House Republicans impeached Homeland Security Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas on Tuesday, making him the first Cabinet secretary since 1876 to be impeached by the House.

A week after a first attempt that fell short and caused heartburn for GOP leadership, Mayorkas was impeached in a second vote, 214-213.

The Senate is all but guaranteed to sidestep it, with Majority Leader Chuck Schumer’s office saying the articles will be presented after the upcoming recess with senators sworn in as jurors shortly after. Lawmakers predicted they could quickly dismiss the charges of betraying the public trust and refusing to comply with the law. The Senate is not expected to spend much time on the trial.

Three Republicans defected on the impeachment effort: Reps. Mike Gallagher (R-Wis.), Ken Buck (R-Colo.) and Tom McClintock (R-Calif.), who all also voted “no” last week. But GOP leaders were able to revive the articles against Mayorkas with Majority Leader Steve Scalise’s (R-La.) return this week after treatment for blood cancer.

The vote comes on the same day that Republicans are trying to hold onto expelled Rep. George Santos’s seat. If Democrats flip the seat, that would likely have put impeaching Mayorkas just out of reach until special elections later this year.

The eventual success caps off months of Republican work to impeach Mayorkas, after they were caught flat footed last week when Rep. Al Green (D-Texas) showed up from the hospital to cast his no vote. Republicans, while acknowledging their own dysfunction, quickly tried to salvage the situation by noting they would impeach the Homeland Security chief as soon as Scalise returned.

The GOP views the border as a unifying issue in their raucous conference and an easy cudgel against Democrats as they head toward November. They’ve been building up support for the historic step for months, while also scuttling a bipartisan border plan in the Senate — raising the likelihood that legislation to address spiking migrant crossings isn’t signed into law this year.

In a statement after the vote, Speaker Mike Johnson said Mayorkas “deserves to be impeached.” “Since this Secretary refuses to do the job that the Senate confirmed him to do, the House must act,” the speaker added.

But even as GOP leaders tried to convince their colleagues to support impeaching Mayorkas, the effort wasn’t guaranteed. Last week it appeared to be on the verge of collapse as several Republicans remained on-the-fence just hours before the vote. Though leadership managed to win over nearly all of them, they still fell short because of opposition from Gallagher, Buck and McClintock, alongside full attendance from House Democrats.

Gallagher announced his plans to retire days after the vote, and Buck also plans to leave the House at the end of this term.

The GOP’s impeachment push has sparked pushback from the administration, typical GOP constitutional allies and congressional Democrats — and is already being turned against Biden-district Republicans up for reelection. In a post-vote statement, President Joe Biden said, “History will not look kindly on House Republicans for their blatant act of unconstitutional partisanship.”

“House Republicans will be remembered by history for trampling on the Constitution for political gain rather than working to solve the serious challenges at our border,” DHS spokesperson Mia Ehrenberg said in a statement. “While Secretary Mayorkas was helping a group of Republican and Democratic Senators develop bipartisan solutions to strengthen border security and get needed resources for enforcement, House Republicans have wasted months with this baseless, unconstitutional impeachment.”

Gallagher, Buck and McClintock each raised concerns that the Mayorkas impeachment didn’t meet the bar laid out under the Constitution — a concern from GOP-aligned constitutional experts who publicly urged Republicans against taking the step heading into last week’s vote.

The Department of Homeland Security, in a new memo on Tuesday, also made a final push to sway Republicans against impeaching Mayorkas, writing that they should “listen to their fellow Republicans and stop wasting time on this pointless, unconstitutional impeachment.”

The Senate is set to approve its $95 billion national security funding package as soon as Tuesday, delivering long-stalled aid to Ukraine, Israel and Taiwan. Then the House will take its turn — and there will be a multi-directional battle to decide the fate of the bill.

That’s because the GOP’s thin margin of control leaves Speaker Mike Johnson with few politically palatable choices as he considers a Senate aid bill that many in his party want to scrap. But if Johnson tries to ignore the bill, a potential rebellion could begin to brew among rank-and-file members in the ideological middle who still want to see Ukraine aid pass.

