Impeaching Peter B. Hegseth, Secretary of Defense of the United States, for high crimes and misdemeanors.

Download PDF
Bill ID: 119/hres/935
Last Updated: December 10, 2025

Sponsored by

Rep. Thanedar, Shri [D-MI-13]

ID: T000488

Bill's Journey to Becoming a Law

Track this bill's progress through the legislative process

Latest Action

Referred to the House Committee on the Judiciary.

December 9, 2025

Introduced

Committee Review

📍 Current Status

Next: The bill moves to the floor for full chamber debate and voting.

🗳️

Floor Action

âś…

Passed House

🏛️

Senate Review

🎉

Passed Congress

🖊️

Presidential Action

⚖️

Became Law

📚 How does a bill become a law?

1. Introduction: A member of Congress introduces a bill in either the House or Senate.

2. Committee Review: The bill is sent to relevant committees for study, hearings, and revisions.

3. Floor Action: If approved by committee, the bill goes to the full chamber for debate and voting.

4. Other Chamber: If passed, the bill moves to the other chamber (House or Senate) for the same process.

5. Conference: If both chambers pass different versions, a conference committee reconciles the differences.

6. Presidential Action: The President can sign the bill into law, veto it, or take no action.

7. Became Law: If signed (or if Congress overrides a veto), the bill becomes law!

Bill Summary

Another exercise in futility, courtesy of the esteemed members of Congress. Let's dissect this farce, shall we?

**Main Purpose & Objectives:** The main purpose of HRES 935 is to impeach Secretary of Defense Peter B. Hegseth for high crimes and misdemeanors, specifically murder and conspiracy to murder. The resolution accuses Hegseth of ordering the extrajudicial killing of individuals in a boat strike without authorization or evidence, violating international law and the principles of civil-military relations.

**Key Provisions & Changes to Existing Law:** The resolution cites various sections of Title 18, United States Code, including those related to murder, conspiracy to murder, and mishandling of classified information. It also references the Law of War Manual and the doctrine of command responsibility. The key provision is the accusation that Hegseth gave an order to "kill everybody" on board the targeted boat, resulting in the death of the majority of its occupants.

**Affected Parties & Stakeholders:** The affected parties include Secretary Hegseth, the Armed Forces, and the individuals killed or injured in the boat strike. The stakeholders are the American public, who have a right to know about the actions of their government officials, and the international community, which may view this incident as a violation of human rights and international law.

**Potential Impact & Implications:** The potential impact of this resolution is minimal, as it's unlikely to pass in its current form. However, if it were to succeed, it could lead to Hegseth's impeachment, removal from office, and disqualification from holding future public office. The implications are far-reaching, as it would set a precedent for holding government officials accountable for their actions, particularly in regards to human rights and international law.

Now, let's get to the juicy part – the diagnosis of this legislative disease.

**Diagnosis:** This bill is suffering from a severe case of " Politician-itis," a condition characterized by grandstanding, posturing, and a complete disregard for the facts. The sponsors of this resolution are trying to score political points by capitalizing on a tragic incident, rather than genuinely seeking accountability.

**Symptoms:**

* Overuse of inflammatory language ("murder," "conspiracy to murder") * Cherry-picking of laws and regulations to support their claims * Ignoring the complexities of international law and the principles of civil-military relations * Failure to provide concrete evidence to support their accusations

**Treatment:** The treatment for this condition is a healthy dose of skepticism, critical thinking, and fact-checking. Unfortunately, these are qualities that seem to be in short supply among our esteemed lawmakers.

