H. Res. 204 (119th)Bill Overview

Removing a certain Member from a certain standing committee of the House.

Simple ResolutionCongress|Congress
Cosponsors
Support
Republican
Introduced
Mar 10, 2025
Discussions
Bill Text
Current stageCommittee

Referred to the House Committee on Ethics.

Introduced
Committee
Floor
President
Law
Congressional Activities
01 · The brief
Plain-English summaryWhat this bill actually does

This House resolution would remove Representative Green of Texas from his assignment on the House Committee on Financial Services. The resolution cites Green’s interruptions of the President during the March 4, 2025 State of the Union joint session, his removal by the Sergeant at Arms, a subsequent House censure on March 6, 2025, and statements that he would repeat the conduct.

Why people may split

Whether enforcing decorum outweighs protecting protest and speech

Watch point

Relative to its intended legislative type, this bill is a concise, appropriately structured administrative resolution that clearly identifies the problem and specifies the remedial action (removal from a named committee).

This House resolution would remove Representative Green of Texas from his assignment on the House Committee on Financial Services.

The resolution cites Green’s interruptions of the President during the March 4, 2025 State of the Union joint session, his removal by the Sergeant at Arms, a subsequent House censure on March 6, 2025, and statements that he would repeat the conduct.

The sponsors argue his actions breached House decorum and warrant removal from the committee.

Passage40/100

Narrow, non-fiscal House disciplinary measure with plausible path if majority supports it, but politically sensitive and procedurally subject to delay.

CredibilityAligned

Relative to its intended legislative type, this bill is a concise, appropriately structured administrative resolution that clearly identifies the problem and specifies the remedial action (removal from a named committee).

Contention70/100

Whether enforcing decorum outweighs protecting protest and speech

02 · What it does

Who stands to gain, and who may push back.

Likely benefits vs burdens50% / 50%
Likely helpedLikely burdened

These are examples from the analysis, not a ranked list of the most-affected groups.

Likely helped
  • Potential benefitReinforces House rules by imposing a concrete consequence for breaches of decorum.
  • Potential benefitSignals accountability to preserve respectful joint sessions and institutional norms.
  • Potential benefitMay deter future disruptive interruptions during formal congressional proceedings.
Likely burdened
  • Potential burdenReduces constituents' direct representation on the Financial Services Committee.
  • Potential burdenAlters committee voting dynamics, possibly affecting financial oversight and legislation.
  • Potential burdenMay chill outspoken behavior by Members, constraining robust floor debate or protest.
03 · Why people split

Why the argument around this bill splits.

Whether enforcing decorum outweighs protecting protest and speech
Progressive90%

Likely supportive of removing a member who repeatedly disrupted a formal joint session and ignored admonitions.

Views enforcement of decorum as important for preserving institutional dignity and majority minority rights within Congress.

Leans supportive
Centrist65%

Cautiously supportive of sanctioning serious breaches of decorum but wary of setting a broad precedent.

Wants clear criteria, proportionality, and predictable process to avoid escalation or tit-for-tat removals.

Split reaction
Conservative20%

Likely views this as partisan punishment and overreach, especially if the member was expressing dissenting views.

Concerned removal exceeds prior sanction (censure) and undermines representation and free expression on the House floor.

Likely resistant
04 · Can it pass?

The path through Congress.

Introduced

Reached or meaningfully advanced

Committee

Reached or meaningfully advanced

Floor

Still ahead

President

Still ahead

Law

Still ahead

Passage likelihood40/100

Narrow, non-fiscal House disciplinary measure with plausible path if majority supports it, but politically sensitive and procedurally subject to delay.

Scope and complexity
24%
Scopenarrow
24%
Complexitylow
Why this could stall
  • Whether a House majority will back removal
  • Timing and recommendation from the Committee on Ethics
05 · Recent votes

Recent votes on the bill.

No vote history yet

The bill has not accumulated any surfaced votes yet.

06 · Go deeper

Go deeper than the headline read.

Included on this page

Whether enforcing decorum outweighs protecting protest and speech

Narrow, non-fiscal House disciplinary measure with plausible path if majority supports it, but politically sensitive and procedurally subje…

Unlocked analysis

Relative to its intended legislative type, this bill is a concise, appropriately structured administrative resolution that clearly identifies the problem and specifies the remedial action (removal from a named committee…

Go beyond the headline summary with full stakeholder mapping, legislative design analysis, passage barriers, and lens-by-lens tradeoff breakdowns.

Perspective breakdownsPassage barriersLegislative design reviewStakeholder impact map
Open full analysis