Similarities arise as Justice Department subpoenas Gallego PAC over spending that echoes Peltola complaint

By SUZANNE DOWNING

Oct. 4, 2026 – A federal criminal investigation into Arizona Sen. Ruben Gallego’s political spending is drawing attention to a question already raised in Alaska about Mary Peltola: Were donor dollars paying for political work, or expenses that belonged on a personal credit card?

The Justice Department issued a grand jury subpoena to Gallego’s leadership PAC, Juntos PAC, on Aug. 21, according to a subpoena obtained by Politico Playbook.

The development has parallels with allegations against Peltola over travel, hotels, and meals paid through her former House campaign committee.

The cases stand at different stages. Gallego’s PAC received a subpoena tied to an ongoing criminal investigation. Peltola faces a Republican-filed Federal Election Commission complaint. No DOJ investigation into her disputed spending has been publicly reported.

According to Politico, prosecutors sought records concerning activities around Sept. 9, 2025, along with materials Gallego submitted to the Senate Ethics Committee, which dismissed a related complaint in June. The subpoena came from the US Attorney’s Office for the Central District of California.

That September date corresponds to more than 20 reported PAC disbursements associated with a Disneyland trip, including two hotel charges at Disney’s Grand Californian totaling just over $1,020.

Politico’s broader reporting described family travel, resort stays, Super Bowl tickets, and more than $18,000 in child-care reimbursements. Gallego’s office has defended the Disneyland visit as a fundraising retreat.

His spokesman, Jacques Petit, told Politico the PAC complied with the subpoena because it had “nothing to hide.”

In Alaska, the spending questions concern Mary Peltola for Alaska, her former principal House campaign committee.

After losing her seat in November 2024, Peltola filed paperwork for another House candidacy. She was an active candidate, as far as the Federal Elections Commission was concerned. She ultimately announced a Senate bid in January 2026 and established a separate committee, Alaskans for Mary.

A March 26 NOTUS analysis reported nearly $200,000 in House committee spending after January 2025, including approximately $50,000 for airfare and lodging, more than $8,000 for catering and meals, and over $1,300 for ground transportation.

That means her House campaign account continued spending after she lost office, including travel, hotels, and meals. But during October–December 2025, it reported no paid staff or advertising and no evidence of  any real spending on fundraising.

That raises the question: What campaign activity were those travel and meal expenses supporting?

NOTUS also reported no payroll or advertising expenses in the final quarter of 2025; no evidence she was campaigning while she was traveling and staying in luxury hotels.

The National Republican Senatorial Committee announced its FEC complaint against Peltola the following day. Its filing cited more than $230,000 in total committee expenses from January 2025 through February 2026.

Among the payments the complaint questioned were:

• $648 at Chicago’s Blackstone Autograph hotel, coinciding with Peltola’s University of Chicago fellowship.
• More than $900 at Boise’s Grove Hotel, which the complaint linked tentatively to a speaking appearance.
• Almost $4,000 in DoorDash and Grubhub charges, including recurring $9.99 payments.
• More than $700 at The Monocle restaurant in Washington.
• More than $1,400 at the National Democratic Club.

The NRSC complaint said  that Peltola was not conducting a genuine House campaign and that the spending therefore constituted personal use.

Peltola’s campaign declined detailed spending questions from NOTUS. In a separate response to Alaska Public Media, it rejected the complaint as a “completely false attack” by Sen. Dan Sullivan and his allies.

The resemblance between Gallego and Peltola is donor money paying for travel and meals whose political purpose critics dispute. The legal distinction is the account involved.

The FEC prohibits personal use of candidate campaign funds, evaluating whether an expense would exist irrespective of the campaign or federal officeholder duties. Since Peltola was not actively campaigning, the use of those campaign funds appear to have been questionable. Political travel and fundraising meals can qualify; ordinary personal expenses cannot.

The reported Gallego allegations also include family recreation and resort travel. The Peltola complaint focuses on hotels, speaking engagements, restaurant bills, and food delivery.