How would impeaching Pentagon chief Hegseth work?

How would impeaching Pentagon chief Hegseth work?
U.S. Secretary of Defence Pete Hegseth holds a press briefing at the Pentagon in Washington, DC, U.S., 10 November 2026.
Reuters

A bid to impeach U.S. Defence Secretary Pete Hegseth has been blocked for now, but Democrats are preparing to revive the fight when they take control of the House in January. Here are the eight charges against him, how impeachment works and what could happen next.

The U.S. House of Representatives has effectively blocked an attempt to impeach Defence Secretary Pete Hegseth, voting 211–204 on Tuesday to send eight articles of impeachment to the Judiciary Committee rather than put them to a full House vote.

The move temporarily halts an effort led by Kentucky Republican Thomas Massie, who accuses Hegseth of “high crimes and misdemeanours” over the war in Iran and a series of other military operations.

But Democrats have vowed to revive the case. “This is not the end of it. It’s just the beginning,” House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries said.

Democrats are set to take control of both chambers of Congress in January.

What happened?
U.S. Representative Thomas Massie (R-KY) holds a press conference about his resolution to impeach Secretary of Defence Pete Hegseth, U.S., 9 November 2026.
Reuters

Massie presented his 34-page resolution to the House on Monday, the first sitting day following the midterm elections, according to PBS NewsHour.

He accused Hegseth of having “knowingly executed and implemented unlawful orders” and warned that he “remains a threat to the Constitution”.

The latest move followed an earlier attempt in September, when Massie filed a similar resolution as “privileged”, requiring the House to act within two legislative days, NBC reported.

Republican leaders subsequently cancelled votes and left Washington early, delaying consideration until after the election. They denied any connection between the timing and the vote.

House Speaker Mike Johnson dismissed the effort as “a publicity stunt by someone who wants attention”.

When lawmakers returned, the House voted to refer the articles to the Judiciary Committee. According to CBS News, Massie was the only Republican to join Democrats in opposing the move. Seven Republicans and 11 Democrats were absent.

ABC News reported that several absent Democrats cited traffic around the Capitol. If all 11 had voted against the referral, it would have been defeated 215–211.

“I wasn’t surprised, but I was disappointed,” Massie said.

How does impeachment work?

The U.S. Constitution gives Congress the power to impeach and remove federal officials, including Cabinet secretaries.

The House has “the sole Power of Impeachment”, while the Senate has “the sole Power to try all Impeachments”.

These powers apply to the president, vice president and “all civil officers of the United States”, including Cabinet members.

Impeachment involves two main stages:

  • First stage: The House votes on the charges. A simple majority is enough to impeach an official. Impeachment is comparable to an indictment and does not itself mean the official has been convicted.
  • Second stage: The Senate considers the charges. It can hold a trial or dismiss the case. Under the Constitution, “no person shall be convicted without the Concurrence of two-thirds of the Members present”. A conviction results in removal from office, and the Senate can also vote to disqualify the official from holding federal office in future.

The two-thirds requirement makes removal particularly difficult, as conviction generally requires significant bipartisan support.

What are the eight charges?

Massie's resolution sets out eight allegations involving military operations, congressional authority and the treatment of a U.S. senator.

According to CBS News, the articles include the following accusations:

  1. Launching war against Iran without congressional authorisation: Hegseth allegedly carried out orders to begin hostilities without a declaration of war or congressional approval, in violation of the 1973 War Powers Resolution.
  2. Defying Congress over the Iran conflict: The resolution accuses Hegseth of continuing military operations despite a measure passed by both chambers in June ordering an end to the fighting. The administration maintained that hostilities had already ended.
  3. Breaching the War Powers deadline: Trump notified Congress of military action on 2 March, triggering a 60-day period that expired on 1 May. Hegseth told senators a ceasefire would pause that deadline, but the article alleges fighting continued beyond 1 June.
  4. Weakening civilian protections: Hegseth allegedly reduced civilian-protection staff and dismissed senior military lawyers. The article connects those decisions to a Tomahawk missile strike on an Iranian school in February, which Iranian media reported killed around 170 civilians, most of them children. The U.S. has not directly accepted responsibility.
  5. Carrying out “extrajudicial killings” at sea: The resolution accuses Hegseth of overseeing strikes against suspected drug-trafficking vessels in the Caribbean and eastern Pacific, allegedly killing at least 243 people since September 2025.
  6. Retaliating against Senator Mark Kelly: Hegseth allegedly targeted Kelly over a video reminding military personnel of their right to refuse unlawful orders. A federal judge blocked a threatened reduction in Kelly's military rank.
  7. Ordering the capture of Nicolás Maduro: The resolution describes the January raid on Caracas, which resulted in Maduro's capture and reportedly killed at least 83 people, as an unauthorised act of war.
  8. Authorising strikes on Yemen without congressional approval: Hegseth allegedly oversaw more than 1,100 strikes against Houthi targets between March and May 2025 without congressional authorisation.
Do the allegations amount to impeachable offences?

Whether the accusations meet the constitutional threshold of “high crimes and misdemeanours” remains fiercely contested.

Hegseth has rejected the allegations, describing them as “policy disagreements, not high crimes, not misdemeanours”, Fox News reported.

“I stand behind every one of these operations,” he said.

Vice President JD Vance also dismissed the accusations, calling the suggestion that Hegseth had committed impeachable crimes “absurd”.

Constitutional law scholar Jonathan Turley questioned the legal basis of most of the charges.

Speaking to Fox News, Turley said “six of the eight articles should be nonstarters, including the Iranian articles”.

He argued that Massie was attempting to use impeachment to resolve a longstanding dispute over presidential war powers, pointing out that former Presidents Bill Clinton, Barack Obama and Joe Biden had also asserted broad authority to launch military operations.

However, Turley acknowledged potentially more serious legal questions surrounding the maritime strikes and Hegseth's treatment of Kelly.

Referring to allegations of a second strike on a previously targeted vessel, he said an alleged “double tap” strike order “would be a war crime, if true”, although he stressed that he would need to examine the evidence.

Trump and Hegseth have both denied issuing such an order.

Supporters of impeachment, meanwhile, argue that an official does not need to be convicted of a criminal offence to meet the constitutional standard. They maintain that knowingly violating the law or abusing public office can be sufficient grounds for removal.

Massie insisted that Hegseth had committed impeachable acts “eight times”.

Has a Cabinet member been impeached before?

Only two Cabinet secretaries have been impeached in U.S. history, and neither was convicted by the Senate.

The first was William Belknap, President Ulysses S. Grant's Secretary of War, who was unanimously impeached by the House in 1876.

He was accused of “criminally disregarding his duty as Secretary of War and basely prostituting his high office to his lust for private gain”, according to the U.S. Senate's historical records.

The case involved allegations that Belknap received $24,450 in kickbacks linked to a military trading post at Fort Sill, according to TIME.

Belknap resigned just hours before the House voted, but the Senate proceeded with his trial.

Senators voted 37–29 to affirm their authority to try a former official, according to an analysis by Thomas Berry of the Cato Institute.

Although a majority supported conviction on all five articles, none secured the required two-thirds majority, resulting in his acquittal.

Nearly 150 years later, in 2024, Homeland Security Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas became the second Cabinet member to be impeached.

The Republican-led House accused him of misconduct over his handling of the U.S. border. However, the Democratic-controlled Senate dismissed both articles as unconstitutional without holding a full trial.

What could happen next?

For now, the impeachment effort faces a political dead end.

Referring the articles to the Judiciary Committee makes further action unlikely before the Republican-led House's term ends.

But that could change in January, when Democrats take control of the House and gain the power to bring fresh impeachment articles to a vote.

Even if they secure enough votes to impeach Hegseth, removing him from office would require a two-thirds majority in the Senate.

No U.S. Cabinet secretary has ever been convicted by the Senate following impeachment, leaving Hegseth's potential removal facing a formidable constitutional and political hurdle.

Read  more:

Tags