Several players or blocs are positioned to grab power over the aid measure once it reaches the House — starting with Johnson himself.

The speaker may shrug off the foreign aid package after the Senate clears it, focusing instead on a second attempt to pass the standalone Israel aid plan that he tried and failed to push through on a bipartisan basis last week.

But it’s hard to see that type of response quieting the eagerness among establishment and centrist Republicans to vote on the legislation anyway.

“There’s a general belief that we need to get it done” shared by House Republicans, Sen. Thom Tillis (R-N.C.) said over the weekend. “Hopefully this is something that Speaker Johnson will just take up, because I believe you’d have significant support for it in the Republican conference. Whether or not it’s the majority, I don’t know.”

Johnson has expressed support for Ukraine generally but has not said whether he’d slate a House vote on the Senate’s aid bill, which many conservatives oppose. His spokesperson Raj Shah told Playbook in a statement that Johnson wants to consider the bill “on its own merits.”

“The speaker merely conveyed that each component of the supplemental must be evaluated on its own merits and can potentially be considered separately,” he said in a statement.

Johnson’s office did not immediately respond to a request for comment on whether that means an attempt to design a House rule that might separate out the different component parts of the Senate-passed bill. Even if he goes that route, he’ll face trouble in the Rules Committee, where conservatives hold enough seats to wield an effective veto power over any bill that the House tries to consider under a rule for debate.

Notably, House Democrats can also assert their own power over the aid bill once it passes the Senate. Most, if not all, of them want to approve more Ukraine aid ASAP. Caucus leaders have already signaled they’re open to using any legislative tools that could get that done.

The most likely such tool is the long-shot option of a discharge petition, which requires a majority of House members to sign on in order to force a floor vote despite opposition from GOP leaders. That means at least a few Republicans would have to sign the petition.

There’s already a shell petition with every single Democratic lawmaker attached that can be used to force a vote on the Senate aid bill – although some progressives could peel off out of opposition to its unconditional aid for Israel.

Some House Democrats have already held quiet conversations with Republicans about a pathway forward for the Senate aid package. But if Republicans are feeling any pressure to act on a bill that their presumptive presidential nominee Donald Trump wants to kill, they’re not showing it yet.

And it’s tough to underscore just how rarely a discharge petition is successfully used in the House, where even slim majorities still tend to rule the day. Recall that Democrats floated a discharge petition as a Hail Mary option to circumvent Republican leadership on the debt limit last year, to no avail.

Then there’s the potential for more moderate Republicans to work their will on the foreign aid debate. A handful of them, led by Rep. Brian Fitzpatrick, have indicated they’re open to writing a new national security package with Democrats that would include funding for Ukraine and the southern border, among other priorities.

That makes centrist pro-Ukraine Republicans the most important lawmakers to watch this week when the House returns on Tuesday night. The louder they push for new aid to Ukraine after the Senate passes the supplemental funding package, the more likely it is that Johnson takes up the bill in some way, shape or form.

Another influential centrist in the mix, Rep. Don Bacon (R-Neb.), said last week that he was pushing for a Ukraine aid package that’s more narrowly focused on helping defeat Russia: “There’s a handful of us pushing for military aid. We might not be able to do all the other stuff, but let’s do military aid,” he said.

It’s ultimately arguable that a split vote on the Senate aid bill — taking it up in separate buckets for Ukraine, Israel, and more — means no one has claimed power over the matter. By making that move, Johnson will have essentially avoided forcing conservatives in his conference to accept Ukraine aid that would likely win a Democratic-dominated majority of the House.

House Speaker Mike Johnson is facing another challenge as he tries to navigate an already tricky spy powers fight: an effort within his own ranks to link upcoming legislation to gun rights.

Rep. Warren Davidson is circulating a letter to Johnson and Majority Leader Steve Scalise urging them to use a revived debate over controversial surveillance power to also prevent data brokers from selling consumer information to law enforcement.

And the Ohio Republican is weaving in another hot button issue, arguing that without changes, gun owners are at risk of being negatively impacted.

“It is vital that any forthcoming legislation Section 702 … close the data broker loophole. Congress now has a once-in-a-generation opportunity to update our laws to protect Americans’ liberty, Americans’ right to privacy and the Second Amendment,” Davidson wrote in the letter.

