President Donald Trump has reignited a heated debate in Washington by urging Senate Republicans to eliminate the filibuster—a key Senate rule requiring 60 votes to advance most legislation. In late-night social media posts on October 30, Trump called for the “nuclear option” to scrap the 60-vote threshold, allowing Republicans to pass a government funding bill with a simple majority and end a monthlong shutdown without Democratic support. However, his push has met swift and firm resistance from within his own party, highlighting deep divisions over a rule that many see as essential to the Senate’s deliberative nature.
The government shutdown, now entering its 30th day as of October 31, has left federal workers unpaid, disrupted services, and affected millions of Americans. Republicans hold a slim 53-seat majority in the Senate but lack the 60 votes needed to overcome a Democratic filibuster on their preferred funding bill. Democrats, in turn, are demanding concessions, such as extending subsidies for Affordable Care Act health coverage, which Republicans reject as too costly for a short-term spending measure.
Trump’s frustration boiled over in posts on Truth Social. “It is now time for the Republicans to play their ‘TRUMP CARD,’ and go for what is called the Nuclear Option — Get rid of the Filibuster, and get rid of it, NOW!” he wrote. In another post, he added, “THE CHOICE IS CLEAR — INITIATE THE ‘NUCLEAR OPTION,’ GET RID OF THE FILIBUSTER AND, MAKE AMERICA GREAT AGAIN!” He argued that Democrats would abolish the rule on their “first day” in power if roles were reversed, citing their failed 2022 attempt to change it for voting rights legislation.
What Is the Filibuster, and Why Does It Matter?
The filibuster is not mentioned in the Constitution but has evolved as a Senate tradition since the early 19th century. It allows senators in the minority to extend debate indefinitely, effectively blocking a bill unless 60 senators vote for “cloture” to end the debate and proceed to a vote. Today, a filibuster doesn’t require marathon speeches like in the classic film Mr. Smith Goes to Washington; senators simply signal their intent, and the 60-vote hurdle applies.
The rule has been weakened over time but only for certain matters. In 2013, Democrats under Majority Leader Harry Reid eliminated it for most executive nominations and lower-court judges. Republicans, led by Mitch McConnell in 2017, extended this to Supreme Court nominees. Legislative filibusters, however, remain intact for bills like government funding. Exceptions exist, such as budget reconciliation, which Republicans used in Trump’s first term for tax cuts but which has limits and can’t fully resolve the current impasse.
Proponents argue the filibuster forces bipartisanship and protects the minority party from sweeping changes when power shifts. Critics, including Trump, call it an outdated obstacle that “kills” progress. As Senate Majority Leader John Thune, R-S.D., said earlier in October, the 60-vote threshold “has protected this country” from extreme policies, like those he claimed Democrats would pursue if they won—such as statehood for D.C. and Puerto Rico or court-packing.
Immediate Republican Resistance
Despite Trump’s pleas, Senate GOP leaders and members have dug in. Thune, a staunch defender of Senate traditions, reaffirmed his stance on October 31 through spokesman Ryan Wrasse: “Leader Thune’s position on the importance of the legislative filibuster is unchanged.” Senate Majority Whip John Barrasso, R-Wyo., echoed this, with his office stating his support for the rule remains firm.
Several senators publicly rejected the idea. Sen. John Curtis, R-Utah, posted on X: “The filibuster forces us to find common ground in the Senate. Power changes hands, but principles shouldn’t. I’m a firm no on eliminating it.” Sen. Thom Tillis, R-N.C., who has vowed to resign if the filibuster is abolished, noted Trump’s similar calls during his first term were ignored. “We stood firm there,” Tillis said. “I can’t imagine anybody changing now.”
Others were equally blunt. Sen. Roger Marshall, R-Kan., called it a “nonstarter.” Sen. Markwayne Mullin, R-Okla., said he would “absolutely not” support going nuclear, though he might consider limited changes to prevent future shutdowns. Sen. Jon Husted, R-Ohio, dismissed a colleague’s suggestion to end it, saying, “That’s not a step I think we should take.” Even House Speaker Mike Johnson, R-La., deferred to the Senate, noting, “The filibuster has traditionally been viewed as a very important safeguard. If the shoe was on the other foot, I don’t think our team would like it.”
A few Republicans have shown openness. Sen. Bernie Moreno, R-Ohio, suggested on Fox News that eliminating it could let Republicans “just vote” to reopen the government. Sen. Tommy Tuberville, R-Ala., called it “probably a viable option,” and Sen. Josh Hawley, R-Mo., prioritized avoiding hunger for children over “some Senate procedure.” But with only 53 GOP senators, losing even a few votes dooms the effort—especially since figures like Sen. Rand Paul, R-Ky., often oppose funding bills.
Democratic Reactions and Broader Context
Democrats have taunted Republicans to follow through if they dislike negotiating. Sen. John Fetterman, D-Pa., who campaigned in 2024 on ending the filibuster, said sarcastically, “We ran on killing the filibuster, and now we love it.” He supported carving it out just for funding bills to prevent shutdowns. Rep. Chris DeLuzio, D-Pa., told NBC’s Meet the Press NOW that Republicans “should have” nuked it if they wanted to avoid Democratic input.
The standoff shows no quick resolution, with the Senate not returning until November 3. The shutdown is nearing the 35-day record set in 2018-2019. Meanwhile, other Trump administration actions face legal scrutiny, such as two federal judges ruling against withholding SNAP benefits during the shutdown, ensuring food assistance continues.
Trump’s demand revives a fight from his first term, when he called the filibuster a “joke” blocking his agenda. This time, with full GOP control of Congress and the White House, the pressure is intense—but so is the fear of future Democratic majorities unleashing unchecked policies. As Thune put it, “There’s always pressure on the filibuster,” but it remains a “bulwark” for many Republicans. For now, the filibuster stands, prolonging the shutdown and testing party unity.