Homeland Security Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas Narrowly Avoids Impeachment as House Republicans Fall Short of Votes
In a stunning turn of events, House Republicans failed to impeach Homeland Security Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas on Tuesday, falling just one vote short of their goal. The Republican Party’s plan to punish the Biden administration over its handling of the U.S-Mexico border was put on hold as a few GOP lawmakers refused to support the impeachment. This setback has forced the party to reconsider its strategy for holding the administration accountable.
The vote on the impeachment articles resulted in a tie of 215-215, leaving the outcome hanging in the balance for several minutes. Republican lawmakers, led by Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene of Georgia, surrounded Wisconsin Republican Mike Gallagher, who was one of the holdouts refusing to change his vote. With Democrats demanding closure, the vote ultimately fell short, with a final tally of 214-216.
While this may be a temporary setback, House Speaker Mike Johnson remains determined to revisit the plans for impeaching Mayorkas. However, the next steps are uncertain at this point. The Republicans needed every vote from their slim majority to approve the articles of impeachment, and they even managed to sway one Republican to change his vote so that the measure could be revisited.
Impeaching a Cabinet secretary is an extremely rare occurrence, with the last instance dating back to 1876 when Secretary of War William Belknap resigned just before facing impeachment. Mayorkas would be the first sitting secretary to be impeached in 148 years. The decision to pursue impeachment comes at a time when border security has become a prominent issue leading up to the 2024 election. Republicans, particularly former President Donald Trump, have been using it as a potent line of attack against President Joe Biden.
The surge of people arriving at the southern border has raised concerns, with many migrants fleeing countries around the world. Mayorkas refers to this as an era of global migration, as migrants seek asylum and are conditionally released into the U.S. However, cities are ill-equipped to provide housing and other assistance while they await lengthy judicial proceedings that can take years to determine their fate. Despite these challenges, House Democrats stood united against the impeachment charges, dismissing them as a sham designed to appease Trump rather than addressing legitimate concerns.
Even if Republicans manage to impeach Mayorkas, it is unlikely that he will be convicted in a Senate trial. Republican senators have shown little interest in supporting the effort, and the Senate may refer the matter to a committee for further investigation, effectively delaying any immediate action. Three Republicans, Gallagher, Rep. Ken Buck of Colorado, and Tom McClintock of California, opposed the impeachment, arguing that the charges fail to identify an impeachable crime committed by Mayorkas.
The push for Mayorkas’ impeachment gained momentum after Republican efforts to impeach President Biden over his son Hunter Biden’s business dealings hit a lull. The Committee on Homeland Security, led by Chairman Mark Green, had been investigating Mayorkas for most of the past year, focusing on the flow of deadly fentanyl into the U.S. However, it was a resolution from Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene that pushed the impeachment to the forefront. The committee swiftly held hearings before announcing the two articles of impeachment against Mayorkas.
Unlike previous impeachment proceedings, the arguments played out in an almost empty chamber without the usual fervor or solemnity. Greene blamed Mayorkas for what she called an “invasion” of migrants coming to the U.S., while other Republican representatives accused him of dereliction of duty. Democratic Leader Hakeem Jeffries criticized the vote as a stunt designed to sow chaos and confusion rather than govern.
Mayorkas, a former federal prosecutor, did not testify on his own behalf but submitted a rare letter defending his work to the panel. The vote for impeachment comes at an unusual time for Mayorkas, who has been shuttling to the Senate to negotiate a bipartisan border security package. Despite earning high marks from a group of senators involved, the legislation collapsed after facing criticism from Trump and other Republicans.
Impeachment has become increasingly used as both a constitutional check on the executive and a political weapon. House Republicans have prioritized impeachments, censures, and other rebukes of officials and lawmakers this session of Congress, setting a concerning new standard for punishing perceived transgressions. Experts argue that Mayorkas has become entangled in a policy dispute with Republicans who disapprove of the Biden administration’s approach to the border situation.
Constitutional law experts have weighed in on the matter, with Jonathan Turley stating that impeachment should not be used for being a “bad Cabinet member,” and Alan Dershowitz asserting that Mayorkas has not committed any impeachable offenses. The framers of the Constitution initially considered “maladministration” as an impeachable offense but ultimately dropped it due to concerns about giving too much power to the legislative branch and disrupting the balance of power.
Three former secretaries of the Department of Homeland Security, Michael Chertoff, Janet Napolitano, and Jeh Johnson, expressed their opposition to impeaching Mayorkas in a letter. They argued that impeaching a Cabinet official over policy disputes would jeopardize national security. Senators have shown little interest in a potential impeachment trial, with Sen. Kevin Cramer stating that the House should not pursue anything that is “dead on arrival” in the Senate.
As the dust settles from this dramatic impeachment vote, Mayorkas remains in his position for now. The Republican Party will need to reassess its strategy and determine its next steps in holding the Biden administration accountable for its handling of border security. The outcome of this battle will have significant implications for the future of immigration policy and national security.
