When Democrats made it clear they wanted to protest President Donald Trump’s joint address, House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries had some simple guidelines: No distractions, don’t become the story.
“He was adamant to keep the focus on the American people,” a person familiar with his words told NOTUS.
But two Texas Democrats, Al Green and Greg Casar, had a different idea.
Green seemed determined to get thrown out of the chamber. He stood and shouted and wagged his cane at the president, telling Trump he has “no mandate.” After the scene became such a distraction that Speaker Mike Johnson had to interject to warn Green that he would have the sergeant-at-arms remove him, Green was escorted out.
Casar, the Congressional Progressive Caucus chair, had a less disruptive but much larger protest idea: signs.
Progressive Caucus members held signs that read “Save Medicaid,” “Musk Steals” and “Protect Veterans.” And on the back of the signs, there was another message Democratic members frequently turned to: “FALSE.”
While the signs arguably did try to focus the conversation more on the American people and less on Trump, the images of rows of Democrats holding the placards became instant Resistance iconography.
Meanwhile, the top three members of House Democratic leadership — Jeffries, Minority Whip Katherine Clark and Caucus Chair Pete Aguilar — watched the speech with clear discomfort as the disruptions played out.
(Clark had also spoken to individual members about Democratic leadership’s concerns before the speech. And Jeffries wrote in a Dear Colleague letter before the address that he wanted a “strong, determined and dignified Democratic presence in the chamber.” Democrats privately referenced previous protests from Republicans, including repeated disruptions from Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene during Joe Biden’s joint addresses as a reason to respond respectfully.)
But rank-and-file Democrats were frustrated that there wasn’t a clear plan to protest Trump’s speech. Democratic leadership opted to skip the escort committee — a perfunctory duty of accompanying the president to the well of the House — but leaders were satisfied in letting the official Democratic response from Sen. Elissa Slotkin speak for itself.
They knew Slotkin was trying to center her criticism on how Trump’s policies were affecting Americans, and most Democrats seemed to believe that was the best way to go, people familiar told NOTUS.
But other Democrats, unsatisfied with the muted response, took it upon themselves to do something else. And because Democratic leaders yielded the stage, many of the most liberal Democrats — with the highest profile ideas of protest — stole the spotlight.
When Jeffries was asked about the disruptions Wednesday morning, he told reporters it was a “question that should be asked of them.”
And former Speaker Nancy Pelosi — who also looked perturbed by many of the disruptions, and whom sergeant-at-arms officers consulted with before removing Green — tried to move past the protests and refocus the conversation on what Trump did and didn’t say.
“He never went into the kitchen table issues of our country,” Pelosi told NOTUS Wednesday morning. “I’m more focused on what the president had to say than what Al Green had to do.”
Predictably, the Democrats behind the protests didn’t seem to see the problem. During a press conference on Wednesday, Casar said he believed the Progressive Caucus’ actions during the address “fit very squarely” within the guidance that Democratic leaders had offered.
“Leadership was very clear heading right into the speech that their directive, their desire, was for us to stay on message on Medicaid and the attacks on Medicaid, the attacks on our veterans, and the attacks on taxpayers that are getting their money stolen from them and being handed over to billionaires,” Casar said.
Of course, Republicans were quick to pounce on the disruptions, particularly Green’s outburst.
Rep. Eli Crane, a member of the conservative House Freedom Caucus, is leading an effort to censure Green. The Freedom Caucus went so far as to warn Democrats before the president’s address on X that there would be consequences for anyone disrupting the speech. And Crane is quickly building support for his resolution.
So is Rep. Dan Newhouse, one of two current House Republicans who previously voted to impeach Trump. Newhouse was actually the first lawmaker to offer a privileged resolution to censure Green, perhaps in an effort to bolster his Trump-loving credentials.
“There were many people interested. I was the first to approach the speaker about this issue,” Newhouse said Wednesday. “This is about the House of Representatives, Congress and respecting the rules of decorum that we have. It could be any president, any member. This is bigger than a particular relationship.”
It appears as if House GOP leadership — perhaps also looking to bolster its Trump-loving credentials — will take up one of the censure resolutions, with Johnson telling NOTUS that what Green did was “unprecedented, certainly in the modern era.”
“It wasn’t an excited utterance,” Johnson said of Green. “It was a, you know, planned, prolonged protest.”
Johnson added that members simply can’t interrupt the president. “We have to lay down the law,” he said.
—
Daniella Diaz and Reese Gorman are reporters at NOTUS.