultant, Kate Maeder, criticized Steyer’s actions as “politically negligent and harmful,” adding, “California’s renters don’t need to be shamed by an out-of-touch billionaire.” Eleven Democratic members of the California Congressional Delegation signed a letter denouncing Steyer’s residency challenge, a sign of the deepening rift within the party. The campaign further emphasized Swalwell’s record as a longtime renter in his East Bay district and his ongoing security concerns, noting he received over 100 death threats last year alone.
To shore up his eligibility, Swalwell and his landlord submitted sworn declarations on March 6, affirming that he has rented and lived at the Livermore residence since 2017. The landlord stated that Swalwell keeps belongings at the home, receives mail there, and is registered to vote at the address. Swalwell’s own declaration notes that he holds a California driver’s license and has maintained an active California State Bar license since 2006—facts confirmed by state records. Still, his campaign has refused to release lease documentation or bank statements, fueling further speculation.
The legal battle is far from over. A lawsuit filed by right-wing filmmaker Joel Gilbert challenging Swalwell’s residency is scheduled for a court hearing later in March. Meanwhile, Attorney General Rob Bonta has stated that the Secretary of State is not required to verify candidate residency, leaving the matter largely in the hands of the courts and, potentially, the voters themselves.
Amid the controversy, the race for governor remains fluid. A new Emerson College Polling survey released March 11 shows Swalwell leading California’s nonpartisan gubernatorial primary with 17% support among likely voters. He is followed by Steve Hilton at 13%, with Tom Steyer and Riverside County Sheriff Chad Bianco tied at 11% each, and former U.S. Rep. Katie Porter at 8%. Notably, 25% of likely voters remain undecided, according to the poll conducted March 7-9 among 1,000 likely voters. The survey carries a credibility interval of plus or minus 3 percentage points. “Rep. Swalwell’s support increased among Democratic voters in the past month from 23% to 27%, along with Tom Steyer, whose support among this group also increased from 12% to 16%,” said Spencer Kimball, executive director of Emerson College Polling, as reported by IBTimes AU.
Other recent polls, including a UC Berkeley survey for Politico, show Hilton leading at 19%, followed by Steyer, Swalwell, and Bianco tied in the low teens. The crowded field—nine Democrats and two Republicans—means that the top two finishers, regardless of party, will advance to the November general election. This “top-two” system has heightened the stakes, with some Democrats openly worrying that if Swalwell is disqualified, the door could open for two Republicans to make the runoff.
Jessica Levinson, a professor at Loyola Law School, put the legal stakes plainly: “The state constitution requires five years of residency in California before an election, and a domicile requires a candidate to have a physical presence and intent to remain or return to the home.” As the campaign intensifies, the outcome of the court hearing and the ongoing scrutiny of Swalwell’s residency could prove decisive—not just for his candidacy, but for the balance of power in California.
With campaign trail drama, legal showdowns, and a divided electorate, California’s 2026 governor’s race is shaping up to be one for the history books. Every twist and turn is being watched closely, as the question of who truly calls California home may end up deciding who leads the Golden State next.