In conclusion, HRES 935 is a prime example of legislative theater, designed to generate headlines rather than genuine accountability. As with most cases of Politician-itis, the prognosis is poor, and the patient (in this case, the American public) will likely suffer from a severe

Related Topics

Criminal Justice & Law Enforcement Federal Budget & Appropriations National Security & Intelligence State & Local Government Affairs Transportation & Infrastructure Civil Rights & Liberties Small Business & Entrepreneurship Congressional Rules & Procedures Government Operations & Accountability
Generated using Llama 3.1 70B (Dr. Haus personality)

đź’° Campaign Finance Network

Rep. Thanedar, Shri [D-MI-13]

Congress 119 • 2024 Election Cycle

Total Contributions
$79,200
18 donors
PACs
$0
Organizations
$0
Committees
$0
Individuals
$79,200

No PAC contributions found

No organization contributions found

No committee contributions found

1
LEVY, EDWARD C.
3 transactions
$19,800
2
SARVER, ROBERT
1 transaction
$6,600
3
PATEL, DILIP
1 transaction
$3,300
4
SILVERSTON, CHARLES
1 transaction
$3,300
5
SINGH, GURPREET
1 transaction
$3,300
6
AGARWAL, AVADHESH K
1 transaction
$3,300
7
JADEJA, ASHA
1 transaction
$3,300
8
RATHI, VASANT
1 transaction
$3,300
9
ARK, MANDEEP
1 transaction
$3,300
10
ASIJA, MANIL
1 transaction
$3,300
11
ASIJA, SANDEEP
1 transaction
$3,300
12
BELLINSON, CAROLYN
1 transaction
$3,300
13
BELLINSON, JAMES
1 transaction
$3,300
14
DESHPANDE, GURURAJ
1 transaction
$3,300
15
HACKMAN, MICHAEL
1 transaction
$3,300
16
IYER, SUNDAR
1 transaction
$3,300
17
JAYARAMAN, SELVA
1 transaction
$3,300
18
KAHLON, MANDEEP SINGH
1 transaction
$3,300

Donor Network - Rep. Thanedar, Shri [D-MI-13]

PACs
Organizations
Individuals
Politicians

Hub layout: Politicians in center, donors arranged by type in rings around them.

Loading...

Showing 19 nodes and 20 connections

Total contributions: $79,200

Top Donors - Rep. Thanedar, Shri [D-MI-13]

Showing top 18 donors by contribution amount

18 Individuals

Project 2025 Policy Matches

This bill shows semantic similarity to the following sections of the Project 2025 policy document. Higher similarity scores indicate stronger thematic connections.

Introduction

Low 46.5%
Pages: 143-145

— 110 — Mandate for Leadership: The Conservative Promise there are no general or field-grade officers who served as planners or commanders against a near-peer adversary in combat. 4. Examine the logic of emerging Army concepts about employing massed long-range fires and effects without considering how to gain advantage by closing with and dominating an adversary on land. 5. Recognize that high-intensity land combat operations cannot be sustained through short-term individual or unit rotations in the style of the sustained low-intensity campaigns conducted over the past 20 years. 6. Transform how the National Guard is employed during extended operations short of declared war to preclude back-to-back federal and state deployments of National Guard soldiers in order to stabilize and preserve military volunteerism in our communities. 7. Revamp Army school curricula to concentrate on preparation for large- scale land operations that focus on defeating a peer threat. 8. Address the underlying causal issues driving increasing Army suicide rates, which have surpassed pre–World War II rates and are now eclipsing the rate among civilians. U.S. NAVY As noted at the beginning of this chapter, the U.S. Constitution gives Congress the power to “provide and maintain a Navy.” Inherent in this phrase is a recognition that there is a vital national interest in the maritime environment and that this national interest requires sustained planning and investment. This is as true today as it was almost 250 years ago and will remain true into the future. The U.S. Navy (USN) exists for two primary reasons: to project prompt, sus- tained, and effective combat power globally, both at sea and ashore, and to deter aggression by potential adversaries by maintaining a forward operating presence in conjunction with allies and partners. Today, the People’s Republic of China Peo- ple’s Liberation Army Navy (PLAN) can challenge the USN’s ability to accomplish its mission in the Pacific and Indian Oceans. In the production, employment, and control of maritime forces, the USN must consider the scope and rate of technological change and, where appropriate, adapt its processes and workforce development. In balancing the necessary long-term industrial model of naval platforms against emerging short-term opportunities, the USN must take account of advances that may present vulnerabilities and risks as well as what is assured and secure.

