House Republicans will meet Wednesday at 4 p.m. to discuss the futures of Representative Liz Cheney of Wyoming, the No. 3 Republican in the chamber, and Representative Marjorie Taylor Greene, the Georgia freshman who has created divisions in the party with her rash of conspiracy theories.
Supporters of former President Donald J. Trump want to strip Ms. Cheney of her leadership post as payback for her vote to impeach Mr. Trump. And an array of House and Senate Republicans and Trump critics want to strip Ms. Greene of her committee assignments for endorsing false claims and using bigoted and violent language, including calling for the execution of top Democrats.
Ms. Greene’s behavior poses the more serious test for Republicans because her behavior is so outside the mainstream of American politics. Representative Kevin McCarthy of California, the House Republican leader, met with Ms. Greene on Tuesday night in his office to discuss her past rhetoric and the calls to take her off committees. Mr. McCarthy then met with a group of Republicans who control the conference’s committee assignments, but no decision was ultimately made about whether or how to rebuke Ms. Greene, according to people familiar with the discussions.
Here are some possible steps that House Republicans could take:
-
On Ms. Greene, Republicans could use their Wednesday meeting to discuss her behavior, but any decision on her committee assignments rests with Mr. McCarthy and Republican leaders. House Democrats have threatened to move unilaterally to take Ms. Greene off her two committees if Republicans do not act themselves.
-
On Ms. Cheney, in order to bring up a vote to expel her from her leadership position, two-thirds of House Republicans would need to agree to immediately hold a vote on her fate. The matter also could be relegated to an ad hoc committee of House Republican leaders, who would likely rule in Ms. Cheney’s favor, or be brought up immediately for a vote by Mr. McCarthy.
The House Republican meeting will be a turning point for the party as members grapple with how to deal with two lawmakers who have incensed different wings of the party for very different reasons.
On one side is Mr. Trump, who has praised Ms. Greene, and a majority of House Republicans who backed the former president after the Capitol riot on Jan. 6. On the other are a growing number of Republican senators, including Mitch McConnell of Kentucky, the minority leader, who have rallied behind Ms. Cheney.
Caught in the middle is Mr. McCarthy, who is under pressure from both sides and who met with Mr. Trump in Florida last weekend. At the same time, Mr. McConnell, who rarely wades into party disputes publicly, inserted himself into the fray by issuing two statements on Monday night. One praised Ms. Cheney, and the other slammed Ms. Greene, without naming her, for “loony lies” that he called a “cancer” on his party.
Mr. McConnell and his fellow Senate Republicans are facing their own test of how to navigate the post-Trump era with the former president’s impeachment trial set to begin in earnest next week. Most Republican senators, including Mr. McConnell, voted last week to dismiss the trial as unconstitutional, a reflection of how reluctant they still are to cross Mr. Trump.
On Tuesday, the House impeachment managers laid out their case against the former president in an 80-page brief, declaring that he was “singularly responsible” for the deadly assault on the Capitol.
In their own filing, Mr. Trump’s lawyers denied that he had incited the riot, argued that the Senate “lacks jurisdiction” to try a former president and called for the dismissal of the single charge against him.
Senate Democrats will take control of the chamber’s committees under a new power-sharing agreement with Republicans after weeks of negotiations over how to manage the Senate that is divided 50-50.
Senator Chuck Schumer, Democrat of New York and the new majority leader, said he and Senator Mitch McConnell, Republican of Kentucky and the new minority leader, had reached an agreement that would allow Democrats to assume the chairmanships of Senate committees that had remained under Republican leadership despite Democratic election victories.
The lack of an agreement, during the first month of the new Congress, created a bizarre situation that had slowed consideration of some of President Biden’s nominees, including a hearing for Judge Merrick B. Garland, the nominee for attorney general.
“I’m confident our members are ready to hit the ground running on the most important issues that face our country,” Mr. Schumer said on Wednesday.
The Senate’s so-called organizing resolution was initially slowed by Mr. McConnell’s demand that Senate Democrats pledge to preserve the filibuster for the next two years. Mr. Schumer did not accede to the demand but Mr. McConnell dropped his insistence after two Senate Democrats said they would not back eliminating the filibuster, meaning the votes did not exist to overturn it under the current alignment.
The new Senate arrangement is based on an agreement reached during 2001, when the Senate was last equally divided. It will allow equal party representation on committees but in the cases of tie votes, legislation or nominees will still advance to the floor for consideration.
Though the Senate is split 50-50, Democrats are in control by virtue of the power of Vice President Kamala Harris’s tiebreaking vote. The formal organizing resolution is expected to be considered later Wednesday.
Vice President Kamala Harris and a group of lawmakers on Wednesday morning paid their last respects to Brian D. Sicknick, the Capitol Police officer who died from injuries sustained during the Jan. 6 attack on the Capitol.
Mr. Sicknick is the fifth person to lie in honor in the Capitol, a distinction reserved for private citizens, while government officials, like former presidents, lie in state. Senator Chuck Schumer of New York, the majority leader, and Speaker Nancy Pelosi of California, delivered remarks at a ceremony for Mr. Sicknick later in the morning.
