Senate Acquits Trump 57-43 Despite Bipartisan Majority Finding Him Guilty

On February 13, 2021, the Senate voted 57-43 to acquit former President Donald Trump on the charge of incitement of insurrection, with the vote falling ten short of the two-thirds majority (67 votes) required for conviction. Despite the acquittal, the vote represented the most bipartisan presidential impeachment in American history, with seven Republican senators joining all fifty Democrats to form a clear majority finding Trump guilty of the most serious presidential offense in U.S. history. The 57-43 vote marked the first time in American history that a president was convicted by a bipartisan majority of the Senate, even though the constitutional supermajority requirement prevented that majority from resulting in conviction. Trump became the only president to be impeached twice and to be tried after leaving office, and the trial concluded with the unprecedented result of a bipartisan guilty verdict that nonetheless failed to meet the Constitution’s conviction threshold.

The seven Republican senators who voted to convict Trump were: Mitt Romney of Utah, Richard Burr of North Carolina, Bill Cassidy of Louisiana, Susan Collins of Maine, Lisa Murkowski of Alaska, Ben Sasse of Nebraska, and Pat Toomey of Pennsylvania. The group represented a diverse cross-section of Republican political circumstances: some like Romney and Collins had long histories of occasional independence from Trump, while others like Burr and Cassidy surprised observers with their guilty votes after previously signaling support for Trump or voting that the trial was unconstitutional. The votes demonstrated genuine political courage in most cases, as each senator faced immediate censure threats from their state Republican parties and potential primary challenges, though several had insulated themselves by either announcing retirement or benefiting from recent reelection that gave them six years before facing voters again.

The Seven Republicans and Their Remarkable Statements

Senator Richard Burr of North Carolina provided perhaps the biggest surprise of the vote. Burr had voted just days earlier that the trial was unconstitutional, leading observers to assume he would vote to acquit. However, after hearing the evidence, Burr voted guilty and released a powerful statement: “The evidence is compelling that President Trump is guilty of inciting an insurrection.” Burr had announced his retirement before the trial, freeing him to vote his conscience without concern for political consequences. His shift from the constitutional vote to the final vote demonstrated that the House managers’ evidence presentation had been effective in changing at least some minds.

Senator Bill Cassidy of Louisiana had also voted that the trial was constitutional after Trump’s lawyers delivered their disastrous opening arguments, and he followed through with a guilty vote despite representing a deeply pro-Trump state. Cassidy, who had been reelected in 2020 by a 40-point margin and wouldn’t face voters until 2026, posted on social media: “Our Constitution and our country is more important than any one person. I voted to convict President Trump because he is guilty.” The Louisiana Republican Party unanimously censured Cassidy within hours of his vote.

Senator Susan Collins of Maine, who had just won reelection in 2020 and wouldn’t face voters until 2026, delivered a sixteen-minute Senate floor address citing Trump’s “abuse of power.” Collins had voted to convict in the impeachment trial despite being among the more moderate Republicans, and her vote reflected both her history of occasional independence and the political insulation provided by Maine’s ranked-choice voting system.

Senator Lisa Murkowski of Alaska stood out as the only one of the seven who would face voters in 2022, yet she voted to convict nonetheless. Murkowski emphasized Trump’s failure to protect the Capitol and his moral responsibility for the attack. Alaska’s new open primary and ranked-choice voting system significantly reduced her risk from a Republican primary challenge, giving her more freedom to vote her conscience. Murkowski had long been willing to break with her party on key votes and had survived a write-in campaign in 2010, demonstrating her political resilience.

Senator Mitt Romney of Utah, who had been the sole Republican to vote guilty in Trump’s first impeachment trial, once again voted to convict, making him the only senator in American history to vote to remove a president of his own party from office (or in this case, to convict a former president). Romney, who had won his 2018 election with nearly 63% of the vote in a Trump-supporting state and would face reelection in 2024, had consistently criticized Trump throughout his presidency. His guilty vote was expected given his previous stance, but it nonetheless required political courage given the Trump-aligned direction of the Republican Party.

