In a bold and unusual move, Congressman Al Green has once more called for the impeachment of President Donald Trump, leaving Democrats grappling with a potential political quagmire just as the fall midterm elections ramp up.
On Monday, Green put forth a resolution charging Trump with ‘high crimes and misdemeanors,’ focusing specifically on the contentious immigration-enforcement policies of his administration.
This initiative stands apart from any larger Democratic-led impeachment efforts, accentuating the friction between Green’s assertive stance and the party’s leadership, which insists that any impeachment proceedings should be rooted in thorough investigations.
Such tensions have long simmered. During Trump’s initial term, prominent House Democrats, including Nancy Pelosi and Steny Hoyer, pushed back against Green’s impeachment drives, advocating for more patient, investigative diligence.
A similar scenario unfolded during Trump’s subsequent term. In February 2025, Pete Aguilar, a then-leader within the House Democratic caucus, reaffirmed that Democrats were not prioritizing impeachment at that time.
Later that year, Hakeem Jeffries and other Democratic leaders again declined to fully embrace Green’s effort. Jeffries said impeachment ‘requires a comprehensive investigative process’ and that the necessary investigative work had not been done.
Josh Gottheimer has also been skeptical of another Trump impeachment, saying, ‘We saw that movie twice and it didn’t work,’ while urging Democrats to focus on congressional oversight.
Representative Al Green filed an articles of impeachment against President Trump on Monday. He alleges that ICE and CBP have been used in ways that interfere with freedom of speech
Green accused the administration of permitting unlawful searches, seizures and arrests, as well as excessive uses of force by immigration-enforcement officers
Among the most prominent cases cited by Green of deaths by ICE agents include Renée Good and Alex Pretti, both 37-year-old US citizens who were killed during encounters involving federal immigration-enforcement personnel in Minneapolis
Jamie Raskin, meanwhile, has remained open to impeachment but wants a strong factual and legal case built first.
The divide is about strategy. Green pushes for immediate action whenever he believes Trump has crossed a constitutional line, while Democratic leadership favors investigations, evidence-gathering and a coordinated approach.
That could matter enormously if Democrats retake the House. They are preparing to launch broad investigations into Trump and his administration, with impeachment becoming an option if those investigations produce a case for it.
Green, however, is once again moving ahead on his own.
Monday’s articles argue that Trump’s conduct violates his constitutional oath, and accuse his administration of allowing ICE and CBP to trample Americans’ constitutional rights.
Green alleges violations of the First and Fourth Amendments: interference with speech and protest, unlawful searches, seizures and arrests, excessive force, and violations of due process and equal protection. He describes ICE and CBP as ‘quota-driven, unaccountable paramilitary police forces.’
The Texas Democrat’s argument is that Washington’s authority to enforce immigration law does not give it license to ignore constitutional protections. He claims enforcement has involved racially targeted arrests, unjustified detention and unjustified uses of deadly force — not disputed policy, he says, but potential constitutional violations for which the president must be held responsible.
Among the cases he cites are the deaths of Renée Good and Alex Pretti, both 37-year-old US citizens killed during encounters with federal immigration-enforcement personnel in Minneapolis, which Green holds up as examples of excessive or unconstitutional force. He also points to the fatal shooting by an ICE agent of illegal migrant Lorenzo Salgado Araujo in Houston.
Because Trump controls the executive branch and sets its immigration-enforcement policies, Green argues, the president cannot distance himself from what federal agencies do under his authority. Allowing or directing unconstitutional conduct, in Green’s view, is fundamentally incompatible with the presidential oath and potentially rises to the level of an impeachable offense.
Monday’s filing is far from Green’s first attempt. It is at least his third of Trump’s second term, part of a years-long campaign to remove him from office.
In May 2025, Green introduced H.Res. 415, titled ‘Impeaching Donald J. Trump, President of the United States, of high crimes and misdemeanors.’ It was referred to the House Judiciary Committee and went no further.
Weeks later, on June 24, he was back with H.Res. 537, which contained actual Articles of Impeachment accusing Trump of abusing the powers of his presidency. The House voted to table it the same day.
On December 11, Green introduced H.Res. 939, branding Trump an ‘abuser of Presidential power’ and arguing that leaving him in office would allow him to keep undermining democracy and inciting violence.
Green has said he helped lay the groundwork for Trump’s first impeachment in 2019. Trump was impeached twice by the House during his first presidency, though neither impeachment resulted in his removal by the Senate.
Now Green is back again – putting Democrats in the familiar position of deciding whether to embrace his latest effort or keep their powder dry for a broader, leadership-driven strategy against Trump.