“Blessed are the peacekeepers like Brian,” Mr. Schumer said. “Let us be the peacekeepers now in his memory.”
Mr. Sicknick’s family, lawmakers and other top officials attended the ceremony, including the Republican leaders, Senator Mitch McConnell of Kentucky and Representative Kevin McCarthy of California;Defense Secretary Lloyd J. Austin III; and Mayor Muriel E. Bowser of Washington.
Mr. Sicknick’s remains were delivered to the Capitol on Tuesday evening, passing through a set of doors still shattered from the events of Jan. 6. Officers from his unit, some on mountain bikes, lined up near the steps outside.
Minutes later, President Biden departed the White House to pay his respects.
Mr. Biden spoke with members of the officer’s family in the days after he was killed, according to White House officials, but his visit to the Capitol was not announced until the president’s motorcade departed the White House. Jill Biden, the first lady, joined him.
Two Capitol Police officers placed an urn containing Mr. Sicknick’s remains and an American flag on a dark gray table in the same rotunda that rioters stormed last month. At least 14 other Capitol Police officers were injured in the attack, according to a memo issued by the F.B.I., which said in January that it would investigate Mr. Sicknick’s killing. Two police officers who responded to the attack have since died by suicide.
Mr. Sicknick’s fellow officers surrounded the table on Tuesday, alongside Mr. Schumer, Ms. Pelosi and Mr. McCarthy.
One by one, officers saluted their former colleague before filing out Tuesday night, and a private ceremony was held for Mr. Sicknick’s family.
“Knowing our personal tragedy and loss is shared by our nation brings hope for healing,” Mr. Sicknick’s partner, Sandra Garza, and his family said in a statement on Tuesday.
His urn will be taken to Arlington National Cemetery.
Representative Liz Cheney, the No. 3-ranking Republican in the House, has become the most visible and imperiled target of the pro-Trump majority in the G.O.P., and she faces possible punishment from them on Wednesday over her vote to impeach former President Donald J. Trump last month.
She and other House Republicans will gather Wednesday afternoon for a private meeting where lawmakers will have the opportunity to confront her in person. Members of Mr. Trump’s family and some of his allies in Congress want to force her out of her leadership position. House Republican leaders have been mum in recent weeks as they have mulled how to deal with Ms. Cheney, the daughter of former Vice President Dick Cheney.
If Republicans do punish Ms. Cheney, they will be creating an unofficial litmus test for any party member seeking office: Do you support Mr. Trump and his actions, including his comments at the Jan. 6 rally in Washington just before a mob of his supporters attacked the Capitol? Ms. Cheney and nine other House Republicans voted in favor of an article of impeachment against Mr. Trump for “incitement of insurrection.”
At home in Wyoming, the sense of betrayal among Republicans is burning hot at the moment. It’s especially acute among the conservative grass roots and local party activists whose strong presence in the state helped deliver Mr. Trump his largest margin of victory anywhere — beating Joseph R. Biden Jr. with 70 percent of the vote.
At least one conservative state lawmaker — who described the impeachment vote as “an ice pick in the back” by Republicans who supported it — has printed “Impeach Liz Cheney!” yard signs and is vowing to challenge her in 2022. Ten county-level Republican Party organizations have voted to censure Ms. Cheney in recent days, and more are expected to follow suit.
People close to Ms. Cheney, who insisted on anonymity so they could discuss her private views, said that her break with the pro-Trump faction reflected her belief that many more Republicans share her disgust with how seriously Mr. Trump undermined confidence in the country’s electoral system.
As she watched Mr. Trump and his supporters peddle conspiracy theories and promote what she called “the big lie,” Ms. Cheney became deeply unsettled by how many of her colleagues seemed so cavalier about Mr. Trump’s actions, friends and associates said. In conversations with colleagues, Ms. Cheney has said she hopes her example makes more Republicans in and out of public office comfortable acknowledging that they should have pushed back earlier.
Her allies said that attempts to punish her were counterproductive at a time when the party should be united in opposition to Democratic control of Washington.
“The beneficiaries of Republican fratricide are Democrats,” said Karl Rove, the former Bush strategist, who is close to the Cheney family. “So the more we have purity tests and everyone has to think and act alike, particularly when it comes to former President Trump, it’s only helping Democrats.”
WASHINGTON — More than 370 Democratic congressional aides issued an unusual public appeal on Wednesday, imploring senators — in some cases their own bosses — to convict former President Donald J. Trump for inciting a violent “attack on our workplace” that threatened the peaceful transition of power.
In a starkly personal letter, the staff members describe ducking under office desks, barricading themselves in offices or watching as they witnessed marauding bands of rioters who “smashed” their way through the Capitol on Jan. 6. Responsibility, they argue, lies squarely with Mr. Trump and his “baseless, monthslong effort to reject votes lawfully cast by the American people.”
“As congressional employees, we don’t have a vote on whether to convict Donald J. Trump for his role in inciting the violent attack at the Capitol, but our senators do,” they wrote. “And for our sake, and the sake of the country, we ask that they vote to convict the former president and bar him from ever holding office again.”
