Capitol Erupts: Noem Faces Bipartisan Revolt, Trump Stands Firm

Paul Riverbank, 1/29/2026Kristi Noem faces bipartisan fire after Minneapolis protest deaths, with impeachment threats and deepening divides. Her fate—and the nation’s immigration debate—hang in the balance as political pressure mounts and Washington awaits the next move.

After the deaths of Alex Pretti and Renee Good at an anti-deportation rally in Minneapolis, Democratic leaders wasted no time leveling thunderous accusations: “Kristi Noem should be fired immediately,” was the line delivered in sync by Reps. Hakeem Jeffries, Katherine Clark, and Pete Aguilar. Behind closed doors—and, increasingly, out in the open—the word “impeachment” gets tossed around not as a last resort, but as a near certainty if Noem keeps her post.

But if you expected Republicans to rush to her defense, you’d have been mistaken. The defenses that usually materialize for political appointees in trouble are nowhere to be found. Senator Thom Tillis of North Carolina called the Minnesota episode “disqualifying.” That’s strong language, especially for someone in his position. From Alaska, Lisa Murkowski, never one for sugarcoating, put it bluntly: “It probably is time for her to step down.” Even John Thune—Senate Majority Leader and a fellow Plains Republican—managed little more than a shrug. “That’s the president’s judgment call to make,” he said, sidestepping the heart of the matter.

The White House, though, isn’t wavering. President Trump, when pressed, offered a definitive “No” on whether Noem was done. On Fox News, he didn’t let up: “Who closed up the border? She did, with Tom Homan, with the whole group. The border is a tremendous success.” For the moment, at least, that shield holds even as doubts multiply.

There’s another layer here—the collision between federal immigration policy and local law enforcement. Noem has stuck to her script describing Pretti as the "aggressor" and labelling the whole episode “an act of domestic terrorism.” But eyewitnesses on the ground tell a muddier story. Their accounts have fed new doubts, and critics now pounce with more fervor.

Although the substance of the policy—how and when to enforce federal immigration law—has been a topic of national debate for years, the recent images out of Minneapolis have injected a feverish urgency. Democrats now talk openly about using funding as leverage, threatening to choke off the Department of Homeland Security’s budget unless changes are made. It’s a familiar tool in Washington, but the stakes feel higher. Photos of families being split apart hover over hearings like unspoken accusations. Assistant Secretary Tricia McLaughlin tried to flip the script, fretting that lawmakers would rather defend those “committing crimes” than stand by the men and women enforcing the law. She argued forcefully that the real focus should be on public safety.

Even so, changing the flow of federal dollars isn’t so simple. With the Republican-led House having already approved a bigger chunk for Homeland Security, Democrats’ only hope lies in attaching legislative strings—riders that tangle up enforcement. There’s a fast-closing window before another possible government shutdown, and both parties are conscious of the risks: nobody wants to be the reason security lapses during a crisis.

Yet, the coalition against Noem isn’t universal. The House Freedom Caucus, often the administration’s most reliable defenders on law-and-order, shot off a letter asking the president to consider the Insurrection Act if protests flare again. They’ve also promised to keep the administration’s immigration plans funded.

None of this is just about agency policy or statistics. What has the capital buzzing is the question of leadership—whether Noem’s been too combative, too quick to brand her critics as enemies, and not attentive enough to the costs of real oversight. Since a tense news conference last Saturday, she’s largely stayed out of view. Her brief television appearance was somber, acknowledging the pain of Pretti’s family but insisting on the dangers facing law enforcement every day—a familiar refrain for embattled officials.

It’s hard to overstate how much the word “impeachment” has lost its taboo. Only two years ago, a GOP-led House moved to impeach then-Homeland Security Secretary Mayorkas. The bid fizzled in the Senate, dismissed almost out of hand, but it set a precedent. Now, over 160 House Democrats have added their names to a new resolution calling for Noem’s removal, citing the Minneapolis deaths as proof of “lawlessness and corruption.” Rep. Jamie Raskin, Judiciary Ranking Member, has signaled he’s prepared to open an inquiry along with colleagues from the Homeland Security and Oversight panels if top Democratic leaders hesitate.

Even the Senate’s top Democrat, Chuck Schumer, is ratcheting things up—calling Noem a liar and demanding she resign at once.

In the end, the country is watching more than a battle over one official. The crisis is an X-ray of the national debate—immigration, authority, public protest, and accountability, all condensed into a few headlines and a string of night sessions on Capitol Hill. Noem still has the president’s backing, for now. But Washington knows how fast loyalties can evaporate when the calculus of survival shifts. If the last week is anything to go by, more twists are just over the horizon.

