In America: Hegseth Impeachment Vote Postponed

Andrew Harnik

Earlier this September, Representative Thomas Massie (R-KY) introduced articles of impeachment against Secretary of War Pete Hegseth. The charges against Hegseth are broad and include actions like the war in Iran, extrajudicial killings in the Caribbean, and kidnapping the President of Venezuela, Nicolás Maduro. 

“By engaging in hostilities in Iran for more than 90 days without congressional authorization, Secretary Hegseth is breaking the law and must be held accountable. Secretary Hegseth's constitutional violations extend beyond the illegal war in Iran. He is abusing the power of his office to ignore congressional war powers resolutions, to kidnap foreign leaders, and to intimidate critics of the Trump administration by retaliating against them for exercising free speech. If we are to remain true to our oath to ‘support and defend the Constitution of the United States,’ Congress must not turn a blind eye to Secretary Hegseth's unconstitutional and illegal actions.” – Rep. Thomas Massie (R-KY) in a statement to Congress

In this high-profile and deliberate move, Rep. Massie understood the impact of bringing these charges into the national spotlight before the midterm elections. By filing the impeachment articles as “privileged,” forcing the House to vote on the issue within two legislative days. GOP leadership avoided this vote by canceling the remaining congressional sessions scheduled in the House before the midterms. The Senate will continue to convene up to the Midterms. 

Speaker Mike Johnson (R-LA) chastised Massie’s actions and defended Hegseth in discussion with reporters following the news of the postponed vote. 

“It’s a publicity stunt by someone who wants attention. It will immediately be tabled, of course. ... We’ll probably do it when we come back, but it’s a stunt. Secretary Hegseth has done an extraordinary job, the Department of War. We’re in the middle of international conflicts right now, and we should not be playing games with national security.”

Indeed, another layer of this story is the personal feud between Thomas Massie and Pete Hegseth. Earlier this May, Hegseth made the unusual move to support Massie’s primary opponent, Ed Gallrein. Part of the motivation for Hegseth’s actions was due to Thomas Massie’s role as the most vocal critic within the GOP against Trump and the war in Iran. 

While campaigning for Gallrein, Hegseth accused Massie of “too much grandstanding, too few great votes, years of acting like being difficult is the same thing as being courageous; it’s not.” 

Gallrein’s campaign also received major donations from President Trump’s operations and like-minded donors, even creating an “anti-Massie” super-PAC. Overall ad spending breached $32 million, making it the most expensive House primary in history according to AdImpact. 

Massie ultimately lost in the primaries against Gallrein. 

While GOP leadership tries to extinguish the fires, some House Democrats also look to capitalize on the opportunity the recent chaos has provided. Rep. Jason Crow (D-Colo.) argued that many Republicans dislike Hegseth as Secretary of War but perhaps not enough to remove him from office. 

“You talk to Republicans here — which I do a lot, because I’m on the Armed Services and Intel committee — a vast majority of people do not like Pete Hegseth. They think he’s incompetent, at best. They think he’s a clown and a joker at worst. … And a lot of people are somewhere in between. They don’t want to vote on it.”

Intriguingly, Democratic leadership in the House seems to be largely aligned with GOP leadership in postponing any impeachment votes until after the midterms. A separate impeachment push by Rep. Al Green (D-Texas) targeted President Trump over the killing of several civilians by immigration enforcement officers. This impeachment vote came up before the recess and, like Massie’s proposal, party leadership shot it down. 

Regardless of the personal feud between Massie and Hegseth, the points raised about potential violations of human rights and war crimes have concerned some members of Democratic leadership. Rep. Jamie Raskin (D-Md.), the senior Democrat on the House Judiciary Committee, which oversees impeachment proceedings, suggested that Democrats are exploring their options.

“I think that all impeachment articles should be sent to the Judiciary Committee, and we should scrutinize them. I’m not a huge fan of pop-up impeachments, but if that’s all Speaker Johnson leaves us, then we will have to take it very seriously.” 

House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries (D-N.Y.) echoed Raskin’s statement on Democratic leadership and their ‘strategic ambiguity’ on a Hegseth impeachment vote.

“We haven’t ruled anything out when it comes to all of the tools available to us to hold people accountable, and we haven’t ruled anything in. That’s been our position. That will remain our position.” 

Overall, it appears that Democratic and GOP leadership are aligned on eliminating the “political noise” before the midterms. While Massie’s impeachment articles have not fallen on deaf ears, the response has been muted. What happens with the impeachment vote after the midterms largely hinges on which party wins a majority in the House and Senate. Even with a Democratic majority, some members of Democratic leadership may not want to pursue such an aggressive impeachment strategy. It is unclear whether any momentum behind this impeachment vote will persist through the end of this year.