Davidson is collecting signatures from his colleagues for the letter, a copy of which was obtained by POLITICO. The House Judiciary Committee already passed legislation on a bipartisan basis to prevent data brokers from selling consumer information to law enforcement.

It’s the latest potential hurdle for Johnson. House Republicans are hoping to bring a revived bill to change and reauthorize Section 702 to the floor this week. The surveillance power is meant to target foreigners abroad but has come under fire because of its ability to sweep in Americans data.

But a coalition of privacy hawks, including both progressives and conservatives in the House, view the data broker issue as a top priority for the 702 debate. They are expected to get a vote on an amendment related to it as part of this week’s debate.

And they are already getting support from some traditional GOP allies closely watching the debate.

Aidan Johnston, Gun Owners of America’s director of federal affairs, told POLITICO the group “is closely tracking the FISA loophole allowing federal law enforcement to buy lists of gun owners and concealed carry permit holders without a warrant or regard for the Second and Fourth Amendments.”

“We have serious concerns about the potential for the federal government to weaponize this data against Americans, especially given the Biden administration’s lengthy record of harassing and prosecuting political opponents, including gun owners,” he added.

House Republicans are preparing a second attempt at passing legislation reauthorizing a controversial surveillance power.

The Rules Committee will take up legislation Wednesday that would make changes to and extend Section 702 of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act. The authority is meant to target foreigners abroad but has come under scrutiny for its ability to sweep in Americans.

A spokesperson for Majority Leader Steve Scalise didn’t immediately respond to a question about timing for a vote. But individuals involved in the closed-door discussion told POLITICO they expect the bill to be on the floor Thursday or Friday.

First it will need to get through the Rules Committee, where Speaker Mike Johnson’s plan last year to bring competing bills to the floor ultimately unraveled.

Reps. Chip Roy (R-Texas) and Thomas Massie (R-Ky.), who are both members of the Judiciary Committee, along with Rep. Ralph Norman (R-S.C.), have the combined ability to block a bill in Rules absent Democratic help. They could also be a barometer for the bill’s reception among privacy hawks, members of the Freedom Caucus and their allies.

POLITICO first reported last Wednesday that Johnson was leaning toward bringing a bill to the floor this week after leadership revived a GOP working group aimed at bridging the party’s surveillance divisions.

Two individuals briefed on the discussion told POLITICO late last week and over the weekend that there are expected to be approximately six votes on amendments to the bill, including on a warrant requirement before searching 702-collected data for Americans information and on preventing data brokers from selling consumer information to law enforcement.

The revised bill comes after intense closed-door negotiations about the path forward after the Judiciary and Intelligence committees offered competing proposals late last year.

Technically Congress has until mid-April to work out a deal, but Republicans have hinted that Johnson wants quicker action. The House is currently scheduled to leave after Friday until Feb. 28. When they return, Congress is expected to be consumed by twin government funding deadlines and averting a shutdown threat.

Another Donald Trump impeachment over Ukraine funding? Ohio Republican Sen. J.D. Vance says it’s a possibility, if the $95 billion emergency foreign aid spending bill becomes law and Trump wins the election.

Vance distributed a memo to Senate GOP offices on Monday arguing that the foreign aid measure could tie Trump’s hands if he comes into office next year wanting to pause Ukraine funds as part of negotiations on ending Russia’s war on the U.S. ally. That’s because some of the legislation’s funding expires nine months into the next presidency, effectively — according to Vance — handcuffing a future President Trump from making his own decisions on Ukraine spending.

Vance is one of the most outspoken opponents of Ukraine assistance, and he’s making a last-ditch effort to block the legislation before a critical vote later on Monday to end debate on the foreign aid plan, which needs 60 votes.

“The supplemental represents an attempt by the foreign policy blob/deep state to stop President Trump from pursuing his desired policy, and if he does so anyways, to provide grounds to impeach him and undermine his administration. All Republicans should oppose its passage,” reads the memo by Vance’s office.