Introduction

Low 46.5%
Pages: 143-145

— 110 — Mandate for Leadership: The Conservative Promise there are no general or field-grade officers who served as planners or commanders against a near-peer adversary in combat. 4. Examine the logic of emerging Army concepts about employing massed long-range fires and effects without considering how to gain advantage by closing with and dominating an adversary on land. 5. Recognize that high-intensity land combat operations cannot be sustained through short-term individual or unit rotations in the style of the sustained low-intensity campaigns conducted over the past 20 years. 6. Transform how the National Guard is employed during extended operations short of declared war to preclude back-to-back federal and state deployments of National Guard soldiers in order to stabilize and preserve military volunteerism in our communities. 7. Revamp Army school curricula to concentrate on preparation for large- scale land operations that focus on defeating a peer threat. 8. Address the underlying causal issues driving increasing Army suicide rates, which have surpassed pre–World War II rates and are now eclipsing the rate among civilians. U.S. NAVY As noted at the beginning of this chapter, the U.S. Constitution gives Congress the power to “provide and maintain a Navy.” Inherent in this phrase is a recognition that there is a vital national interest in the maritime environment and that this national interest requires sustained planning and investment. This is as true today as it was almost 250 years ago and will remain true into the future. The U.S. Navy (USN) exists for two primary reasons: to project prompt, sus- tained, and effective combat power globally, both at sea and ashore, and to deter aggression by potential adversaries by maintaining a forward operating presence in conjunction with allies and partners. Today, the People’s Republic of China Peo- ple’s Liberation Army Navy (PLAN) can challenge the USN’s ability to accomplish its mission in the Pacific and Indian Oceans. In the production, employment, and control of maritime forces, the USN must consider the scope and rate of technological change and, where appropriate, adapt its processes and workforce development. In balancing the necessary long-term industrial model of naval platforms against emerging short-term opportunities, the USN must take account of advances that may present vulnerabilities and risks as well as what is assured and secure. — 111 — Department of Defense Needed Reforms l Invest in and expand force structure. The USN’s organizing principle remains platform-centered: vessels manned by sailors. The manned surface and subsurface forces act in concert with land-based, air-based, and space- based forces to project power outside sovereign territory, principally by operating in international waters. Investments must be closely coordinated with these other elements of military power. 1. Build a fleet of more than 355 ships.26 2. Develop and field unmanned systems to augment the manned forces. 3. Require that range and lethality be the key factors in all procurement and sustainment decisions for ships, aircraft, and munitions. l Reestablish the General Board. In contrast with the Navy General Board that served ship development so well during the interwar period, the current joint process27 for defining the requirements for major defense acquisitions is not well-suited to long-term planning of the sort that is needed for USN fleet architecture and shipbuilding. The interwar General Board should serve as a model, empowered with final decision authority over all requirements documents concerning ships and the major defense systems fielded on ships. The individual board members would ensure a broad base of knowledge as well as independent thinking.28 l Establish a Rapid Capabilities Office. The USN must transition technology into warfighting capability more rapidly. It must foster a culture of innovation that includes connecting theoretical and intangible ideas with real production environments that produce tangible and practical outcomes and adapting proven processes to advance material solutions. 1. Harness innovation and willingness to tolerate risk so that “good enough” systems can be fielded rapidly. 2. Use the Space Development Agency as a model. 3. Establish an oversight Board of Directors made up of the service chief, service secretary, and Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition and Sustainment.

