House Democrats are intensifying pressure on Kristi Noem, the Secretary of Homeland Security, as an impeachment resolution gains significant traction in the House. Introduced by Representative Robin Kelly of Illinois on January 14, 2026, House Resolution 996 now has over 140 cosponsors — representing a substantial portion of the Democratic Caucus — amid escalating outrage over a series of fatal incidents involving federal immigration agents.

Mounting Calls for Accountability in the Trump Administration

The push to impeach Ms. Noem, a former South Dakota governor known for her staunch conservative stance on border security, has evolved from a fringe initiative into a coordinated effort by House Democrats. The resolution accuses her of high crimes and misdemeanors, focusing on three core articles: obstruction of Congress, violation of public trust, and self-dealing.

This development comes against the backdrop of aggressive immigration enforcement operations under the Trump administration, particularly in urban areas like Minneapolis, where recent shootings by agents have drawn bipartisan criticism. Democrats argue that these incidents highlight systemic failures under Ms. Noem’s leadership at the Department of Homeland Security (DHS), which oversees agencies such as Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) and Customs and Border Protection (CBP).

Prominent Democrats, including House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries, have publicly stated that impeachment proceedings would proceed unless President Trump fires Ms. Noem immediately. In statements and interviews, party leaders have described the situation as a crisis of accountability, with some calling the department’s actions a “killing spree” in certain operations.

Even as the resolution remains referred to the House Judiciary Committee in a Republican-controlled chamber, its privileged status allows for potential floor action, though Speaker Mike Johnson and GOP leadership have shown no inclination to advance it.

Details of the Impeachment Articles

Article I: Obstruction of Congress centers on allegations that Ms. Noem directed DHS to systematically block congressional oversight of detention facilities. The resolution cites federal law permitting unannounced visits by members of Congress to ICE sites for oversight purposes. Despite this, lawmakers reportedly faced repeated denials of entry at locations including El Paso, Aurora, Los Angeles, New York, Chantilly, and Tacoma. Critics point to a DHS policy requiring seven days’ advance notice, which they say contravenes statutes and impedes transparency.

The article also references instances where FEMA, under DHS purview, allegedly withheld congressionally mandated funds without adequate explanation to oversight bodies like the Government Accountability Office.

Article II: Violation of Public Trust is the most expansive, accusing Ms. Noem of directing ICE to engage in warrantless arrests, excessive force, and violations of constitutional rights, including the First and Fourth Amendments as well as due process protections for U.S. citizens. Specific incidents detailed include federal judge rulings on unlawful arrests, raids affecting citizens, veterans, and elderly individuals, and the use of tear gas in prohibited settings.

High-profile cases involve shootings: On January 7, 2026, an ICE agent fatally shot a U.S. citizen in a vehicle that was reportedly moving away, with Ms. Noem’s public statements about the officer’s peril allegedly contradicted by video evidence. Other episodes include masked patrols and confrontations at public events, which Democrats say have eroded public confidence in federal law enforcement.

Article III: Self-Dealing alleges misuse of office for personal or connected gain, including bypassing competitive bidding processes under emergency declarations to award contracts worth millions, such as advertising campaigns and deals tied to associates.

These charges draw from documented events, court findings, and congressional inquiries, painting a picture of leadership that Democrats say prioritizes enforcement over legality and oversight.

Broader Political Context and Reactions

Ms. Noem, often referred to critically in some circles as “ICE Barbie” for her prominent role in the administration’s immigration crackdown, has defended her department’s actions as necessary for national security. Supporters within the Republican Party and the White House have praised her for executing the president’s border agenda aggressively.

However, the impeachment drive reflects deeper divisions over immigration policy in the second Trump term. Governors from states like New York and California have called for her removal, while some Republican senators have voiced concerns about specific operations. Senate Democrats have hinted at blocking DHS funding if reforms are not forthcoming.

The resolution’s momentum — with cosponsors now approaching or exceeding initial reports of 140, and climbing toward three-quarters of House Democrats in some accounts — underscores how quickly public and political sentiment can shift in response to high-profile incidents. As video evidence and witness accounts circulate, the debate has moved beyond partisan lines in limited ways, though passage in the House remains unlikely without GOP support.

For now, the effort serves as a forceful statement from Democrats about the limits of executive power in immigration enforcement and the importance of congressional oversight. Whether it leads to formal proceedings, an inquiry, or simply heightened scrutiny of DHS operations, the impeachment resolution has placed Kristi Noem at the center of one of the most intense political controversies of the early 2026 congressional session.