The then-Democratic House majority impeached Trump in 2019 over the then-president’s move to withhold funding slated for Ukraine and pressure Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky to launch investigations into Joe Biden, who defeated Trump in November 2020. The Senate acquitted Trump in early 2020.

Though the 2024 election is nine months away, Trump is trying to kill the foreign aid bill and urging the Senate to stop it. Despite that, the bill is clearly on track for passage — with just one more opportunity for the GOP to block it later on Monday. It would still need to pass the House, which is an uncertain prospect at the moment.

If the overseas aid bill does become law and Trump wins the election, Vance’s new memo argues that the incoming president could be impeached again if he “were to withdraw from or pause financial support for the war in Ukraine in order to bring the conflict to a peaceful conclusion.”

Senate Republican Ukraine advocates swept away a last-minute cavalcade of attacks on Monday evening, defeating a conservative filibuster of the $95 billion aid package and putting it on a glide path to clearing the chamber.

The 66-33 vote advanced the bill toward final passage, which is expected to take place by midweek, if not earlier. Sen. Rand Paul (R-Ky.) has objected to moving forward more quickly, and conservative opponents have used the delay to throw the proverbial kitchen sink at the proposal.

Those attacks are taking their toll, to an extent: 39 Senate Republicans supported a standalone $40 billion Ukraine bill two years ago, a number that’s now roughly sliced in half. That reflects the sustained attacks on Ukraine by GOP opponents, including former President Donald Trump, whose verbal assaults carry more weight by the day as he marches toward the Republican nomination.

Still, those fusillades have almost certainly failed to stop passage in the Democratic-controlled Senate. There’s no such guarantee over in the House, where Speaker Mike Johnson criticized the bill Monday, casting doubt on its future.

“These are chaotic times. And as a support of Ukraine, Israel and our industrial base, it’s adequate. It’s good enough,” said Sen. John Cornyn (R-Texas) of the Republican support in the Senate.

It’s been roughly 14 months since Congress approved new funding for Ukraine’s defense against Russia’s attacks and the latest tranche is expected to pass the Senate just ahead of the Munich Security Conference, which focuses on threats to international security.

Once a hawkish party that attacked Democrats for being weak on funding national security, now the GOP is split between Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell’s more interventionist views and those of Trump, who said any more money to Ukraine needs to take the form of a loan. And the run-up to the vote reflected the intense tension in the Republican Party over continuing to fund Ukraine, which receives roughly $60 billion under the legislation. The rest is destined for Taiwan, Israel and humanitarian assistance for Gaza.

Ukraine opponents met late Monday evening and came out resolving to delay the bill as long as they can, even if it requires holding the Senate floor overnight. Sen. Ron Johnson (R-Wis.) said they will use as “much time as we can” on the Senate floor.

“We’re not helping Ukraine at this point in time. We’re fueling a bloody stalemate. It makes no sense,” Johnson said after the meeting.

Trump spent the weekend railing against the bill and said he would not defend NATO allies who did not fulfill spending commitments under the international agreement, comments which split Republicans. A group of conservative senators took to the Senate floor Monday afternoon to denounce the bill; later in the day, some joined Elon Musk on a social media channel to continue the attacks.

On the social media channel, Sen. Mike Lee (R-Utah) questioned the spending pointedly: “This thing still has about $8 billion going directly to the Government of Ukraine. They are not choirboys.”Sen. J.D. Vance (R-OH)

And in a sign of conservatives’ fervent pressure campaign to kill the package, Sen. J.D. Vance (R-Ohio) argued in a Monday morning memo to his colleagues that Trump could be impeached again if he withholds Ukraine funding provided by the bill. Ukraine supporters rebuffed Vance’s argument, but it was picked up across the right-leaning media ecosystem.

“First of all, Trump has to get elected president. Second, Democrats have to get the House. And then they have to think this is the only thing they could use to impeach Donald Trump,” said retiring Sen. Mitt Romney (R-Utah), who voted to convict the former president in both impeachment trials. “I can assure you that if Donald Trump becomes president and the Democrats get the House, they’ll be able to find many opportunities to impeach Donald Trump if they wish.”

