House Speaker Mike Johnson issued a blistering Friday press release accusing congressional Democrats of returning to what he called their "favorite failed and pointless pastime: impeaching President Trump", this time with a constitutional twist. The Louisiana Republican's statement came two days after Newsmax reported that Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries had authorized Rep. Jamie Raskin to lead a briefing on constitutional options for removing the president from office, citing an Axios report published Wednesday.
The move marks a shift for House Democratic leadership, which had previously resisted calls from its base to pursue removal. Now, with more than 80 House members and at least two senators publicly calling for Trump's ouster, either through impeachment or by urging Vice President JD Vance and the Cabinet to invoke the 25th Amendment, the pressure has apparently become too loud to ignore.
For Johnson, the timing tells the whole story. Democrats, he argued, have "no message, no vision, and no leadership", so they're reaching for the most dramatic lever available.
Axios reported Wednesday that Jeffries, the New York Democrat who leads the House minority, greenlit a caucus briefing led by Raskin, the Maryland congressman who played a central role in Trump's second impeachment. The briefing's stated purpose: to walk members through the constitutional mechanisms available for removing a sitting president.
Those mechanisms include impeachment, which requires a simple House majority to charge and a two-thirds Senate vote to convict, and the 25th Amendment, which would require the vice president and a majority of the Cabinet to declare the president unable to discharge his duties. Neither path has any realistic chance of success with Republicans controlling the House and signaling they will block any such effort.
Democratic leadership had resisted these demands for some time. But Axios, as cited in the Newsmax report, said the base's demands intensified following Trump's recent rhetoric on Iran. Democrats are also said to be preparing further discussions and symbolic votes related to Trump's Iran policy, a strategy that looks less like governance and more like messaging for the midterms.
Johnson, who has spent recent weeks navigating his own high-stakes legislative fights, clearly sees the Democratic push as a political gift rather than a genuine constitutional threat.
The Speaker's Friday statement pulled no punches on substance. He framed the removal effort as a direct assault on the electorate, saying Democrats "are attempting to once again invalidate the votes of tens of millions of Americans" who "overwhelmingly elected" Trump.
Johnson also pointed to what he described as a glaring double standard. He noted that Democrats never raised the 25th Amendment during Joe Biden's presidency, even as questions about Biden's fitness for office became a matter of public debate.
"Not one of these Democrats breathed a word about the 25th Amendment"
That line landed where Johnson intended it to land. Whatever one thinks of the current removal push, the contrast is hard to miss. Democrats spent years deflecting concerns about Biden's capacity. Now, months into Trump's term, they're exploring the most extraordinary constitutional remedies available, not because of incapacity, but because they disagree with his foreign policy posture.
Johnson also cited what he described as historically low approval ratings for the Democratic Party, though he did not specify which polls he was referencing. The claim fits a broader Republican argument that Democrats are out of step with the public and compensating with procedural warfare rather than a competing agenda.
This is not the first time Democrats have pursued extraordinary measures against Trump. He was impeached twice during his first term, once over a phone call with Ukraine's president, once over the events of January 6, 2021. Both efforts ended in Senate acquittal. The 25th Amendment talk adds a new constitutional avenue to a familiar playbook.
What makes this round different is the scale. More than 80 House members now publicly support removal. That is a significant chunk of the Democratic caucus, and it explains why Jeffries, who had previously held the line against such measures, felt compelled to authorize the Raskin briefing.
Republicans, meanwhile, are signaling they intend to keep their focus on the legislative agenda. Johnson has been working to advance spending bills and policy priorities, including a DHS funding bill that passed the House before the Senate left for Easter recess. The contrast he wants voters to see is clear: one party legislating, the other litigating.
That framing suits Republicans heading into the midterms. Johnson said as much in his statement, predicting the next election cycle would offer voters a stark choice.
"The midterm election will be a contrast between common sense and crazy."
He accused Democrats of pursuing what he called "deranged priorities", a phrase that, whatever its rhetorical heat, reflects a genuine strategic calculation. Republicans believe voters care more about inflation, border security, and government spending than about another round of constitutional confrontation with the White House.
Even if every House Democrat voted to impeach Trump, the effort would fail in the Senate, where a two-thirds supermajority is required for conviction. The 25th Amendment route is even less plausible. It would require Vice President JD Vance, Trump's own running mate, and a majority of the Cabinet to turn against the president. No serious observer expects that to happen.
So what is the point? The most honest reading is that Democratic leadership is managing its own caucus. The base wants action. Jeffries is giving them a briefing. Raskin is giving them a constitutional seminar. The symbolic votes on Iran policy give restless members something to point to back home.
None of it changes the balance of power. But it does consume oxygen, oxygen that could go toward the kind of policy work voters say they want. Democrats have already attacked Trump's fiscal 2027 budget as unacceptable. They could build a case around kitchen-table economics. Instead, they are back in the constitutional crisis business.
Johnson, for his part, has been working to hold his own conference together on spending fights, including an earlier push to secure a government funding vote. That work is unglamorous. It doesn't generate cable-news segments. But it is the job.
Democrats are expected to continue internal discussions on removal and to schedule additional symbolic votes tied to Trump's Iran policy. Whether those efforts escalate beyond messaging remains an open question. Jeffries has not spoken publicly about the Raskin briefing, and no formal articles of impeachment have been introduced.
Republicans will keep blocking. Johnson made clear that the GOP sees this as a political winner, not a threat. And the numbers, both in Congress and, if Johnson's polling claims hold up, in public opinion, back that read.
The real question is whether Democratic voters reward their leaders for fighting or punish them for failing. Twice before, impeachment energized the Democratic base without delivering a conviction. A third attempt, or a quixotic 25th Amendment campaign, risks looking less like principle and more like reflex.
When you've lost three times at the same game, the problem isn't the rules. It's the strategy.
