Maxine Waters Among 12 Democrats Boycotting President Trump’s State of the Union

Breaking

At least 12 Democratic lawmakers have announced plans to boycott President Donald Trump’s upcoming State of the Union address, opting instead to attend a rally organized by progressive advocacy groups on the National Mall.

Among those skipping the address are Senators Ed Markey of Massachusetts, Jeff Merkley of Oregon, Chris Murphy of Connecticut, Tina Smith of Minnesota, and Chris Van Hollen of Maryland. Members of the House joining the boycott include Representatives Yassamin Ansari of Arizona, Becca Balint of Vermont, Greg Casar of Texas, Veronica Escobar of Texas, Pramila Jayapal of Washington, Delia Ramirez of Illinois, Bonnie Watson Coleman of New Jersey, and Maxine Waters of California.

Senator Chris Van Hollen announced his decision publicly, writing on X, “Next week, Trump will deliver his State of the Union address. I won’t be there. Trump is marching America towards fascism, and I refuse to normalize his shredding of our Constitution & democracy. This cannot be business as usual.”

Details & Background

The State of the Union address traditionally serves as a constitutional duty of the president to update Congress and the American people on the condition of the nation and outline legislative priorities. Historically, members of the opposing party express disagreement through a formal televised response following the speech.

In recent years, however, partisan tensions have escalated beyond the traditional rebuttal. During President Trump’s first term, some Democratic lawmakers skipped the address entirely, staged walkouts, or were removed from the chamber during disruptions.

Senator Chris Murphy said President Trump has made “a mockery” of the address, claiming he has turned a moment intended to unify the country into “a campaign rally to spew hatred and division.” Murphy added, “Democrats have no obligation to reward him with an audience as he lies and attacks people who disagree with him.”

Representative Becca Balint echoed similar concerns, stating that the address “is meant to be a serious reflection of our nation’s progress, our shortfalls, and the common goals ahead of us.” She added, “Instead of sitting through what has become President Trump’s annual self-congratulation, misinformation, and division speech, I look forward to a night of standing with colleagues, organizers, advocates, and everyday Americans who are committed to doing the real and honest work of protecting our rights, strengthening our communities, and holding those in power accountable.”

Reactions

The White House sharply criticized the boycott. White House spokeswoman Abigail Jackson responded by pointing to Democratic opposition to key elements of President Trump’s agenda.

“It’s not a surprise that they refuse to celebrate and honor the Americans who have benefitted from the commonsense policies Republicans have governed with,” Jackson said. She specifically referenced Democratic votes against tax cuts and resistance to enhanced border security measures.

Republican lawmakers have framed the boycott as political theater, arguing that the State of the Union is an opportunity to show respect for the American people and for guests invited to the chamber — often including military families, law enforcement officers, and citizens impacted by federal policy.

The divide underscores the deeply polarized political climate as President Trump advances a second-term agenda focused heavily on border enforcement, tax relief, and rolling back Biden-era regulations.

Why This Matters to You

For millions of Americans — particularly those concerned about illegal immigration, public safety, and economic policy — the State of the Union represents more than ceremony. It is a platform for outlining the direction of the country and the administration’s plan to address national priorities.

The decision by multiple Democratic lawmakers to boycott the speech reflects the intensity of opposition to President Trump’s policies, especially on border security and immigration enforcement. At the same time, the White House has emphasized what it describes as measurable benefits from tax cuts and stricter border policies.

The federal government continues to face major legislative battles ahead, including funding priorities, immigration enforcement measures, and national security concerns. Whether lawmakers attend or protest, the policies discussed during the address will directly affect American families, businesses, and communities.

The moment highlights a defining contrast in Washington — between those advancing the administration’s agenda and those choosing visible resistance — as the nation watches closely.