Which Democrats and Republicans specifically voted 'nay' on the motion to table H.Res.939, and how have they explained their votes?

1. What the tally says and where to find the names

The official roll call (Roll Call 322) records 140 members voting “nay” on the motion to table H.Res.939 and provides the complete list of those individual votes on the Clerk’s site; that roll call is the authoritative source for who voted which way ^[1]. The public roll call is the primary record and should be consulted to extract the full roster of Democrats and Republicans who registered “nay,” because the vote totals alone do not identify party breakdowns in the summary snippet ^[1].

2. Why many Democrats voted “nay”: forcing the issue and framing accountability

Ranked Democratic leaders publicly framed “nay” votes as a choice to keep the impeachment resolution alive for debate and consideration, arguing that tabling would be a way to avoid accountability; Ranking Member Jamie Raskin issued a statement explaining his vote in that context, underscoring Democratic insistence on moving forward with consideration rather than burying the resolution ^[2]. That rationale — that a “nay” to tabling preserves the opportunity to litigate allegations on the floor and in committee — was the dominant public explanation from House Democrats in coverage and official statements surrounding the vote ^[2].

3. Why some Republicans registered “nay”: defending the former president and signaling opposition to process

Republican public explanations for opposing impeachment efforts or for supporting procedural maneuvers have typically emphasized skepticism about the underlying allegations and a portrayal of impeachment as politically motivated; individual GOP members’ public “my vote” pages historically frame such votes as defending policy achievements and attacking partisan motives, as Representative Claudia Tenney’s explanation of opposing Trump impeachment in earlier cycles illustrates the messaging Republican “nay” voters often use ^[3]. In short, when Republicans vote “nay” on a motion to table (or on related impeachment measures), their public statements frequently advance themes of protecting the former president, objecting to perceived politicization, and defending the GOP’s governing agenda ^[3].

4. The political subtext: messaging, procedure, and incentives

Beyond the plain roll call, the vote contained clear political incentives: Democrats who wanted a full airing framed “nay” votes as a vote for transparency and accountability, while Republicans who resisted framed their positions as defending electoral legitimacy and policy wins, an opposition that often aims at shoring up the party base rather than persuading undecided colleagues ^{[2] [3]}. Each side’s public statements serve an electoral messaging function — Democratic calls for accountability and Republican claims of partisan overreach — and those motives are visible in the official press releases and members’ vote explanations referenced above ^{[2] [3]}.

5. Limits of available reporting and where to look next

The Clerk’s roll call page is the definitive source for the list of all members who voted “nay” (Roll Call 322), but the snippets provided here do not include the exported roster of names; therefore, this account cites the Clerk for the vote count and directs readers to that roll call for the full list ^[1]. The public rationales cited here come from the Judiciary Democrats’ press release for a Democratic explanation and a Republican member’s “My Votes Explained” page as representative of GOP messaging, but a complete mapping of every individual lawmaker’s rationale requires examining each member’s statement or office release as recorded around the December 11, 2025 vote ^{[2] [3]}.