The House votes 211-204 to send eight impeachment articles to committee, halting an immediate vote over the Iran war and other disputed military actions.
The Republican-controlled U.S. House of Representatives blocked an effort to impeach Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth on Tuesday, November 10, 2026, voting 211-204 to refer eight articles of impeachment to the House Judiciary Committee. The procedural decision effectively halted an immediate impeachment vote over the Iran war and other military actions carried out under President Donald Trump.
The impeachment effort was introduced by Kentucky Republican Thomas Massie, a frequent critic of the administration’s military policies. Massie was the only Republican to oppose sending the resolution to committee, joining 203 Democrats who voted against the referral.
The House did not vote on whether Hegseth committed impeachable offenses. Instead, the majority chose a procedural route that allows the resolution to remain in committee without requiring lawmakers to decide the allegations themselves.
House Vote Prevents Immediate Impeachment Proceedings
The official House record identifies the measure as H. Res. 1655, a resolution accusing Hegseth of high crimes and misdemeanors. Republicans largely united behind the motion to refer it to the Judiciary Committee.
The final vote included 210 Republicans and one independent supporting the referral. Massie and 203 Democrats opposed it, while 18 lawmakers did not vote.
Those absent included 11 Democrats and seven Republicans. No Democrat who participated voted in favor of referring the resolution.
The vote took place after California Republican Darrell Issa moved to send the measure to committee. Massie had introduced the resolution as a privileged matter, a procedure that requires the House to address the proposal within a limited period.
The referral prevents the impeachment articles from advancing directly to a vote on the House floor. Although the Judiciary Committee could consider the resolution, the Republican majority has given no indication that it intends to pursue impeachment.
The decision also came during the final weeks of the current Congress. Democrats won control of Congress in the November 3 midterm elections and are preparing to assume their new majorities in January.
That change could allow the incoming House to reconsider allegations against Hegseth. However, a future impeachment effort would require new congressional action and sufficient support among lawmakers.
Massie Accuses Hegseth of Violating War Powers
Massie introduced eight articles of impeachment alleging that Hegseth exceeded his constitutional and legal authority during military operations in several countries.
A central accusation concerns the war against Iran, which began earlier this year. Massie argues that the administration continued military operations without obtaining the congressional authorization required under the Constitution and federal law.
The Kentucky congressman also accused Hegseth of violating restrictions under the War Powers Resolution. The law generally requires the withdrawal of U.S. forces from unauthorized hostilities after 60 days, with provisions for an additional withdrawal period.
Massie maintains that the continued fighting in Iran violates those requirements. The administration disputes that interpretation and argues that the president possesses constitutional authority to direct the military operations.
Other impeachment articles concern actions in Yemen, military strikes against suspected drug-trafficking vessels in the Caribbean and the operation that resulted in the capture of Venezuelan President Nicolás Maduro.
Massie alleges that some of these operations involved unlawful uses of military force. He also accuses Hegseth of failing to maintain safeguards intended to distinguish civilian targets from legitimate military objectives.
The resolution raises concerns about civilian casualties during the Iran war, including the deaths of children. Those accusations remain disputed, and the House referral did not establish whether Hegseth violated the law.
The defense secretary rejects the allegations and maintains that the operations were lawful actions carried out under presidential authority.
Senator Mark Kelly Dispute Included in Charges
One impeachment article focuses on Hegseth’s response to Democratic Senator Mark Kelly of Arizona, a former Navy pilot and astronaut.
Kelly had joined other Democratic lawmakers in reminding military personnel that they must not obey unlawful orders. The comments prompted criticism from the administration, including an investigation involving Kelly.
Massie argues that actions taken against the senator amounted to retaliation for constitutionally protected speech. The allegation raises questions about the relationship between military authority, congressional oversight and the First Amendment.
Hegseth’s supporters maintain that the defense secretary acted within his responsibilities. They reject the suggestion that his handling of military affairs or personnel matters constitutes an impeachable offense.
The dispute illustrates the broader disagreements surrounding the administration’s military decisions. Congressional critics argue that the executive branch has exceeded its authority, while the administration maintains that its actions are necessary to protect national security.