Introduction

Low 45.3%
Pages: 587-589

— 554 — Mandate for Leadership: The Conservative Promise attorneys are consistently using the tools at their disposal in cases with violent offenders, including pursuing mandatory minimum sentences under the Armed Career Criminal Act (ACCA).43 The department should also support legislative efforts to provide further tools, such as the Restoring the Armed Career Criminal Act, which Senators Tom Cotton (R–AR), Marsha Blackburn (R–TN), and Cindy Hyde-Smith (R–MS) introduced in 2021 in response to U.S. Supreme Court decisions neutering the ACCA.44 l Enforce the death penalty where appropriate and applicable. Capital punishment is a sensitive matter, as it should be, but the current crime wave makes deterrence vital at the federal, state, and local levels. However, providing this punishment without ever enforcing it provides justice neither for the victims’ families nor for the defendant. The next conservative Administration should therefore do everything possible to obtain finality for the 44 prisoners currently on federal death row. It should also pursue the death penalty for applicable crimes—particularly heinous crimes involving violence and sexual abuse of children—until Congress says otherwise through legislation.45 DISMANTLING DOMESTIC AND INTERNATIONAL CRIMINAL ENTERPRISES Criminal organizations are as old as crime itself, but are more extensive, sophisticated, and dangerous today than at any other point in history. The Department of Justice has a key role in tackling transnational criminal orga- nizations like Mara Salvatrucha (MS-13) and Mexican drug cartels as well as purely domestic criminal organizations like those built on the more traditional mafia crime model as part of its obligation to ensure the safety and security of the American people. The department’s primary directive under the next Administration should be to return to an unapologetic focus on dismantling these criminal organizations and incarcerating their membership. Once this reprioritization occurs, the depart- ment’s political leadership should take concrete steps to use agency reach and resources to prevent these criminal organizations from operating and surviving. Assaulting the business model of these criminal organizations—which are massive, diversified enterprises with nationwide or international operations—is essential for success. The next Administration will therefore need to: l Revitalize the DOJ’s use of the array of statutory tools that exist for dealing with the threat of criminal organizations. The most potent ones are the simplest. For example, the department should: — 555 — Department of Justice 1. Rigorously prosecute as much interstate drug activity as possible, including simple possession of distributable quantities.46 Recent efforts to create the impression that drug possession crimes are not serious offenses has contributed to the explosion of criminal organization activities in the United States. 2. Aggressively deploy the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act (RICO),47 which Congress expressly created to empower the Department of Justice to treat patterns of intrastate- level crimes, such as robbery, extortion, and murder, as federal criminal conduct for criminal organizations and networks. The next Administration can use existing tools while it works with Congress to develop new tools. l Secure the border,48 which is the key entry point for many criminal organizations and their supplies, products, and employees. Mexico— which is arguably functioning as a failed state run by drug cartels—is the main point of transit for illegal drugs produced in Central and South America, fentanyl precursors from the Chinese Communist Party–led People’s Republic of China,49 weapons, human smuggling and trafficking, and other contraband. Mexican drug cartels, including the dominant Sinaloa Cartel and the Jalisco New Generation Cartel (CJNG), are the main drivers of fentanyl production and distribution in the United States. The southwestern land border is sufficiently porous that Mexican drug cartels have operational control of large sections of the border, which facilitates easy movement of product and personnel. These cartels are also violent and not afraid to demonstrate force on both sides of the border. Their conduct represents a clear and present danger to the United States and its citizens. In addition to finalizing the southwestern land border wall, the next Administration should take a creative and aggressive approach to tackling these dangerous criminal organizations at the border. This could include use of active-duty military personnel and National Guardsmen to assist in arrest operations along the border—something that has not yet been done. A new and forceful approach to interdiction will have a ripple effect on the operations of these criminal organizations, which currently operate freely without concern for criminal prosecution, and will lay the necessary groundwork for initial prosecutions of these organizations and their leaders. It is critical that the federal government staunch the flow of drugs by preventing the far-too-easy access to the United States that now exists.

Showing 3 of 5 policy matches

About These Correlations

Policy matches are calculated using semantic similarity between bill summaries and Project 2025 policy text. A score of 60% or higher indicates meaningful thematic overlap. This does not imply direct causation or intent, but highlights areas where legislation aligns with Project 2025 policy objectives.