DHS Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas is sworn in during the Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee hearing.Tom Williams/CQ Roll Call/ZUMA

Fight disinformation: Sign up for the free Mother Jones Daily newsletter and follow the news that matters.

On Tuesday, House Republicans fell short of getting enough votes to adopt a resolution to impeach Department of Homeland Security Alejandro Mayorkas in what would have been the first impeachment of a cabinet leader since 1876. The vote was the culmination of incessant attacks by House Republicans against the secretary, who they accused of “willful and systemic refusal to comply with the law” and “breach of public trust.” For months, Democrats and an array of legal experts have decried the proceedings as a “political stunt” with no basis on constitutional grounds.

The final vote was 214-216 with four Republican lawmakers joining Democrats in voting against the resolution, including Rep. Tom McClintock (R-Calif.), Mike Gallagher (R-Wisc.), Ken Buck (R-Colo.), and Blake Moore (R-Utah).

“They say this is about securing the border,” Rep. Jim McGovern (D-Mass.) said of his GOP counterparts on the House floor, “and their plan to secure the border is to impeach the guy responsible for securing the border and replace him with—now wait for it…they aren’t sure.” He added: “Republicans simply do not want to participate in government. They want to create chaos, they want to create confusion, and they want to create a campaign issue for Donald Trump going into the next election.”

As I’ve written about before, Republicans’ scapegoating of Mayorkas has been a long time in the making:

Almost since the moment Mayorkas, a career public servant with extensive experience as a federal prosecutor and head of the US Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS), began the job as head of DHS, Republicans have made him a target. They say that Mayorkas has willfully violated his oath of office by refusing to do his job of securing the border. Republicans claim Mayorkas has abused his office’s authority when using a discretionary parole program to allow certain groups to lawfully enter the country and has lied to Congress about having “operational control” of the border—an impossible, congressionally defined standard that requires “the prevention of all unlawful entries into the United States.” 

When asked about the process in a New York Times magazine tight-lipped interview, Mayorkas called the process “baseless” and “a political process, and I am not engaged in politics.” 

The failed effort to impeach Mayorkas represents an embarrassing blowback for House Speaker Mike Johnson—who is simultaneously handing a death sentence to the Senate bipartisan border deal negotiated with the White House with input from Mayorkas. It was also something of a test run. Conservative Republicans aspired to pursue an impeachment against President Joe Biden. “We’re here because the madcap wild goose chase to impeach Joe Biden has produced no wild geese,” Rep. Jamie Raskin (D-Md.) said on Tuesday, calling the process against Mayorkas a “worthless trinket of a consolation prize.”

Prior to the vote, some House Republicans showed trepidation in moving forward with the impeachment process. In an op-ed, Rep. Buck declared he was voting no on the impeachment. “Partisan impeachments that do not meet the constitutional standard will boomerang back and hurt Republicans in the future,” he wrote. “I can envision a future Republican administration where a Democrat-led House uses this precedent to act against a Republican Cabinet member who isn’t discharging their duties in a way that Democrats desire.” 

“I think that it lowers the grounds of impeachment,” Rep. McClintock said in an interview with CNN, adding that they “will have been complicit in redefining the fundamental definition of impeachment.” Moreover, McClintock wrote in a 10-page memo to his colleagues opposing the impeachment, “it is delusional to believe the Senate will vote to remove Mayorkas on the grounds laid out by the [Homeland Security Committee]. At best it will be a party-line vote. More likely, it will be a bi-partisan repudiation of of a misuse of power.” 

Mayorkas’ impeachment would have faced an uphill battle in the Democrat-led Senate. 

LET’S TALK ABOUT OPTIMISM FOR A CHANGE

Democracy and journalism are in crisis mode—and have been for a while. So how about doing something different?

Mother Jones did. We just merged with the Center for Investigative Reporting, bringing the radio show Reveal, the documentary film team CIR Studios, and Mother Jones together as one bigger, bolder investigative journalism nonprofit.

And this is the first time we’re asking you to support the new organization we’re building. In “Less Dreading, More Doing,” we lay it all out for you: why we merged, how we’re stronger together, why we’re optimistic about the work ahead, and why we need to raise the First $500,000 in online donations by June 22.

It won’t be easy. There are many exciting new things to share with you, but spoiler: Wiggle room in our budget is not among them. We can’t afford missing these goals. We need this to be a big one. Falling flat would be utterly devastating right now.

A First $500,000 donation of $500, $50, or $5 would mean the world to us—a signal that you believe in the power of independent investigative reporting like we do. And whether you can pitch in or not, we have a free Strengthen Journalism sticker for you so you can help us spread the word and make the most of this huge moment.

payment methods

LET’S TALK ABOUT OPTIMISM FOR A CHANGE

Democracy and journalism are in crisis mode—and have been for a while. So how about doing something different?

Mother Jones did. We just merged with the Center for Investigative Reporting, bringing the radio show Reveal, the documentary film team CIR Studios, and Mother Jones together as one bigger, bolder investigative journalism nonprofit.

And this is the first time we’re asking you to support the new organization we’re building. In “Less Dreading, More Doing,” we lay it all out for you: why we merged, how we’re stronger together, why we’re optimistic about the work ahead, and why we need to raise the First $500,000 in online donations by June 22.

It won’t be easy. There are many exciting new things to share with you, but spoiler: Wiggle room in our budget is not among them. We can’t afford missing these goals. We need this to be a big one. Falling flat would be utterly devastating right now.

A First $500,000 donation of $500, $50, or $5 would mean the world to us—a signal that you believe in the power of independent investigative reporting like we do. And whether you can pitch in or not, we have a free Strengthen Journalism sticker for you so you can help us spread the word and make the most of this huge moment.

payment methods

We Recommend

Latest

Sign up for our free newsletter

Subscribe to the Mother Jones Daily to have our top stories delivered directly to your inbox.

Get our award-winning magazine

Save big on a full year of investigations, ideas, and insights.

Subscribe

Support our journalism

Help Mother Jones' reporters dig deep with a tax-deductible donation.

Donate