Where Jewish reps stand on impeaching Trump


Of the 435 members of the House of Representatives, 134 have said that they are for an impeachment inquiry of President Donald Trump. Here’s where the 25 Jewish Democrats in the stand. It is safe to assume that the two Republican representatives — Lee Zeldin of Long Island and David Kustoff of Tennessee — would not support that move.

In favor (from latest to earliest) 

Brad Schneider (IL), Aug. 29, 2019: “After months of relentless stonewalling by the Trump administration, I believe it is necessary to elevate the various congressional investigations of the president to a formal impeachment inquiry as the only way to ensure the American people have a comprehensive understanding of the facts uncovered by Special Counsel Robert Mueller’s investigation and hold the president accountable for his actions.”

Ted Deutch (FL), Aug. 1, 2019: “The question is no longer whether the House should vote to proceed with a formal impeachment inquiry. The inquiry has already begun.”

Nita Lowey (NY), July 31, 2019: “The House Judiciary Committee should move forward with an impeachment inquiry. … [to] strengthen our hand in uncovering the truth.”

Eliot Engel (NY), July 30, 2019: “The American people want, and deserve, the truth. Mr. Mueller’s testimony provided ample evidence that the president committed obstruction of justice, and I believe the House must pursue a formal impeachment inquiry.”

Kim Schrier (WA), July 28, 2019: “The American people deserve to know what transpired and to what extent our president is acting against the best interests of our nation. … An impeachment inquiry will be required to get timely access to the information we need for our national security and national conscience.”

Mike Levin (CA), July 26, 2019: “I cannot ignore the dysfunction, corruption, and abuse of democracy that we witness every day from President Trump. … I must now support an impeachment inquiry in order to get to the truth for my constituents.”

Jan Schakowsky (IL), June 19, 2019: “President Trump certainly has committed all kinds of offenses that meet the standard of impeachment, high crimes and misdemeanors.”

Andy Levin (MI), June 15, 2019: “After extensive discussion with colleagues on the committees of jurisdiction over various investigations, I have concluded that the only way to get to the bottom of Mr. Trump’s activities and inform the public about what we learn is to centralize and expedite the process through one select committee with the focus, power and urgency that come with an impeachment inquiry.”

Alan Lowenthal (CA), May 30, 2019: “Special Counsel Mueller’s statement yesterday highlighted what was clear in his report. Our democracy was attacked by a foreign power, and there is evidence that the president obstructed justice. Congress must hold him accountable. I believe the time has come to consider an impeachment inquiry.”

Jamie Raskin (MD), May 21, 2019: “I think that overwhelming evidence has been presented to us in the Mueller report, and outside of it, too, of high crimes and misdemeanors, and we should launch an impeachment inquiry. Remember, an inquiry doesn’t prejudge the outcome. We’re not talking about articles of impeachment.”

David Cicilline (RI), May 21, 2019: “If [former White House Counsel] Don McGahn does not testify tomorrow, it will be time to begin an impeachment inquiry of [Trump].”

John Yarmuth (KY), March 12, 2019: “I think we are essentially in the beginning of an impeachment process. … I don’t think right now there’s any way that we could get 218 votes on the floor of the House for an impeachment resolution, but I think that’s not a matter of whether, it’s a matter of when.” (Reiterated his call for impeachment on May 29.)

Steve Cohen (TN): Introduced articles of impeachment on Nov. 15, 2017.

Brad Sherman (CA): Introduced articles of impeachment on July 12, 2017.

Undecided or not now

Jerrold Nadler (NY): Nadler has been unclear about his stance on impeachment or an impeachment inquiry.

Susan Davis (CA): “We must go where the facts lead and our democratic principles demand.”

Lois Frankel (FL): In April, she told CNN that she wants to let the congressional investigations of Trump and his administration take their course.

Josh Gottheimer (NJ): Recently told JTA, “I think we need to have strong oversight, I’m not going to answer your question.”

Elaine Luria (VA): Told JNS last week, “We need to have all of the facts before we consider impeaching the president. I support the important work being done by the appropriate committees in the House.”

Dean Phillips (MN): In June, he told constituents, “I’m appalled by the behavior of the United States president. … I do have some red lines that if crossed even during those [next] six weeks I will have no choice but to change my current position.”

Max Rose (NY): In May, he warned that if Democrats impeach, “then they should warm to the idea of going back to the minority.” Last week, he wrote on SILive.com, “There is no doubt that this Administration is one of the most corrupt in history. … But pursuing a partisan impeachment process won’t address any of those serious issues. The truth is impeachment will only tear our country further apart. … Impeachment will not keep our kids safe from gun violence or end the opioid epidemic. Impeachment will not improve the lives of the hardworking Staten Islanders and South Brooklynites that I fight for every day.”

Adam Schiff (CA): The House Intelligence Committee chairman told CNN that Democrats should “make the case to the country that this President’s conduct is so incompatible with the office” that impeachment is justified.

Debbie Wasserman Schultz (D-Fla.): In May, she said that “I am at a point where I am maybe, probably, a little bit further [toward an inquiry] than I was before.”

Elissa Slotkin (MI): In August, she told constituents, “I’m open to where this goes. But I think that it is important that we do it in a way that communicates clearly what we are intending. And we do it in a way that doesn’t forget about the other part of our job, which is to legislate.”

Susan Wild (PA): At a townhall with constituents in August, she said, “You don’t want to try a case where the facts are not all lined up and you’re ready with all of your evidence that you’re going to introduce. I don’t believe we are there at this point in time.”