What were the exact articles of impeachment in Trump’s third impeachment and who sponsored them?
Executive summary
Representative Shri Thanedar introduced seven articles of impeachment against President Trump in mid‑May 2025; the resolution text and summaries list allegations including obstruction of justice, bribery/corruption, abuse of trade and war powers, violations of First Amendment rights, creation of an unlawful office, usurpation of appropriations, and “tyranny” [1] [2]. Multiple other House Democrats — notably Rep. Al Green — also signaled or filed separate impeachment measures in 2025, but available sources document Thanedar’s seven‑article package as the clearest formal set of articles introduced in that period [2] [3].
1. What the official filings say: Thanedar’s seven articles
Congressional summary reporting and contemporaneous coverage indicate Rep. Shri Thanedar filed a seven‑count resolution in May 2025 outlining alleged impeachable conduct: obstruction of justice/violation of due process and failure to faithfully execute the law; usurpation of Congress’s appropriations power; abuse of trade powers and international aggression; violation of First Amendment rights; creation of an unlawful office; bribery and corruption; and tyranny. That seven‑article outline is what news summaries and Congress.gov entries attribute to Thanedar’s effort [1] [2].
2. Which members sponsored or filed articles
Primary sponsorship is reported as Rep. Shri Thanedar for the seven‑article package introduced in mid‑May 2025; separate, earlier and later initiatives came from Rep. Al Green, who repeatedly said he was “working on” or would file articles [2] [3]. News coverage and nonprofit trackers updated with Thanedar’s filing as the central multi‑article submission in spring 2025; other activists and groups maintained parallel campaigns but those are distinct from the formal House resolution recorded for Thanedar [2] [4].
3. How reporters and trackers framed the allegations
Media summaries and watchdog groups framed Thanedar’s articles as wide‑ranging, moving beyond the Ukraine and Jan. 6 allegations that produced Trump’s prior impeachments to encompass tariffs, unilateral use of force, alleged interference with congressional powers, and alleged corruption or bribery. Outlets described the package as alleging both constitutional abuses (War Powers/Appropriations) and statutory or ethical violations (bribery/corruption, obstruction), emphasizing the breadth of the charges [1] [5].
4. Political context and likelihood of movement
Multiple analysts and campus news columns noted the political reality: Republicans controlled both chambers in early‑to‑mid 2025, making a successful House referral and any Senate conviction unlikely; scholars pointed out that even if articles are introduced, they are “unlikely to move forward” under GOP control [6]. Publications also stressed that Democrats could prioritize accountability even knowing a Senate conviction would be improbable — a strategic as well as constitutional calculation [5] [6].
5. Competing initiatives and advocacy groups
Beyond Thanedar and Green, advocacy campaigns such as Free Speech For People and Impeach Trump Again documented numerous grounds for impeachment and urged House action; those groups updated public lists of “grounds” that activists say could serve as articles, and they celebrated congressional moves like Thanedar’s as validation [4] [7]. These organizations press for a broader set of allegations than what any single House sponsor may formally file [4] [7].
6. What the primary sources do and do not show
Congress.gov and news summaries provide text and synopses of Thanedar’s seven‑article package and report Al Green’s separate moves; they do not, in the provided reporting, show a completed House vote or a Senate trial stemming from the 2025 filings. Available sources do not mention a House floor conviction, a Senate trial outcome, or detailed evidentiary records tied to each article in the public summaries we have [1] [2].
7. Why the differences in coverage matter
Reporting varies between legal summaries (Congress.gov listing of H.Res.353/537 materials), activist updates, and political analysis pieces that highlight strategy and feasibility. That divergence can make a filed set of articles seem more consequential in activist communications than in a Congress controlled by the president’s party; readers should weigh the existence of formal text (Thanedar’s seven articles) against the practical prospects documented by analysts and scholars [1] [6].
Limitations: this account relies only on the provided sources, which document Thanedar’s seven‑article submission and public statements by Al Green and advocacy groups but do not include final House action, House vote totals, or any Senate proceedings arising from the 2025 filings [1] [2] [3].