Kristi Noem finds herself in the middle of a political whirlwind, but this time, the eye of the storm isn’t just swirling along predictable party lines. Every hour seems to notch up the pressure. What began as the usual partisan tug-of-war has mutated into something more tangled—criticism now bubbles up within both sides. It’s a rarity in Washington, and folks here know to brace themselves when familiar alliances start to fracture.After the deaths of Alex Pretti and Renee Good at an anti-deportation rally in Minneapolis, Democratic leaders wasted no time leveling thunderous accusations: “Kristi Noem should be fired immediately,” was the line delivered in sync by Reps. Hakeem Jeffries, Katherine Clark, and Pete Aguilar. Behind closed doors—and, increasingly, out in the open—the word “impeachment” gets tossed around not as a last resort, but as a near certainty if Noem keeps her post.But if you expected Republicans to rush to her defense, you’d have been mistaken. The defenses that usually materialize for political appointees in trouble are nowhere to be found. Senator Thom Tillis of North Carolina called the Minnesota episode “disqualifying.” That’s strong language, especially for someone in his position. From Alaska, Lisa Murkowski, never one for sugarcoating, put it bluntly: “It probably is time for her to step down.” Even John Thune—Senate Majority Leader and a fellow Plains Republican—managed little more than a shrug. “That’s the president’s judgment call to make,” he said, sidestepping the heart of the matter.The White House, though, isn’t wavering. President Trump, when pressed, offered a definitive “No” on whether Noem was done. On Fox News, he didn’t let up: “Who closed up the border? She did, with Tom Homan, with the whole group. The border is a tremendous success.” For the moment, at least, that shield holds even as doubts multiply.There’s another layer here—the collision between federal immigration policy and local law enforcement. Noem has stuck to her script describing Pretti as the "aggressor" and labelling the whole episode “an act of domestic terrorism.” But eyewitnesses on the ground tell a muddier story. Their accounts have fed new doubts, and critics now pounce with more fervor.Although the substance of the policy—how and when to enforce federal immigration law—has been a topic of national debate for years, the recent images out of Minneapolis have injected a feverish urgency. Democrats now talk openly about using funding as leverage, threatening to choke off the Department of Homeland Security’s budget unless changes are made. It’s a familiar tool in Washington, but the stakes feel higher. Photos of families being split apart hover over hearings like unspoken accusations. Assistant Secretary Tricia McLaughlin tried to flip the script, fretting that lawmakers would rather defend those “committing crimes” than stand by the men and women enforcing the law. She argued forcefully that the real focus should be on public safety.Even so, changing the flow of federal dollars isn’t so simple. With the Republican-led House having already approved a bigger chunk for Homeland Security, Democrats’ only hope lies in attaching legislative strings—riders that tangle up enforcement. There’s a fast-closing window before another possible government shutdown, and both parties are conscious of the risks: nobody wants to be the reason security lapses during a crisis.Yet, the coalition against Noem isn’t universal. The House Freedom Caucus, often the administration’s most reliable defenders on law-and-order, shot off a letter asking the president to consider the Insurrection Act if protests flare again. They’ve also promised to keep the administration’s immigration plans funded.None of this is just about agency policy or statistics. What has the capital buzzing is the question of leadership—whether Noem’s been too combative, too quick to brand her critics as enemies, and not attentive enough to the costs of real oversight. Since a tense news conference last Saturday, she’s largely stayed out of view. Her brief television appearance was somber, acknowledging the pain of Pretti’s family but insisting on the dangers facing law enforcement every day—a familiar refrain for embattled officials.It’s hard to overstate how much the word “impeachment” has lost its taboo. Only two years ago, a GOP-led House moved to impeach then-Homeland Security Secretary Mayorkas. The bid fizzled in the Senate, dismissed almost out of hand, but it set a precedent. Now, over 160 House Democrats have added their names to a new resolution calling for Noem’s removal, citing the Minneapolis deaths as proof of “lawlessness and corruption.” Rep. Jamie Raskin, Judiciary Ranking Member, has signaled he’s prepared to open an inquiry along with colleagues from the Homeland Security and Oversight panels if top Democratic leaders hesitate.Even the Senate’s top Democrat, Chuck Schumer, is ratcheting things up—calling Noem a liar and demanding she resign at once.In the end, the country is watching more than a battle over one official. The crisis is an X-ray of the national debate—immigration, authority, public protest, and accountability, all condensed into a few headlines and a string of night sessions on Capitol Hill. Noem still has the president’s backing, for now. But Washington knows how fast loyalties can evaporate when the calculus of survival shifts. If the last week is anything to go by, more twists are just over the horizon.