Amid the crosscurrents, some Republicans were deliberating over their final vote, with some still pushing for certain amendment votes in exchange for their approval. That’s been severely complicated by Paul’s unwillingness to speed up the process, since Democrats are reluctant to allow amendments without expediting passage.

That led to some GOP senators voting against moving the bill forward. On Monday, some of them were still assessing their vote on final passage of a massive national security spending bill with no border components — sending it to an uncertain fate in the House — after the bipartisan border deal fell apart last week.

“My goal is to be a yes. But also remembering there’s another stage to this, and that’s the House of Representatives. And so we need to help them,” said Sen. Kevin Cramer (R-N.D.). “Otherwise, there’s no point in just making a point.”

Speaker Johnson made clear he cares little for the Senate bill in a statement on Monday evening. Though he rejected the Senate’s bipartisan border negotiations last week, he criticized the Senate’s bill for lacking a border component.

It’s just the latest sign of uncertainty for Ukraine aid. Johnson said “the House will have to continue to work its own will on these important matters. America deserves better than the Senate’s status quo.”

Anthony Adragna contributed to this report.

House Republican investigators leading the impeachment inquiry into President Joe Biden are pressing for more details on his interview with Robert Hur as part of the special counsel’s classified documents investigation.

Judiciary Committee Chair Jim Jordan (R-Ohio), Oversight Committee Chair James Comer (R-Ky.) and Ways & Means Committee Chair Jason Smith (R-Mo.) sent a letter to Attorney General Merrick Garland on Monday, asking for any records, including recordings, related to Biden’s interview with Hur’s team. They also want classified documents identified in the report related to Ukraine.

In addition to the documents request, House Republicans are in talks with Hur to have him testify about his report, according to a person familiar with the discussions.

House Republicans are giving the Justice Department until 5 p.m. on Feb. 19 to hand over the requested materials. Otherwise, they warned, GOP lawmakers are “prepared to compel the production of this material if necessary” via a subpoena. They are also requesting any communication between the Justice Department, Biden’s personal counsel and the White House about the special counsel report.

“For our investigatory purposes, the Committees require certain records relating to Mr. Hur’s investigation and report,” the three GOP lawmakers wrote to Garland.

They added that they “require this transcript and any other records of this interview, including, but not limited to, any recordings, notes, or summaries of the interview.”

The Justice Department released Hur’s report last week, which found that criminal charges against Biden wouldn’t be warranted even if DOJ lacked an internal policy against prosecuting sitting presidents. Hur’s investigation found evidence that Biden “willfully retained and disclosed classified materials after his vice presidency,” the report states, but it didn’t “establish Mr. Biden’s guilt beyond a reasonable doubt.”

Congressional Republicans have also emphasized the report’s descriptions of Biden, including that he would be perceived in any court proceedings as a “sympathetic, well-meaning elderly man with a poor memory.” Comer called last week for the Justice Department to provide access to classified documents referenced in the report, as well as release the transcript with Biden. But Monday’s letter is the first formal request for information since the report’s release.

Biden has denied that he improperly shared classified information. Hur’s report alleges that he shared it with a ghostwriter. The president and other Democrats have also publicly criticized Hur’s descriptions of Biden’s memory.

Richard Sauber, a special counsel to the president, and Bob Bauer, Biden’s personal counsel, sent a joint letter to Hur last week asking that he revise his descriptions of Biden’s memory “so that they are stated in a manner that is within the bounds of your expertise and remit.”

In addition to the impeachment inquiry into President Joe Biden — which has largely focused on the business deals of his family members, but also delved into his handling of classified documents and the years-long federal investigation into Hunter Biden — Republicans said in their letter on Monday that they also needed the information for a separate investigation into the federal investigation of former President Donald Trump’s handling of classified documents.

Republicans have tried to draw an apples-to-apples comparison of Biden’s and Trump’s mishandling of classified documents, arguing that the Justice Department’s decision not to charge Biden but to pursue charges against Trump is an example of a politicized justice system.

But Hur’s report draws a contrast between the two cases, noting that Trump allegedly refused to return classified documents for months while Biden turned in the classified documents and cooperated with the investigation.