How did the House committees vote and which members broke with their parties on the 2025 impeachment articles?

1. How the House voted — the headline numbers

On June 24, 2025 the House recorded a yea-and-nay vote on a motion to table H.Res.537 (the impeachment resolution introduced by Rep. Al Green). The Clerk’s roll call shows the motion to table passed with 344 yeas and 79 nays; 0 present ^[1]. That procedural victory effectively blocked immediate floor consideration of the impeachment articles Green submitted ^[3].

2. What “table” meant in practice

A successful motion to table ends debate and prevents the House from taking up the underlying privileged impeachment resolution at that moment. In this case, the 344–79 vote removed H.Res.537 from immediate consideration and meant the House declined to advance Green’s articles to the next steps described in the resolution text ^{[3] [1]}.

3. Party-line dynamics and the defections

Despite the large margin, this was not a strict party-line result. Reporting summarized that about 128 House Democrats voted with most Republicans to table the motion, joining the majority of the chamber; 79 members opposed tabling (i.e., voted to proceed) ^[2]. The public statements of some Democrats who voted to table make the split clear: for example, Rep. Jamie Raskin issued a statement after voting to table ^[4], and Rep. Betty McCollum explained she had previously voted to impeach but supported tabling because she said the vote “failed to follow that process” ^[5].

4. Competing perspectives inside the Democratic caucus

One Democratic perspective, represented by Rep. Green and those who voted against tabling, argued impeachment was a constitutional duty in response to the President’s unauthorised military actions and alleged abuses described in the resolution text ^[3]. Another faction of Democrats — roughly 128 members — argued impeachment should follow committee investigation and a more formal process, or that timing/strategy counseled against forcing a privileged impeachment vote; members such as Raskin and McCollum publicly explained their “table” votes along those lines ^{[4] [5]}.

5. How media and advocacy framed the defections

Newsweek summarized the split by listing the Democrats who voted to block new impeachment articles and quantified the defections as “nearly 130 House Democrats” joining Republicans to table the resolution, signaling intra-party disagreement over tactics even among members who have previously supported impeachment in different contexts ^[2]. Advocacy groups later pressed the Judiciary Committee and Democrats to pursue impeachment, delivering petitions and arguing for further action — indicating the vote did not end broader pressure ^[6].

6. What the resolution charged and why it mattered

Green’s resolution set out allegations including unauthorized military action, usurpation of congressional war powers, and other abuses; the text explicitly alleges that President Trump’s conduct “warrants impeachment and trial, and removal from office” and cites actions such as announced strikes on Iranian nuclear sites and refusal to seek prior congressional authorization (H.Res.537 text) ^[3]. That content explains why lawmakers and outside groups treated the vote as consequential despite being a procedural motion ^{[3] [2]}.

7. Limits of the available reporting

Available sources give the roll-call total and note the significant number of Democrats who voted to table, and they provide some named statements; detailed, fully sourced member-by-member lists of who broke with their parties are reported by outlets like Newsweek but are not exhaustively reproduced in the congressional roll-call summary included here ^{[1] [2]}. For a definitive, official per-member record of how every Representative voted, the Clerk’s roll call ^[1] is the authoritative source; media lists compile and annotate that data for readers ^[2].

8. Bottom line for readers

The House decisively blocked immediate consideration of the 2025 impeachment resolution by a 344–79 tabling vote; the result revealed a notable intra-Democratic split — roughly 128 Democrats joined Republicans to table — and produced public explanations from lawmakers on both sides about constitutional duty versus process and timing ^{[1] [2] [4]}. Available sources do not mention follow-up votes or Judiciary Committee advancement resulting directly from this June 24 tabling motion (not found in current reporting).