A House Democrat has walked away from the Congressional Dads Caucus as an ethics investigation closes in on the group’s founder and chairman.
Rep. Jake Auchincloss of Massachusetts has resigned from the caucus, according to his office.
His departure is the first publicly reported break inside the Democratic group since the House Ethics Committee formally disclosed its review of Rep. Jimmy Gomez of California.
A Democrat congressman has resigned from the Congressional Dads Caucus as its founder and chairman, Rep. Jimmy Gomez (D-CA), faces an ethics investigation involving allegations of sexual harassment and assault. A woman accused him of sexual assault. pic.twitter.com/jmQMSmzCOU
— DrDave Menke, PhD, MS, BA (@DrDHMenke) August 29, 2026
NOTUS reported that an Auchincloss spokesperson confirmed the resignation when asked whether the congressman would call for Gomez to surrender the chairmanship.
The spokesperson stopped short of making that demand, saying the question of leadership belongs to the caucus’s members. Auchincloss’s photograph has since disappeared from the group’s website, confirming that the departure was reflected publicly instead of staying behind closed doors.
The outlet contacted the other founding members to ask whether they would leave the group or push Gomez out. None responded at the time.
Former Rep. Jamaal Bowman, who helped launch the caucus but no longer serves in Congress, gave a direct answer when asked whether Gomez should resign his House seat: yes.
NOTUS counted roughly three dozen Democratic lawmakers in the voluntary group, most of them men. The membership includes influential figures from both the House and Senate.
That puts Auchincloss’s move in a sharper light. It is not a procedural reshuffle.
It is the first visible defection from a group whose chairman now faces questions about whether his private conduct can be squared with the public identity he built around fatherhood and family policy.
The House Committee on Ethics announced August 17 that it is reviewing whether Gomez may have engaged in sexual misconduct, including alleged inappropriate sexual contact with a House staffer.
The review specifically cites clause 18(b) of the Code of Official Conduct, which bars members from unwelcome sexual advances or conduct toward House employees.
The panel is evenly divided between Republicans and Democrats. Its public statement did not identify an accuser, describe the alleged encounter or announce any finding against Gomez.
The committee made that limit explicit: opening and disclosing a review does not itself establish that a violation occurred. It also said it would make no further public comment except as permitted by its rules.
That leaves the investigation in a consequential but unfinished stage. The allegations are serious enough for a formal, publicly disclosed review, but Gomez has not been found responsible for misconduct.
Nothing to see here just another Demoncrat resigns after allegedly sexually sexual abuse allegations surfaced! https://t.co/P0K09WWcZm
— Grouperguy1 (@Grouperguy22) August 29, 2026
The allegations escalated two days after the committee’s announcement.
CBS News reported that attorneys Lisa Banks and Sarah Nesbitt said an unidentified client had spoken with investigators about what the lawyers described as sexual harassment and assault by Gomez.
The attorneys did not identify their client or explain publicly how she knew the congressman. Their statement said the woman had been interviewed by the Ethics Committee about her experience.
The lawyers argued that Congress must respond more forcefully when women working on Capitol Hill accuse lawmakers of misconduct. They said they expected the investigation to support their client’s account.
Those are allegations from the woman’s attorneys, not findings by the committee. CBS reported that Gomez declined to address the assault accusation directly, citing respect for his family and the ongoing investigation.
The distinction matters. The public record now contains a formal ethics review and a specific accusation relayed by counsel, while the adjudicative process remains incomplete.
Gomez has denied violating the law or House rules. He says his conduct was consensual.
Roll Call reported that Gomez acknowledged making personal mistakes outside his marriage, apologized for the pain caused to his family and said he stands ready to cooperate with the Ethics Committee.
Gomez said those past actions were consensual and maintained that they did not violate federal law or congressional rules. He also said the mistakes did not diminish the harm and embarrassment caused to the people closest to him.
The congressman represents California’s 34th District and has served in the House since 2017. He is seeking another term this fall against fellow Democrat Angela Gonzales-Torres.
His defense draws a bright line between marital misconduct, which he admits, and prohibited workplace conduct, which he denies. The Ethics Committee’s task is to determine whether the evidence supports that distinction.
For now, Gomez remains in Congress and remains publicly listed as the Dads Caucus chairman.
— Import 3rd world,become 3rd world-Carney must go (@psdp608) August 29, 2026
The optics are especially brutal because Gomez built the Dads Caucus around a promise of responsibility at home and in Congress.
The Congressional Dads Caucus says it was founded in January 2023 to push for paid family leave, affordable child care and an expanded Child Tax Credit.
Its website identifies Gomez as founder and chair. It traces the group’s origin to the attention he received after carrying his infant son onto the House floor during the long 2023 speaker vote.
The group says that moment exposed a double standard: fathers who bring children to work are often praised, while mothers can be judged as less committed to their careers. Its stated goal was to turn that attention into durable support for parents.
Gomez used the attention to organize lawmakers around a broader message that fathers should do more at home and should advocate for working families in Congress.
The official membership page includes prominent Democrats from both chambers, including House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries and Sens. Adam Schiff and Ruben Gallego.
Auchincloss no longer appears on that roster. His departure puts pressure on every remaining member to decide whether the group’s mission can remain separated from the chairman’s unresolved ethics case.
A caucus created to make responsibility its calling card now has to decide what responsibility requires from its own leadership.
But the leadership picture has now started to move.
The Washington Examiner reported Thursday that Gomez has told caucus members he will not seek another term as chairman.
Rep. Johnny Olszewski’s office told the outlet that a leadership transition is expected at the group’s next meeting, which is not anticipated until after the November election. That timetable would leave Gomez in place through the final stretch of his reelection campaign.
The timing is murky. One person with direct knowledge said Gomez had discussed leaving the chairmanship months ago, after the first reports about his conduct but before the assault allegation became public.
The Examiner also reported that at least two current caucus members support Gomez stepping aside while the ethics investigation remains unresolved and unanswered.
That means Gomez is not giving up the post immediately. It also means Auchincloss did not wait for the planned transition before heading for the exit.
Gomez is also fighting to keep his House seat in California’s all-party general election. The caucus transition and the Ethics Committee review will therefore unfold against an active campaign.
One Democrat has now left the group, its founder is preparing to surrender the chairmanship, and the next formal leadership change may not come until voters have already gone to the polls.
The Ethics Committee still has to follow the evidence and give Gomez the process he is owed.
Politically, however, the damage has already moved beyond headlines. A Democrat has quit the caucus, the chairman is preparing to give up his post, and a group created to showcase responsible fatherhood is now confronting the conduct of the man who built it.
This is a Guest Post from our friends over at WLTReport. View the original article here.
What are your thoughts?