Senator Ben Sasse of Nebraska, who had just won reelection in 2020 by substantial margins and wouldn’t face voters until 2026, had preemptively addressed potential censure by releasing videos defending his independence. Sasse cited Trump’s election fraud claims as violations of his presidential oath and had been increasingly critical of Trump’s conduct. His guilty vote reflected both his constitutional conservatism and his belief that Trump had betrayed conservative principles.

Senator Pat Toomey of Pennsylvania, who had announced his retirement in October 2020 and wouldn’t seek reelection in 2022, voted guilty and noted that Trump’s actions marked “the first time in American history” that the presidential transfer of power wasn’t peaceful. Toomey represented a state Trump had lost in 2020, and his retirement freed him from political consequences. His vote emphasized the historic nature of Trump’s offense against American democratic traditions.

Trump’s Response and Historical Significance

Unable to access Twitter after his permanent suspension following January 6, Trump responded to the acquittal via email statement, characterizing the trial as “another phase of the greatest witch hunt in the history of our country.” Trump claimed complete exoneration and immediately signaled his intention to remain active in Republican politics, stating the MAGA movement “has only just begun.” The statement demonstrated Trump’s continued refusal to accept responsibility for the January 6 attack or to show any remorse for his conduct—a defiance that would feature prominently in Senate Republican Leader Mitch McConnell’s floor speech minutes later.

The 57-43 vote carried profound historical significance beyond the immediate outcome. It represented the largest bipartisan vote to convict a president in American history, surpassing the Democratic votes against Bill Clinton and demonstrating that Trump’s conduct on January 6 had genuinely crossed lines even for some Republicans. The fact that a clear majority of the Senate—representing a clear majority of the American population—voted guilty established a bipartisan historical record that Trump had committed an impeachable offense, even if the constitutional supermajority requirement prevented conviction.

The vote also revealed the structural challenges of the impeachment process when applied to a president who commands intense partisan loyalty. Despite overwhelming video evidence, constitutional law experts’ testimony, and the lived experience of senators who had personally experienced the attack, 43 Republican senators voted to acquit. Many cited the jurisdictional argument that a former president could not be tried—an argument that McConnell himself had enabled by refusing to reconvene the Senate for a trial while Trump was still in office. The acquittal meant that Trump could not be barred from future federal office, leaving open the possibility of his return to power despite what a bipartisan Senate majority had determined was incitement of insurrection against the United States government.

The Paradox of Acquittal Despite Guilt

The trial’s outcome created a paradoxical historical record: Trump was acquitted despite a bipartisan majority voting guilty, he faced no legal consequences for what senators across party lines acknowledged was the gravest presidential offense in American history, and the constitutional mechanism designed to hold presidents accountable proved unable to function when confronted with intense partisan polarization. The seven Republicans who voted guilty represented the maximum number willing to prioritize constitutional duty over partisan loyalty and political self-preservation, but they fell far short of the seventeen Republican votes that would have been needed for conviction.

The acquittal also established dangerous precedent: a president could incite violence to overturn an election, could refuse to protect Congress during an attack, could show no remorse for his conduct, and still escape conviction if his party maintained sufficient loyalty. The gap between the evidence presented—which even many Republicans acknowledged was “compelling” and “damning”—and the final vote demonstrated that the impeachment process had become primarily a political rather than legal proceeding, with predetermined outcomes based on partisan affiliation rather than facts and evidence.

For the seven Republicans who voted guilty, the vote represented a choice to prioritize constitutional duty over political expediency, though most had carefully insulated themselves from immediate political consequences through retirement announcements or recent reelections. Their votes established them as a distinct faction within the Republican Party—senators willing to break with Trump despite the political risks—but they remained a small minority insufficient to impose meaningful accountability. The acquittal ensured Trump would remain a dominant force in Republican politics and left unresolved the fundamental question of whether American democracy possessed the institutional mechanisms to hold a president accountable for attempting to overturn an election through violence.