A copy of the letter, including the names of the signatories, was shared with The New York Times before its release on Wednesday, four weeks after the attack and days before the Senate’s impeachment trial.
The letter, while in no way binding, underscored the remarkable dynamic surrounding Mr. Trump’s trial, in which many of the witnesses to and victims of the “incitement of insurrection” he is charged with are among the closest advisers to lawmakers who will decide his political fate. Congressional aides often provide counsel behind closed doors to the elected officials they serve, and many are authorized to speak on those officials’ behalf. But exceedingly rarely do they publicly express their own views — much less push for so stark a political and constitutional remedy as conviction in an impeachment trial.
The House voted on Tuesday night to begin fining lawmakers who refused to pass through metal detectors before walking onto the House floor, the latest move in a series of security measures taken after the deadly Jan. 6 riot at the Capitol.
The provision, tucked in a procedural package of rules, will fine lawmakers who bypass the metal detectors installed outside the House floor $5,000 for a first offense and $10,000 for a second offense, with the amounts deducted directly from their salaries. The vote came as House Speaker Nancy Pelosi announced in a letter to her fellow Democratic lawmakers that House leaders were reviewing additional measures intended to protect lawmakers and their aides.
“Given the serious and ongoing security threats facing members and the Congress, it is clear that there is a need for an emergency supplemental funding bill to meet institutional security needs,” Ms. Pelosi said. “It is also clear that we will need to establish a 9/11-type Commission to examine and report upon the facts, causes and security relating to the terrorist mob attack on January 6.”
The vote infuriated many Republicans, who have argued that the measure is overly onerous and infantilizing for members of Congress to endure. But in the weeks since the Capitol riot, concerns over keeping firearms off the House floor have not been theoretical. HuffPost reported last month that Representative Andy Harris, Republican of Maryland, tried to bring his gun onto the House floor, and Representative Madison Cawthorne, a Republican of North Carolina who spoke at the Stop the Steal rally in Washington on Jan. 6 that preceded the attack, later claimed he had been armed that day when he evacuated the House floor as rioters stormed the building.
During a speech on the House floor on Tuesday evening, Representative Jim McGovern, Democrat of Massachusetts and the chairman of the House Rules Committee, did not explicitly name the Republican members of Congress who had elevated concerns about firearms on the House floor, but gestured to Mr. Cawthorne and other Republicans, including Representatives Marjorie Taylor Greene of Georgia, who endorsed executing Ms. Pelosi before she was elected, and Lauren Boebert of Colorado, who campaigned on bringing her Glock with her to the halls of Congress.
“These words and actions raise serious safety concerns,” Mr. McGovern said, calling the metal detectors “a basic safety measure.”
Ms. Boebert evidently disagreed, and her chief of staff circulated an email on Tuesday night urging other Republican aides to vote against the measure, calling the fines “unconstitutional.”
Nicholas Fandos contributed reporting.
The Justice Department on Wednesday withdrew a lawsuit against Yale that charged the university with discriminating against Asian-American and white applicants for admission, another reversal by the new administration of a Trump-era policy.
The move is a major step against Asian-American complaints of racial discrimination in college admissions that have arisen at a number of campuses. In 2019, a federal judge rejected claims that Harvard had intentionally discriminated against Asian-American applicants, but the plaintiffs are expected to file a petition to the Supreme Court.
Yale welcomed the Biden administration’s decision, saying it was pleased that the hundreds of millions of dollars in federal funding it receives annually were no longer in jeopardy, as the Trump administration has threatened.
“Yale is gratified that the U.S. Justice Department has dropped its lawsuit challenging Yale College’s admissions practices,” Karen N. Peart, a spokeswoman, said in a statement. “Our admissions process has allowed Yale College to assemble an unparalleled student body, which is distinguished by its academic excellence and diversity.”
The “notice of voluntary dismissal” of the Yale lawsuit, filed in Federal District Court in Connecticut on Wednesday, does not give any reason for the Justice Department’s decision. It noted that Yale had not filed any answering papers in the action.
But the move does not mean that the lawsuit against Yale is dead. Students for Fair Admission, the organization that sued Harvard, plans to pick it up and refile it under their name.
“It is important that this lawsuit continues to be vigorously litigated through the courts during the coming months and years if necessary,” said Edward Blum, the president of the organization. “Using race and ethnicity in college admissions decisions is unfair, unconstitutional and is fraying the social fabric that holds our nation together.”
The lawsuit, filed last October, asserted that Yale discriminated against both Asian-American and white applicants. The government said that race was the “determinative factor” in hundreds of admissions decisions each year, and that “for the great majority of applicants,” Asian-Americans and whites have only one-eighth to one-fourth the likelihood of admission as Black applicants with comparable academic credentials.
Violation of Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, the government said, could cost Yale millions of dollars in taxpayer money. The complaint said Yale receives more than $600 million annually in federal funds.
Yale said its admissions process did not discriminate and complied with Supreme Court precedent. During the Trump administration, the Justice Department also supported the lawsuit against Harvard. But given the Biden administration’s withdrawal from the Yale case it seems likely to withdraw its support for the Harvard case as well.
