Keep Factually independent
Whether you agree or disagree with our analysis, these conversations matter for democracy. We don't take money from political groups - even a $5 donation helps us keep it that way.
Which lawmakers are leading the Trump impeachment effort in 2025?
Executive Summary
The principal, documented leaders of impeachment efforts against President Donald Trump in 2025 are Democratic Representatives Shri Thanedar and Al Green, with Thanedar sponsoring H.Res.353 in April and Green leading a separate June impeachment push that the House overwhelmingly tabled; other Democrats such as Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, Jamie Raskin, and Ro Khanna appear in reporting as potential or rhetorical leaders of scrutiny and oversight rather than as primary sponsors. The concrete legislative actions and outcomes in 2025 show limited caucus support for full impeachment proceedings: Thanedar’s resolution remained introduced and referred to committee with constrained cosponsorship, and Green’s measure was defeated by a 344–79 tabling vote, indicating the effort is fragmented between formal articles and broader oversight initiatives [1] [2] [3] [4].
1. What the record actually claims — parsing the competing assertions
The documents assert three central claims: one, that Rep. Shri Thanedar introduced a formal impeachment resolution (H.Res.353) in April 2025 outlining seven articles; two, that Rep. Al Green later led an impeachment motion tied to an unauthorized strike on Iran, which the House largely rejected; and three, that prominent Democrats such as Jamie Raskin, Ro Khanna, and Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez figure in media as leaders of possible investigations or advocates for impeachment in varying degrees. The legislative record supports Thanedar’s sponsorship and the referral to Judiciary Committee but shows minimal cosponsorship and a withdrawn original cosponsor, Jerrold Nadler, signaling internal resistance. The House vote tabling Green’s impeachment attempt is concrete evidence of low institutional appetite for moving forward with impeachment in 2025 [1] [2] [4].
2. Shri Thanedar’s H.Res.353 — a formal but solitary opening salvo
Thanedar’s April 28, 2025 filing of H.Res.353 places a formal set of seven articles in the Congressional record alleging obstruction, abuse of power, and usurpation of appropriations and trade powers. The resolution’s referral to the House Judiciary Committee is procedurally normal, but its practical momentum is weak: the bill listing shows only one cosponsor at a point and notes that a once-listed cosponsor, Jerrold Nadler, withdrew his name, which diminishes the appearance of organized caucus backing. Thanedar publicly framed the move as defending constitutional norms rather than partisanship, but the subsequent lack of committee action or floor scheduling through the summer points to an introduced resolution with uncertain prospects rather than an active impeachment drive backed by Democratic leadership [1] [2] [5].
3. Al Green’s June attempt — a significant test and decisive rebuke
In June 2025 Representative Al Green led a separate impeachment motion tied to the President’s military action against Iran, which served as the most consequential floor test of impeachment appetite that year. The House overwhelmingly voted 344–79 to table the measure, with most Democrats joining Republicans to kill the motion, underscoring broad institutional reluctance to pursue impeachment in 2025. This vote demonstrates the political reality that while individual members will file or press impeachment efforts, the Democratic caucus and House as a whole were unwilling to advance those measures, preferring oversight and other tools rather than initiating a politically and procedurally fraught impeachment process at that time [3] [4].
4. Other Democrats and the oversight-versus-impeachment debate
Reporting around late 2025 frames figures like Jamie Raskin and Ro Khanna as architects of a potential oversight onslaught if Democrats controlled key committees, but it simultaneously documents skepticism within the party about impeachment’s utility given a likely Senate acquittal and political tradeoffs. Some Democrats, including Steven Horsford and others, prefer focusing on agency oversight and tangible regulatory or administrative issues, while progressives such as Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez have voiced support for impeachment in isolated instances. The interplay between formal impeachment sponsorships (Thanedar, Green) and broader oversight leadership (Raskin, Khanna) highlights a split strategy: pursue targeted legislative inquiries and subpoenas rather than full impeachment, reflecting pragmatic calculations by Democratic leadership about resources and political consequences [6] [3].
5. Bottom line — who’s leading and what that actually means
The clearest factual answer is that Rep. Shri Thanedar and Rep. Al Green were the named sponsors and public faces of impeachment actions in 2025, but their efforts did not coalesce into a sustained, caucus-backed push capable of moving articles past committee or to conviction. Other Democrats are portrayed as potential leaders of scrutiny through oversight rather than direct impeachment sponsors, revealing a strategic preference within the party. The combined record shows fragmented, low-support impeachment initiatives and a prevailing reliance on oversight tools, making Thanedar and Green the principal legislative instigators of impeachment action in 2025 even as the House majority declined to take the steps necessary to advance removal proceedings [1] [4] [6].