House resolution would impeach Biden’s Secretary of Homeland Security Alejandro Mayorkas for failing to secure Mexican border
If this initiative succeeds, Mayorkas would be only the second impeached Cabinet official in U.S. history.
Context
Under President Joe Biden, in July the monthly level of illegal border crossings reached their highest level since May 2000, while in April deportations reached the lowest monthly level on record.
Many Republicans blame Secretary of Homeland Security Alejandro Mayorkas, who proved controversial even before taking the position. His Senate confirmation vote was 56–43, with Democrats approving him unanimously while Republicans largely opposed him 6–43. This was the third-closest vote of Biden’s Cabinet nominations, behind only Secretary of Health and Human Services Xavier Becerra and Secretary of the Interior Deb Haaland.
The word “impeachment” is most commonly associated with the presidency, as the House of Representatives has impeached two of the prior four presidents, Bill Clinton and Donald Trump. However, the House can actually impeach any “civil officer of the United States.” In American history, the power has also been used to impeach the likes of U.S. senators and Supreme Court justices.
A Cabinet official has been impeached just once: in 1876 against President Grant’s Secretary of War William W. Belknap, on charges of corruption. Though the House unanimously impeached him, the Senate later acquitted him, approving his conviction on all five charges by majority votes but shy of the two-thirds threshold required. (Although Belknap had already resigned the office anyway, so the vote was “for show” more than an actual determinant of his ability to remain in office.)
What the resolution does
A recent House resolution would impeach Mayorkas, for failure to secure the U.S.-Mexico border.
Impeachment is intended as a remedy when a government official breaks the law. The impeachment resolution claims that Mayorkas violated the Secure Fence Act of 2006, but the actual text of that law says that the Secretary of Homeland Security has the discretion to “determine” what actions should be taken to secure the border. So even if the advocates of impeachment strongly disagree with Mayorkas’s decisions in office on a public policy level, it’s unclear that he actually broke the law.
It was introduced in the House on August 10 as H.Res. 582, by Rep. Andy Biggs (R-AZ5).
What supporters say
Supporters argue that Mayorkas has not done the job that’s required right there in the name of his job: secure the homeland.
“Secretary Mayorkas is a threat to the sovereignty and security of our nation,” Rep. Biggs said in a press release. “As a result of his actions and policies, America is more in danger today than when he began serving as Secretary. He is willfully refusing to maintain operational control of the border and is encouraging aliens to enter our country illegally.”
“Secretary Mayorkas is failing to faithfully uphold his oath of office and is presiding over a reckless abandonment of border security and immigration enforcement, at the expense of the U.S. Constitution and the security of the United States,” Rep. Biggs continued.
What opponents say
Mayorkas himself explains the current 21-year high in border apprehensions as something of an accidental byproduct, a combination of his predecessors’ bad decisions and the current administration’s good ones.
“There are several reasons for the rise in migrant encounters at the Southern border,” Mayorkas said in an August speech at the U.S.-Mexico border in Brownsville, Texas. “Worsening conditions, of course, in the countries of origin, including poverty, a rise in violence, and corruption. Young boys whose lives are threatened, if they declined to join gangs. Young women who are vulnerable to rape while they walk to school.”
“Tragically, former President Trump slashed our international assistance to Guatemala, El Salvador, and Honduras,” Mayorkas continued. ”Slashed the resources that we were contributing to address the root causes of irregular migration.”
“ Another reason is the end of the cruel policies of the past administration and the restoration of the rule of laws of this country that Congress has passed, including our asylum laws that provide humanitarian relief,” Mayorkas concluded. “And thirdly, and importantly, is the resurgence of the economy in the United States, and the gleam of the American promise, once again.”
Odds of passage
The resolution has attracted 14 cosponsors, all Republicans. It awaits a potential vote in the House Judiciary Committee. Odds of passage are low in the Democratic-controlled chamber.
Even if it somehow did pass, a two-thirds Senate vote is required for actual conviction and expulsion from office.
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —
Update: We added a paragraph to the What The Bill Does section to add additional context.
This article was written by GovTrack Insider staff writer Jesse Rifkin.
Want more? Follow GovTrack by email, on Twitter, and for our “A Bill a Minute” video series — on Instagram, or on YouTube.
Like our analyses? Support our work on Patreon.
