Censure resolutions: When to double down, and when to turn the page

Could the Cover-Up Be Bigger Than the Crime?

The recent censure of Rep. Al Green, D-Texas, in the U.S. House of Representatives has once again highlighted the growing divide and increasing incivility in Congress. On Thursday morning, Green was formally admonished by House Speaker Mike Johnson, R-La., for his antics during President Donald Trump’s speech to Congress earlier in the week. The House voted 224-198, with two members voting present, to censure Green for his disruptive behavior. As part of the censure, Green was required to present himself in the well of the House chamber, where Johnson read the resolution aloud. However, the moment was overshadowed by a group of Democratic lawmakers who joined Green near the dais, singing "We Shall Overcome" to drown out Johnson’s words. The chaotic scene underscores a troubling trend in Congress, where discipline and decorum have given way to partisan theatrics.

This kind of disruption during a censure is not new. In recent years, lawmakers have increasingly used such moments to make a political statement rather than reflect on the gravity of the punishment. For instance, when Rep. Tim Burchett, R-Tenn., called for Green’s expulsion, and Rep. Andy Ogles, R-Tenn., prepared a resolution to strip the dozens of Democrats who supported Green of their committee assignments, it became clear that the situation was more about political brinkmanship than genuine accountability. The censure of Green marks the latest escalation in a cycle of retaliation and one-upmanship that has become all too common in the House.

The Evolution of Censure in the House

Censure, one of the most severe forms of discipline in the House, has historically been a rare and solemn act. Only 29 members of the House have been censured in the institution’s history, with Green becoming the 29th. However, the process has evolved dramatically over time. In the past, censure was a moment of reflection and contrition, as seen in the case of former Rep. Charlie Rangel, D-N.Y., who was censured in 2010 for abusing his office. During Rangel’s censure, the House was silent as then-Speaker Nancy Pelosi read the resolution, and Rangel stood humbly in the well, a stark contrast to the chaotic scenes of today.

In contrast, modern censures have become increasingly partisan and theatrical. For example, the 2023 censure of Rep. Rashida Tlaib, D-Mich., was met with shouting and disruption from her colleagues, turning the solemn occasion into a political rally. This shift reflects a broader erosion of decorum and respect in the House, where lawmakers now use censure as a tool to score political points rather than to address genuine wrongdoing. The increasing frequency of censure—Green is the fourth Democrat censured since 2023—also raises questions about whether the punishment has lost its weight and seriousness.

A Trend of Escalation

The rise in censure is part of a larger pattern of escalating tensions in the House. Republicans argue that Democrats set the precedent for such actions, pointing to the censure of Rep. Paul Gosar, R-Ariz., in 2021 for posting an anime video depicting violence against Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, D-N.Y., and President Joe Biden. Democrats, in turn, argue that Republican lawmakers, such as Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene, R-Ga., have pushed the boundaries of acceptable behavior with their rhetoric and actions.

The back-and-forth has created a toxic environment where lawmakers on both sides feel justified in disrupting proceedings to make a point. During Trump’s speech, Green’s outburst was not an isolated incident. Similar disruptions have occurred during past presidential addresses, with lawmakers like Rep. Lauren Boebert, R-Colo., and Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene, R-Ga., jeering former President Biden. The lack of consequences for such behavior in the past has emboldened lawmakers to push the envelope further. Now, with Green’s censure, the question is whether this cycle of escalation will continue or if lawmakers will take steps to restore decorum.

The Roots of the Problem

The current state of affairs in the House can be traced back to September 2009, when Rep. Joe Wilson, R-S.C., shouted "You lie!" during President Barack Obama’s speech on healthcare reform. The outburst was widely condemned, but it also marked a turning point in congressional decorum. Wilson’s actions were seen as a breach of etiquette, but they also galvanized his base, demonstrating the political potency of such behavior.

In the years since, lawmakers have increasingly used disruptive tactics to gain attention and rally their supporters. The censure process, once a rare and somber act, has become just another tool in the partisan arsenal. The rise of social media has further amplified these moments, turning them into viral spectacles that reinforce partisan divisions. As a result, the House has become a battleground where lawmakers are more focused on scoring points than on governing effectively.

A Call to Action

The censure of Al Green and the subsequent response from his Democratic colleagues highlight the urgent need for a reset in congressional decorum. Speaker Mike Johnson now faces a critical decision: whether to escalate the situation further by punishing Green and his supporters or to seek a path toward bipartisanship and respect. The outcome will have significant implications for the future of the House and the ability of lawmakers to work across the aisle.

Historically, moments of division have also been opportunities for unity. In 2009, Rep. Barbara Lee, D-Calif., called on lawmakers to "turn the page" and reject incivility. While that call went unheeded at the time, it remains a relevant message today. If lawmakers can find a way to return to the decorum and respect that once defined the House, they might yet reclaim the institution’s dignity and restore the public’s trust. The alternative—a continued descent into chaos and division—is a bleak one, but it is not inevitable. The choice is theirs.