House Democrats file impeachment articles against DHS Secretary Noem

House Democrats introduced three articles of impeachment against Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem on Wednesday, accusing her of impeding congressional oversight, violating the public trust through aggressive immigration enforcement, and engaging in self‑dealing with taxpayer funds.

Representative Robin Kelly (D‑Ill.) filed the complaint at a Capitol news conference and said she had backing from members “all across the country.” Coverage of co‑sponsors varied, with some accounts placing the number at roughly 70 and others reporting more than 50 lawmakers had signed on, underscoring differences in contemporaneous tallies. Kelly told reporters that Noem “needs to be held accountable for her actions,” and added, “Renee Nicole Good is dead because Secretary Noem allowed her DHS agents to run amok,” linking the filing to a deadly federal enforcement action in Minneapolis earlier this month.

The three counts in the articles allege obstruction of Congress by denying lawmakers access to Department of Homeland Security facilities that hold immigrants; violation of the public trust through intensified enforcement measures that the articles say produced due‑process violations and warrantless arrests; and self‑dealing, citing reporting included in the impeachment text that alleges Noem awarded roughly $200 million in public funds to a company run by the husband of DHS spokesperson Tricia McLaughlin.

Sponsors and supporters framed the filing as a response to a pattern of expanded enforcement since Noem took office in January 2025, with federal immigration officers deployed to cities including Chicago, Los Angeles and Minneapolis and drawing protests and community pushback. The impeachment motion cites the Jan. 7 shooting in Minneapolis in which 37‑year‑old Renee Nicole Good was killed by a federal immigration officer identified in coverage as Jonathan Ross, making the incident a focal point for those contending that department tactics have escalated to lethal consequence.

Democrats advancing the articles cast the matter as both legal and policy accountability. Representative Nydia Velázquez (D‑N.Y.) said the department “has been turned into a weapon of political revenge” and asserted that the department “thinks it is above the law.” They argue the charges raise institutional questions about congressional access to detention sites, the constitutional limits on interior immigration enforcement, and procurement oversight at a department that handles national security and civil liberties issues.

The Department of Homeland Security pushed back forcefully. A department spokesperson told Spectrum News, “How silly during a serious time,” accusing Representative Kelly of prioritizing “showmanship and fundraising clicks” over public safety and asserting that ICE officers are facing a “1,300% increase in assaults against them.” DHS did not offer further comment immediately to some outlets at the time of reporting.

Procedurally, the impeachment faces steep hurdles. Democrats are the minority in both chambers of Congress, and movement on formal consideration would typically require committee referrals and floor votes that the current arithmetic makes unlikely. Political analysts note the filing could nevertheless become a campaign issue ahead of midterm elections, and supporters say it is meant to put the department’s conduct on the public record.

The effort also recalls recent precedent: the House impeached a prior DHS secretary in 2024; the Senate ultimately dismissed those articles. Whether this filing alters voting patterns, energizes civic engagement in municipalities affected by enforcement actions, or reshapes oversight of DHS contracting and arrest practices will depend on how the case plays in committee, on the House floor, and at the ballot box.