This article was first published in the On the Hill newsletter. Sign up to receive the newsletter in your inbox on Friday mornings here.
For those of you who tuned into the State of the Union on Tuesday night, you may have seen a familiar face in the press box. Your On the Hill author was sitting front row, and got a pleasant surprise sitting next to the U.S. men’s hockey team as they made a cameo.
While I tried to keep my cool on camera, dozens of my friends and family members were receiving this text message: “AHHHH.” So, a good night overall.
But that visit was one of the only bipartisan moments we witnessed during the hour-and-some-change address.
Which raises the question: Will we ever return to an era of civility in which the speech can be used to unite the country?
The State of the Union, at its core, is meant to be an annual report on, well, the state of our union.
Since its inception in 1913, the speech would often be used to highlight bipartisan wins and craft a unifying message. That’s not exactly what you’ll get in modern times as the annual address has devolved into somewhat of a partisan exercise highlighted by heckling matches.
We saw that on full display on Tuesday night when one Democrat, Rep. Al Green of Texas, was removed from the chamber just minutes into the speech for holding up a sign toward the president that read: “Black People Are Not Apes.”
It was a response to a now-deleted social media post from President Donald Trump earlier this month of a video that ended with an image of former President Barack Obama and former first lady Michelle Obama as monkeys.
Democratic leaders implored lawmakers ahead of time not to heckle during the speech so as not to attract negative attention. But there were times when a few progressives yelled back at different points of Trump’s speech.
And while this seems like a now-normal occurrence during these types of speeches — Reps. Lauren Boebert and Marjorie Taylor Greene made headlines after interrupting former President Joe Biden’s State of the Union in 2022 — it raises an important question: Is this what it will always be like?
“(The State of the Union) used to be more aspirational, ceremonial, seeking bipartisanship, cooperation and things like that,” Aaron Kall, director of debate for the University of Michigan Debate Program, told me in an interview. “Now it’s definitely different, and I think it’s because the incentives and political senses have changed. The country’s become more partisan.”
And, it’s true. The speech itself has been used more so as a campaign rally by the president in recent years, and the reaction from the crowd has been used as a political tool by both parties. Democrats used what little power they have in the minority to yell at Trump at the dais, and Republicans were able to use that heckling to claim partisanship.
“I’ve been to 16 of these,” Sen. Mike Lee, R-Utah, said in a post on X. “I’ve never seen Republicans behave like this during a Democrat SOTU.”
Lee later clarified in a separate post that, yeah, Republicans have been guilty of this, too.
“Have Republicans occasionally had outbursts? Yes, of course,” he wrote. “But in the 16 SOTU addresses I’ve attended, I’ve never seen the kind of constant interruptions of the president that I saw from Democrats last night.”
But aside from the heckling, the whole event has become more political over the years. Think about it: Political parties literally sit on opposite sides of the aisle for the speech. And that’s become even more of a visual when the opposing party refuses to stand or clap at the president’s remarks — regardless of what is said.
“It’s almost like a litmus test that, because the partnership is so high, no matter what, those of the opposite party are not allowed to cheer for discussion of policy proposals,” Kall said. “Democrats kind of felt that even if they agreed with the statement, they didn’t want to engage in what he was asking to do.”
So is the speech changed forever? Not all think so.
Rep. Blake Moore, R-Utah, told me that while yes, the State of the Union had “many bipartisan and partisan moments,” he noted “that was also my experience during the Biden Administration.”
“It will likely continue to have both for years to come.”
Stories Driving the Week
- Redistricting scramble: After a new congressional map survived a slew of legal challenges and created a strong Democratic district in the northern part of Salt Lake County, the four members of Utah’s all-Republican House delegation now face a burning question: Where to run in 2026?
- SAVE Act boost: President Donald Trump sent a jolt of energy through conservative Republicans during the State of the Union on Tuesday evening as he implored the majority party to pass stronger voter identification laws and proof-of-citizenship requirements. But the reality is much more complicated beneath the surface.
- Oh, heck: Americans are much more comfortable with swearing than they used to be, but a new survey shows a majority of Americans still don’t like it when their politicians use profanity in public.
DHS shutdown stretches into third week
It’s now been 13 days since the Department of Homeland Security has shut down, and we don’t look much closer to a reopening any time soon.
Senate Majority Leader John Thune, R-S.D., said the White House is still exchanging counteroffers with Senate Democrats as negotiations drag on, but it doesn’t appear either side has made a step toward the other in terms of compromise.
Democrats are still waiting for the latest offer, which Thune says should be coming soon, although the details of all the negotiations have been kept private. Still, the Senate Republican leader seemed skeptical Democrats were working in good faith: “(Democrats) have concluded this is good politics for them,” he said on Thursday.
And if you ask Democrats, they’d say the same thing.
Patty Murray, the top Democrat on the Senate Appropriations Committee, told reporters this week she didn’t think Republicans were working in good faith either — and said the White House did not make meaningful proposals in their counter offer.
Meanwhile, House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries, D-N.Y., said there “hasn’t been any real recent communication with the White House.”
“We believe immigration enforcement should be fair and just and that’s what the American people deserve,” Jeffries said on Tuesday. “That’s not what they’re getting right now, and until that changes, the DHS funding bill is not going to move forward.”
So, I don’t expect a lot of movement very quickly. But hopefully they get the ball rolling as TSA and Secret Service agents continue to work without pay.
Quick Hits
From the Hill: Sen. Mike Lee lays groundwork to ease Biden-era protections of Grand Staircase-Escalante. … These Utah lawmakers got a shoutout from Trump in his State of the Union. …
From the White House: Minnesota continues to face turmoil as Vance launches ‘war on fraud.’ … What Trump’s BLM nominee says about selling public lands. … Trump approval underwater nationwide — but not in Utah.
From the courts: Lawsuit claims Trump’s vaccine revisions threaten children’s health. … Utah GOP sues over redistricting signature removal campaign. … Judge rejects bid to remove Utah County prosecutors in Tyler Robinson case.
What’s next
The Senate is back on Monday, and will turn its focus to reopening DHS as well as a bipartisan housing package. The House is back on Tuesday, and could see a vote next week on reining in Trump’s military authority in Iran.
As always, feel free to reach out to me by email with story ideas or questions you have for lawmakers. And follow me on X for breaking news and timely developments from the Hill.