WASHINGTON — Former President Donald Trump’s latest push to abolish the Senate filibuster in order to end the ongoing government shutdown has been met with firm and immediate resistance from Republican senators, many of whom have long defended the 60 vote threshold as a vital safeguard for minority party rights and legislative stability.
In late night social media posts Thursday, Trump urged Senate Republicans to invoke the so called “nuclear option” and eliminate the filibuster entirely, declaring that doing so would immediately end this ridiculous, country destroying shutdown.
But within hours, senior GOP lawmakers rebuffed the call. Senate Majority Leader John Thune of South Dakota reaffirmed his commitment to maintaining the rule, underscoring the deep divisions between Trump and congressional Republicans on how to govern amid partisan gridlock.
The Senate filibuster, which requires 60 votes to advance most legislation, has long stood as one of the chamber’s defining procedural hurdles. It forces bipartisan cooperation in an increasingly polarized Congress.
Since 1975, when the Senate adopted the current cloture rule, both parties have at times sought to weaken or circumvent it. The threshold has already been lowered for executive branch nominees and judicial confirmations, but efforts to scrap it for legislation have consistently met bipartisan resistance.
The current standoff emerged as the federal government remains partially shuttered, with both parties blaming each other for the impasse over spending and border security. Trump, now serving his second term after his 2024 victory, has accused Senate Republicans of lacking resolve.
“It is time for Republicans to play their Trump card,” the former president wrote online. “We are in power, and if we did what we should be doing, it would immediately end this shutdown.”
Political analysts say Trump’s renewed campaign to dismantle the filibuster reflects a growing divide within the Republican Party between institutional conservatives and populist allies of the former president.
Dr. Elaine McPherson, a political science professor at Georgetown University, said Trump’s appeal resonates with those frustrated by Washington gridlock but alienates traditionalists who view the Senate’s procedural guardrails as essential.
“Eliminating the filibuster might offer short term wins, but long term consequences could be severe for Republicans,” McPherson said.
“The moment Democrats regain control, they could pass sweeping legislation on voting rights, abortion access, and court reform without GOP input.”
Sen. Thom Tillis of North Carolina, one of the filibuster’s staunchest defenders, warned that dismantling the rule would erode the Senate’s identity.
“If Republicans ever abolished the filibuster, I’d resign that same day,” he told reporters earlier this month. “We stood firm before, and I can’t imagine anyone changing now.”
Historically, the filibuster has been both a tool of obstruction and compromise. According to data compiled by the Congressional Research Service, more than 300 cloture motions were filed in the 117th Congress, reflecting a sharp increase from previous decades.
Under Democratic control in 2013, then Majority Leader Harry Reid used the nuclear option to end filibusters on executive and judicial nominations, excluding the Supreme Court. Republicans expanded the change in 2017 to include Supreme Court confirmations.
But the legislative filibuster which applies to most bills has remained intact. Supporters argue that it prevents one party dominance, particularly as Senate control has shifted frequently over the past two decades.
“The 60 vote rule has protected this country from dramatic policy swings,” Thune said earlier in October. “It’s been a bulwark against extreme changes that could undermine stability.”
Outside Washington, opinions on the filibuster debate are mixed but increasingly polarized. In Columbus, Ohio, small business owner Mark Hensley said he supports Trump’s call to end the rule.
“If one side keeps blocking everything, nothing gets done,” Hensley said. “It’s time to let the majority govern.” But others, like retired teacher Carol Briggs of Wichita, Kansas, view the filibuster as a necessary check.
“It forces cooperation,” Briggs said. “If you remove it, the pendulum will swing wildly every election cycle, and regular Americans will pay the price.”
Despite mounting pressure from Trump and a handful of populist conservatives like Sen. Bernie Moreno of Ohio, Senate leaders appear unlikely to alter the rule.
Even those open to limited reforms, such as Sen. Markwayne Mullin of Oklahoma, oppose a full repeal. “If we want to do something extremely limited to avoid shutdowns in the future, maybe,” Mullin said. “But to nuke the filibuster absolutely not.”
Democrats, meanwhile, have dared Republicans to act unilaterally. Sen. John Fetterman of Pennsylvania said he supports carving out exceptions for government funding bills.
We ran on killing the filibuster, and now we love it, Fetterman said. If Republicans want to do it, go ahead but they’ll own the consequences. For now, the Senate remains gridlocked, with negotiations continuing behind closed doors.
Analysts expect the issue to resurface throughout Trump’s second term as the balance between populist urgency and institutional restraint continues to define GOP politics.
Trump’s push to abolish the Senate filibuster has reignited a long standing debate over the chamber’s identity and the boundaries of executive influence.
While his appeal energizes supporters frustrated by Washington’s inertia, Republican leaders remain steadfast in defending the rule that has defined Senate deliberation for nearly half a century.
As the shutdown drags on, the clash underscores the broader struggle within the Republican Party: whether to preserve the institutional norms that limit power or to discard them in pursuit of swift political victories.