What is H.Res.939? The 2025 Impeachment Resolution Unpacked
The U.S. doesn’t get impeachments every day—and heaven knows some Presidents deserved one more than once. Well, buckle up, because H.Res.939 (119th Congress) hit Congress in December 2025, led by Rep. Al Green (D-TX-9) against old favorite Donald John Trump. The resolution accuses Trump, yet again, of “high crimes and misdemeanors.” This time, we’re not talking hush money or international shenanigans, but the President of the United States threatening Congress members with execution and lighting up federal judges on social media.
Impeachment requests don’t come lightly. When the House files a resolution like this, folks on both sides should ask: Are we witnessing the collapse of U.S. norms, or just Trump being Trump? H.Res.939 doesn’t tiptoe around. It spells out, with receipts, why American democracy doesn’t survive if one man gets to play judge, jury, executioner, and Twitter troll for life.
On top of that, the resolution doesn’t just stop at saying Trump acted “improperly.” It accuses him, directly and repeatedly, of actions that could get someone indicted if they weren’t a President with a cult behind them. Spoiler alert: MAGA might call it “free speech,” but threatening to “hang” lawmakers as “traitors” is a little more 1790s than 2020s.
Official status? The bill is introduced and chilling in the House Judiciary Committee. As for co-sponsors: zero, but let’s not confuse courage with consensus. It’s 2025—congressional spine is a rare mineral.
Article I: Execution Threats—Trump’s Social Media Crusade Against Congress
Calling for Blood: How Trump Rewrote the President’s Job Description
The first article of impeachment dives straight into the Twilight Zone: The President of the United States, not-so-subtly, demanding the execution of six Democratic members of Congress—all of whom previously served in the U.S. military or intelligence agencies. Their crime? They posted a video, less TikTok than Civics 101, urging military and intelligence folks to uphold the Constitution and refuse illegal orders. That’s literally their job. In response, Trump called their speech “SEDITIOUS BEHAVIOR AT THE HIGHEST LEVEL,” labeled them “traitors,” and roared that these “traitors … should be ARRESTED AND PUT ON TRIAL.”
Extra points for creative punctuation: Posts also included “SEDITIOUS BEHAVIOR, punishable by DEATH!” and, in a real throwback, reposted comments like, “HANG THEM GEORGE WASHINGTON WOULD!!” Imagine if George Washington ever touched X (Twitter), let alone reposted incitement to murder.
Sure, the right might label this as “tough talk,” but the rest of us call it what it is: the type of extra-judicial, banana-republic stuff you’re warned about in history class. The U.S. doesn’t run on death threats and assassination wishlists. When your President is egging on his angry mob, targeting public officials, history tells us that violence—actual, physical violence—follows.
According to Article I, this isn’t just ‘bad vibes’ online. It’s “a reckless and flagrant abuse of Presidential power that promotes extra-judicial punishment and the assassination of Members of Congress.” To the House, that means “impeachable.” To any decent democracy, it should mean “get this person out of office before they start building guillotines.”
Image: Depiction of federal court buildings under threat. Prompt: “A symbolic digital painting showing shadowy threats looming over federal court buildings, alluding to unprecedented danger to judicial independence.”
Article II: Judge Intimidation—Trump’s Ongoing Assault on Judicial Independence
Unleashing Mob Mentality to Tilt the Scales of Justice
Article II of H.Res.939 reads like the judiciary’s worst-case scenario. Threatening to kill political enemies is bad enough; threatening the people whose literal job is to check presidential power just kicks the foundation out from under our system. Trump, in a fit of keyboard rage, has called federal judges “Radical Left Lunatic(s)” and “troublemaker(s)” who should be “IMPEACHED.” Judges were treated to social media shaming for any ruling the ex-president didn’t like—especially when that judge was appointed by Obama, apparently Trump’s favorite bogeyman next to the U.S. Constitution.
This dictator cosplay isn’t a harmless Twitter flame war. There’s a paper trail: judges report spikes in personal threats and harassment after Trump’s rants. One Chief Judge saw threats rise after presiding over a Trump-related case. Even public reporting (like the May 2, 2025, Reuters article quoting Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson) highlights how this goes beyond internet trolling—these are calculated attacks, “designed to intimidate the judiciary.”
Let’s be crystal clear: this is what ‘authoritarian creep’ looks like at home. It’s how democracies die, with applause from the peanut gallery and silence from anyone desperate to keep their job. Article II concludes that Trump “recklessly call[ed] for the impeachment and removal of judges who disagree with him,” stunningly arrogant (and, per the resolution, “contrary to his trust as President”)—because, last time we all checked, the law is supposed to apply to everyone, including would-be autocrats in ugly red hats.
The article underscores the obvious yet terrifying reality: attacks on the judiciary don’t just shake faith in our legal system—they actively put people’s lives at risk, from judges to everyday court staffers, and undermine whatever shreds of faith are left in American democracy.
Conclusion: Impeachment as a Constitutional Last Stand
Why H.Res.939 Is About More Than Just Trump
If your solution to losing politically is “execute or intimidate my enemies,” you’re not just missing the democratic plot—you’re torching it. This resolution doesn’t just list grievances; it declares that any President, especially this one, can’t be allowed “to promote the incitement of violence, engender invidious hate, undermine our democracy, and dissolve our Republic” unchallenged.
Trump’s brand of “leadership” isn’t just political; it’s existential. If the House and the Senate decide that’s just politics, America might as well run up a white flag over the Capitol and let authoritarian strongmen start writing the laws. The language is unambiguous: Trump’s conduct “warrants impeachment, trial, and removal from office.”
Yes, we’ve seen this horror show before. But if law and precedent mean anything, this resolution forces a reckoning not just for Trump, but for every enabler who thinks democracy is worth sacrificing for a cult of personality and a few more years in office.
Congress.gov gives you the full text. But, readers, you just got the real story: Read the official bill here.
FAQ: H.Res.939, Impeachment, and Why Any of This Matters
- What is H.Res.939? This is the 2025 House impeachment resolution against President Donald Trump for abusing presidential powers by threatening execution of lawmakers and intimidating federal judges.
- Who sponsored H.Res.939? Rep. Al Green (D-TX-9) introduced the resolution. No co-sponsors have joined (yet).
- What are the articles of impeachment? Article I: Trump called for execution of Democratic lawmakers. Article II: He threatened/intimidated federal judges, undermining the U.S. judiciary.
- What would happen if H.Res.939 passed? The House would send articles to the Senate for trial, where Trump could be removed from office if convicted by a supermajority.
- Why does this impeachment matter? Presidential power unchecked by law is a death-blow to democracy. This resolution is about upholding constitutional government, not partisan politics.