Conservatives within the House of Representatives, with a narrow Republican majority, have initiated impeachment proceedings against Homeland Security Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas, a move marking the culmination of prolonged criticism directed at the Democratic administration’s handling of immigration.
Their efforts aim to spotlight border security as a pivotal issue in the upcoming November election.
The House passed two articles of impeachment, alleging Mayorkas’ “willful and systemic refusal” to uphold immigration laws and his “breach of public trust.” This historic move makes Mayorkas the first Cabinet secretary to face impeachment in nearly 150 years.
Republicans attribute a surge in illegal entries from Mexico, which they label a “humanitarian catastrophe,” directly to his tenure.
Republican leaders took a second swing at impeaching Mayorkas after their initial attempt failed due to a miscalculation regarding the number of lawmakers present on each side.
Last week’s botched effort fell short by just one vote, but Tuesday’s rerun saw a dramatic turnaround. The return of Republican House Majority Leader Steve Scalise, who had been undergoing cancer treatment, tipped the balance in a 214-213 vote.
House Speaker Mike Johnson emphasized the gravity of impeachment, likening it to a declaration of war and stressing the House’s solemn approach to the matter. He underscored the necessity of action against Mayorkas, citing his perceived failure to fulfill the responsibilities he was confirmed to undertake by the Senate.
In response, President Biden swiftly condemned the impeachment as a “blatant act of unconstitutional partisanship,” denouncing it as a maneuver driven by petty political motives. He characterized the targeting of Mayorkas, whom he deemed an honorable public servant, as an unjustifiable move designed to serve narrow political interests.
“We will continue pursuing real solutions to the challenges Americans face, and House Republicans have to decide whether to join us to solve the problem or keep playing politics with the border,” he added.
The outcome was unprecedented as the House has only ever impeached one other cabinet official — Secretary of War William Belknap in 1876 — and that was over serious allegations of corruption rather than a straightforward policy disagreement.
Seen as the political equivalent of an indictment, the rebuke is largely symbolic, however, as Mayorkas is certain to be acquitted at his trial in the Democratic-led Senate.
The vote came amid a showdown between the House and the Senate over curbing a surge in illegal immigration, which hit a record 10,000 apprehensions a day at the US-Mexico border in December.
House Republicans have faced allegations of operating with ill intentions during the impeachment proceedings, particularly after opposing a bipartisan agreement negotiated in the Senate that aimed to implement some of the most stringent asylum and border policies in years.
Mia Ehrenberg, a spokesperson for the Department of Homeland Security (DHS), remarked that history will remember House Republicans for prioritizing political gains over addressing the significant border challenges, thereby disregarding the Constitution’s principles. Impeachment, as outlined in the Constitution, is designed to serve as a form of censure for offenses such as treason, bribery, and other serious misdemeanors.
Ken Buck, one of three Republicans who voted no in last week’s vote, called the move against Mayorkas a “stunt” while fellow rebel Mike Gallagher said it would “pry open the Pandora’s box of perpetual impeachment.”
Twenty-five legal experts called the push “utterly unjustified” in an open letter and were echoed by constitutional scholars who have spoken in Congress against Donald Trump’s impeachments, including Jonathan Turley and Alan Dershowitz.
House Democrats voted in unison against the impeachment, which was also vehemently opposed by the White House. Ehrenberg at the DHS accused Republicans of having “falsely smeared a dedicated public servant” without a “shred of evidence.” The Senate is now forced to at least open a trial, although it could vote to dismiss the
articles, dissolve the trial or refer the articles to a committee.
