Which House members have sponsored or cosponsored H.Res.537, H.Res.353 and H.Res.939, and what are their stated grounds for impeachment?
Executive summary
Three separate House resolutions—H.Res.537, H.Res.353 and H.Res.939—have been filed in the 119th Congress to impeach President Donald J. Trump; each is formally captioned as impeaching the president “for high crimes and misdemeanors” (Congress.gov; GovTrack; LegiScan) [1] [2] [3]. The public record supplied by congressional and legislative trackers identifies the sponsors and limited cosponsor counts but, beyond the boilerplate impeachment language, the sources provide only selective substantive framing—most notably that H.Res.537 was presented in the context of Jan. 6 and alleged incitement by members of the Democratic conference [4].
1. Who sponsored each resolution and the cosponsor counts
H.Res.537 is officially listed with Representative Al Green (D–TX-9) as sponsor and shows a cosponsor statistic described as “1 current - includes 0 original” on Congress.gov’s cosponsors page for the 119th Congress [1], while GovTrack’s bill page also tracks the resolution [2]. H.Res.353 is listed with Representative Shri Thanedar (D–MI-13) as sponsor and the Congress.gov cosponsors summary notes a shifting roster: “1 current - includes 3 original, excludes 4 withdrawn,” indicating multiple members at various times had signed on and some withdrew [5]. H.Res.939 is likewise recorded with Rep. Al Green as sponsor and a cosponsor summary showing “1 current - includes 0 original” on the Library of Congress cosponsors page [6]. These official legislative-tracking entries are the primary public record for sponsorship and cosponsor tallies [6] [1] [5].
2. What grounds the resolutions state on their face
Each resolution is formally titled as impeaching “for high crimes and misdemeanors,” language that appears on the public bill texts and listings for H.Res.537, H.Res.353 and H.Res.939 across GovTrack, LegiScan and Congress.gov [7] [3] [2]. That phrase is the standard constitutional formulation; the sources available to this report show that wording but do not, in the excerpts provided, furnish extended articles of impeachment or granular allegation lists for H.Res.353 and H.Res.939 beyond that statutory phrase [7] [3] [2].
3. Context and additional stated grounds reported by sponsors
At least one sponsor and allied Democrats have publicly connected H.Res.537 to the January 6, 2021 events and to allegations the president “incited an insurrection,” with Rep. Betty McCollum’s statement noting that Democrats drafted an impeachment resolution reflecting “what Members of Congress and our entire nation witnessed on January 6, 2021” and that “almost every House Democrat was a cosponsor” when that resolution was then brought to the floor—an account offered by McCollum’s office and posted on her website [4]. That framing links H.Res.537 explicitly to the second impeachment in 2021; the official text and tracking entries nevertheless retain the generic “high crimes and misdemeanors” label [4] [7].
4. What the public record does not (yet) show and alternative viewpoints
The legislative-tracking sources summarize sponsors and show cosponsor counts (including withdrawn supporters in the case of H.Res.353) but do not, in the material provided, append full, itemized articles of impeachment or extended sponsor statements for each resolution beyond the title language [6] [1] [5] [8]. Reformulated claims about specific criminal statutes violated or a detailed evidentiary narrative appear in some public statements by Democrats about earlier impeachment efforts (notably on Jan. 6) but are not reproduced in the bill listings cited here, and Republican critics who dispute impeachment rationales are not sampled in the supplied sources [4]. Therefore the most defensible reporting line from these sources is that sponsors are Democratic Representatives (Al Green and Shri Thanedar) and that the resolutions are formally framed as impeachments for “high crimes and misdemeanors,” with H.Res.537 explicitly tied by Democratic statements to Jan. 6 incitement allegations [6] [1] [5] [4] [2].
5. Implications and the record of shifting cosponsorship
The snapshot of cosponsor statistics—particularly the notation that H.Res.353 “excludes 4 withdrawn” cosponsors—signals political dynamics in which members have at times added or removed their names, an indicator of internal debate or strategic calculation in the House [5]. The Congress.gov and GovTrack listings remain the authoritative places to track any later changes: they record sponsors, cosponsor counts, and, where available, the official bill text, but the supplied documents for these three resolutions do not supply the full set of charged articles or extended sponsor arguments beyond the generic constitutional phrasing [6] [1] [9] [7] [8].