Hegseth Rejects Impeachment Allegations
Hegseth publicly defended his record during a Pentagon news conference Tuesday morning, describing Massie’s effort as a political attack rather than a legitimate constitutional proceeding.
He accused Massie of attempting to undermine the president and the military during a period of ongoing conflict. Hegseth also argued that disagreements over military policy do not automatically amount to high crimes or misdemeanors.
The defense secretary defended American military operations in Iran, Yemen and the Caribbean. He maintained that the missions had been authorized and that Congress had received required notifications.
Hegseth also rejected the argument that carrying out military operations ordered by the president should expose a defense secretary to impeachment. He said the accusations reflected political disagreements rather than established wrongdoing.
The White House issued a formal statement opposing the resolution and urging lawmakers to support the committee referral.
In its statement, the administration argued that the impeachment attempt would interfere with military operations and national security decisions. It also maintained that the president had acted within his constitutional powers.
The White House’s position does not resolve the underlying constitutional disagreements. Congress and the executive branch have long disputed the limits of presidential military authority, particularly when operations continue without a specific declaration of war.
Trump Defends Hegseth and Criticizes Massie
President Trump strongly defended Hegseth before the House vote, praising his performance and criticizing Massie’s attempt to remove him.
Trump described the defense secretary’s response to the allegations in highly favorable terms and attacked Massie as a defeated political opponent.
Vice President JD Vance also opposed the impeachment effort. He argued that Hegseth had challenged established Pentagon practices and that political disagreements over those changes did not justify impeachment.
Massie’s relationship with the administration had already deteriorated before the vote. He lost his Republican primary in May to former Navy SEAL Ed Gallrein, who received support from Trump and Hegseth.
Despite that defeat, Massie continued challenging administration policies during his remaining months in Congress. He has criticized the handling of the Iran war and supported efforts to strengthen congressional oversight.
Massie said his impeachment resolution was intended to force lawmakers to address what he considers violations of the Constitution. He also acknowledged that he had not secured a sufficient number of votes to advance the measure.
Democrats Could Revisit Impeachment in January
Several Democrats supported Massie’s impeachment effort, including California Representative Ro Khanna, who has repeatedly criticized the administration’s handling of the Iran conflict.
House Democratic leaders did not require members to support impeachment, describing the matter as an individual decision for each lawmaker.
Nevertheless, every Democrat who participated in Tuesday’s procedural vote opposed sending the resolution to committee.
House Democratic Leader Hakeem Jeffries indicated that the issue could return when Democrats take control of the chamber in January. That possibility creates uncertainty about Hegseth’s future relationship with Congress.
An impeachment inquiry or renewed resolution would allow lawmakers to examine the allegations and potentially request additional testimony or documents.
However, impeachment would not automatically remove Hegseth from office. The House must first approve articles of impeachment, after which the Senate would conduct proceedings to determine whether removal is warranted.
Under the Constitution, conviction requires a two-thirds majority of senators present. That requirement makes removal dependent on substantial support beyond a simple partisan majority.
Historically, Cabinet-level impeachment has been rare. Secretary of War William Belknap was impeached in 1876, and Homeland Security Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas was impeached in 2024. Neither was removed through a Senate conviction.
Impeachment Dispute Remains Unresolved
Tuesday’s vote gives Hegseth a significant procedural victory while allowing him to remain in office without an immediate House impeachment vote.
It does not amount to a formal finding that the allegations against him are false. The House decided where the resolution would be considered, rather than determining whether the defense secretary committed impeachable offenses.
For the administration, the result avoids another immediate confrontation with Congress over military decisions. For Massie and his supporters, it leaves unresolved questions about presidential war powers, civilian casualties and the legal limits of military operations.
The Judiciary Committee now holds the resolution, although no timetable for further consideration has been announced. With the next Congress beginning in January 2027, Democrats will have an opportunity to decide whether to renew the impeachment effort or pursue other forms of oversight.
IMAGE: Pete Hegseth speaking at an event in Washington, D.C.. Photo: Gage Skidmore / Wikimedia, taken 2015-02-28, CC BY-SA 3.0