Marjorie Taylor Greene Explores Motion to Vacate Johnson Over ACA Dispute and Leadership Failures

Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene was reportedly working in mid-December 2025 to gauge Republican support for a motion to vacate Speaker Mike Johnson from the speakership, seeking the nine Republican co-signers now required under new House rules to trigger such a vote. The reported effort represents what sources described as a potential “last act of defiance” before Greene’s scheduled January 5, 2026 resignation from Congress, following her public falling out with President Trump.

The motion to vacate exploration occurred against the backdrop of multiple Republican revolts against Johnson’s leadership, including the unprecedented discharge petition on ACA subsidies where four Republicans defected to force a vote. Greene’s reported outreach to colleagues sought to capitalize on growing frustration with Johnson’s management of the slim 218-215 Republican majority and his handling of contentious policy issues like healthcare subsidies, government funding, and Epstein file releases.

Under House rules adopted at the beginning of the 119th Congress in January 2025, a motion to vacate now requires nine Republican sponsors to be considered privileged on the House floor. This represents a significant increase from previous rules where a single member could force a vote to remove the speaker. The change was specifically designed to prevent situations like Matt Gaetz’s successful ouster of Kevin McCarthy in October 2023, which triggered weeks of House paralysis.

Greene herself had previously filed a motion to vacate against Johnson on March 22, 2024, though she initially declined to make it privileged, describing it as “more of a warning than a pink slip.” She eventually forced a vote on May 8, 2024, which failed spectacularly by a vote of 359-43 with 7 voting present. The overwhelming defeat saw 196 Republicans and 163 Democrats unite to table—effectively kill—Greene’s resolution, demonstrating broad bipartisan opposition to removing Johnson at that time.

The May 2024 vote breakdown showed just how isolated Greene was in her anti-Johnson stance: only 11 Republicans voted against tabling the motion, meaning that even among conservatives potentially sympathetic to her grievances, there was little appetite for another speaker fight. The 32 Democrats who voted against tabling were largely progressive members who saw political advantage in Republican dysfunction but not enough to actually remove Johnson and risk empowering a more conservative replacement.

Greene’s failed 2024 motion to vacate led directly to the House rules changes requiring multiple co-signers, as Republicans sought to prevent any single member from triggering speaker fights and paralyzing the chamber. The new nine-member threshold creates a significantly higher bar, forcing any would-be ousters to build a coalition of support before bringing a motion to the floor. This procedural change has effectively protected Johnson from the kind of solo guerrilla attacks that Greene previously employed.

According to reports from early December 2025, Greene was “approaching members to get to nine who will oust the speaker,” though the effort faced long odds given President Trump’s continued public support for Johnson. At a White House event, Trump had said “I think Mike Johnson is great” and called him “a fantastic speaker,” making it politically dangerous for Republicans to openly support removing him.

However, Greene publicly denied the reports, telling MS NOW that claims she was working to oust Johnson were “not true” and that she was “not interested in participating in” their story. The denial came as Greene faced her own political crisis following Trump’s withdrawal of his endorsement and his public attacks calling her “Marjorie ‘Traitor’ Greene” and “a ranting Lunatic” over her advocacy for releasing full Epstein investigation files.

The timing of Greene’s reported motion to vacate exploration was particularly significant given her announced resignation effective January 5, 2026. With only a handful of legislative days remaining before her departure, any effort to remove Johnson would need to move quickly. She had stated she would officially resign on the same day the new Congress convenes to elect a speaker for the 119th Congress’s second session, further limiting her window of action.

The context of Greene’s reported efforts included multiple recent challenges to Johnson’s authority beyond the ACA discharge petition. Republicans had defected on votes related to Jeffrey Epstein file releases, federal worker bargaining rights, and defense authorization provisions. House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries had suggested Democrats would not be “as helpful as last time” in saving Johnson from a motion to vacate, potentially making such an effort more viable than in May 2024.

Greene’s grievances with Johnson reportedly centered on his handling of government funding negotiations, his cooperation with Democrats on certain legislation, and his perceived abandonment of hardline conservative priorities. She had previously accused Johnson of “betraying our conference and breaking our rules” by working with Democrats to pass spending bills that avoided government shutdowns but included policy provisions conservatives opposed.

The broader pattern of Republican dysfunction under Johnson’s speakership provided potential recruiting ground for Greene’s reported motion to vacate efforts. The speaker’s razor-thin majority meant that every Republican vote mattered, giving individual members outsized leverage to extract concessions or threaten leadership. Johnson had faced public criticism from members across the ideological spectrum, from hardliners demanding more aggressive conservative tactics to moderates frustrated by leadership’s refusal to allow votes on bipartisan priorities.

Rep. Kevin Kiley’s comment that the discharge petition approach represented “less than the desired level of leadership” reflected broader unease with Johnson’s management style, even among members not aligned with Greene’s hardline positions. The sentiment suggested potential vulnerability for Johnson, though converting vague dissatisfaction into active support for removing him remained a significant challenge.

The threat of a motion to vacate hung over Johnson even if Greene’s reported efforts ultimately went nowhere, as it highlighted the precarious nature of his position leading a fractious caucus with minimal margin for error. Every policy decision and procedural move carried the risk of triggering a rebellion that could threaten his speakership. The ACA discharge petition, with four Republicans openly defying leadership, demonstrated that party discipline had deteriorated to a degree that made managing the caucus extraordinarily difficult.

Greene’s history of inflammatory rhetoric and confrontational tactics limited her effectiveness as a coalition-builder within the Republican conference. Many colleagues viewed her as more interested in media attention and political theater than serious legislating, making it difficult for her to recruit the eight additional co-signers needed for a motion to vacate. Her falling out with Trump further isolated her, as Republicans increasingly saw aligning with her as politically toxic.

The failure of Greene’s previous motion to vacate by such a lopsided margin in May 2024 also created institutional memory that worked against her reported December 2025 efforts. Members who had voted to protect Johnson once were unlikely to reverse course absent dramatic new developments, and Johnson’s survival through multiple subsequent crises suggested he had built sufficient support to withstand challenges.

House Freedom Caucus members who might have been natural allies for a motion to vacate had largely made peace with Johnson by late 2025, recognizing that another speaker fight would damage Republican legislative prospects and potentially empower Democrats. The memory of the three-week paralysis following McCarthy’s ouster loomed large, making members reluctant to trigger another destabilizing leadership fight.

As Greene’s January 5, 2026 resignation date approached, the window for any motion to vacate effort closed rapidly. Even if she could recruit nine co-signers, the procedural timeline for forcing a vote and conducting a speaker election would extend beyond her time in office. The reported effort appeared more symbolic than practical—a final gesture of defiance against a speaker she viewed as insufficiently conservative and too willing to compromise with Democrats.

Johnson survived Greene’s reported motion to vacate efforts, as he had survived previous challenges to his authority. The speaker’s resilience owed partly to lack of viable alternatives within the Republican conference, partly to Trump’s continued support, and partly to members’ exhaustion with leadership fights. The episode nonetheless underscored the persistent fragility of Republican unity and Johnson’s tenuous grip on power heading into 2026.