House Rejects Al Green Impeachment Resolution, Tables Measure 237 to 140

The House of Representatives on December 11 voted to table H.Res. 939, the privileged impeachment resolution filed by Representative Al Green of Texas, ending a push to force floor consideration of articles of impeachment against former President Donald J. Trump. The motion to table passed 237 to 140, and 47 members voted present. Representative Green issued a statement dated December 11 summarizing the action and his reaction, though the text provided to reporters was incomplete.

Under House rules, a privileged resolution compels consideration on the floor within two legislative days, but it does not guarantee an up or down vote on the underlying charges. In practice the first response when such a resolution is called up is for the majority to offer a motion to table or to move referral to committee. The tabling vote is typically the initial parliamentary move and it generally succeeds. That standard pattern played out on Thursday, closing Green's procedural path to immediate debate.

The numerical breakdown of the vote reflected a fractious Democratic response. Multiple reports indicated that 47 Democrats cast present votes and that 23 Democrats voted to table the measure, contributing to a majority that defeated Green's effort. Fox News identified a cluster of Democrats who voted to table, including Representatives Tom Suozzi of New York, Josh Riley of New York, Jared Golden of Maine, Jimmy Panetta of California, Chrissy Houlahan of Pennsylvania, Maggie Goodlander of New Hampshire, Sharice Davids of Kansas, Don Davis of North Carolina, and Shomari Figures of Alabama. Coverage characterized the Republican motion to table as easily succeeding.

Green has repeatedly used privileged resolutions to force impeachment-related votes. His office and contemporaneous reporting note prior instances in December 2017 and January 2018, when he filed H. Res. 646 and H. Res. 705 and compelled votes that were then tabled by large margins. Those earlier tablings were recorded at 364 to 58 and 355 to 66 respectively, with majorities of House Democrats joining Republicans to defeat the motions. The recurrence of the tactic underscores both its procedural utility and its political limitations.

Policy and institutional implications from this episode are multifold. The tabling preserves the majority leadership's control over the House floor calendar and avoids committing the chamber to extended impeachment deliberations that leadership has often viewed as divisive. It also exposes fault lines within the majority party, where a significant number of members chose to register neutral present votes rather than take a clear position for or against immediate consideration. For members, such votes can reflect constituent pressure, electoral calculations, or strategic deference to leadership.

The vote leaves the substantive question of impeachment unaddressed on the floor for now. Green's persistent use of privileged procedures keeps the issue in public view and maintains pressure on party leaders, while demonstrating the procedural barriers to converting that pressure into formal House action. For civic observers and voters the episode is a reminder that procedural tools shape political outcomes as much as the underlying evidence or allegations, and that internal party dynamics often determine whether an issue receives full congressional adjudication. Reporters and analysts seeking precinct level detail should consult the official roll call for confirmation of individual votes.