“At times, the United States Congress is starting to resemble the British House of Commons with members heckling.”
These were the words of Terry Szuplat, a former Barack Obama speechwriter, identifying the aggressive methods that are seen during recent American State of the Union addresses.
President Donald J. Trump’s speech on February 24, 2026, had dissension at different portions of the speech, as Americans watched and both sides grew dissatisfied with each other. When Trump signaled the violence and corruption in America, Congresswoman Ilhan Omar (D) from Minnesota screamed out, “That’s a lie, you’re a liar.” The exchanges continued as Trump looked at Omar and Rashida Tlaib (D) from Michigan and told Americans that these two politicians were part of this massive problem. Trump exclaimed that these leaders should be “ashamed,” as Omar and Tlaib continued screaming “liar” and that he “killed” Americans in Minnesota.
This contentious meeting brought the three branches of government together to listen to the progress, problems, and possible solutions of the nation, but there were clearly ugly points. Sitting in the front seat, normally the entire Supreme Court is present, but after the judicial branch voted against the assumed powers of Trump’s tariffs, only four justices watched this speech. Americans have observed this political division that has hurt this country for over twenty years, but this is not a unique political situation for this government.
Fifty-one years ago, as President Gerald Ford was about to give a State of the Union address, several freshman Democratic congressional leaders refused to listen and walked out. In the middle of a harsh decade, when America had already withdrawn from the Vietnam War, experienced the resignation of President Richard M. Nixon, excessive stagflation, and the oil crisis, this nation was at a crossroads. The “Watergate Babies” were opposed to the pardoning of Nixon and felt that corruption tainted the federal government.
Charles Leppert, a deputy assistant for legislative affairs in the House of Representatives, was startled at this gesture against Ford, and he stated, “I can’t recall such disrespect for the President of the United States in any other era.”
A few months later, as the United States watched the demise of South Vietnam to the communists, two more Democrats walked out of the “State of the World” address. Ford was forced to request more American tax dollars to be sent during the last moments of the Vietnam War.
“… I’m determined that the United States will remain the strongest of all nations, but our power will never be used to initiate a threat to the security of any nation or to the rights of any human being. We seek to be and to remain secure—a nation at peace in a stable world. But to be secure we must face the world as it is. Three basic developments have helped to shape our challenges: the steady growth and increased projection of Soviet military power beyond its own borders; the overwhelming dependence of the Western democracies on oil supplies from the Middle East; and the press of social and religious and economic and political change in the many nations of the developing world, exemplified by the revolution in Iran.”
There were no screams against the above words of President Jimmy Carter during this State of the Union, but Americans feared these numerous foreign and domestic issues. Other nations questioned whether America was still a superpower. Our citizens were imprisoned by Iran, the Soviets invaded Afghanistan, Germany and Japan produced better products, and stagflation crippled our people.
American citizens began hearing from our leadership that the “next five years might be worse than the last five years.” California Governor and presidential candidate Ronald Reagan widely told Americans, “Are you better off than you were four years ago?” Across this nation, Reagan waged an unrelenting campaign that called “The Carter Administration, by its own standard, is a pathetic failure.” Carter was hit with many serious issues that hurt the credibility of his administration in responding to America’s problems.
Four years after the disastrous 9/11/01 attacks that gained bipartisan support for President George W. Bush, this leader detailed the future of Social Security in America. It was the unpopular belief of Bush that Social Security faced bankruptcy by 2042. Democrats immediately booed Bush’s views to change this major retirement program that has been utilized by decades of Americans. This Great Depression initiative started in 1935 under the presidency of Franklin D. Roosevelt, and it became a cornerstone of the Democratic Party.
The next day after Bush’s speech, senior Democratic leaders met at the statue of Roosevelt and vowed to prevent the dismembering of this economic and social legislation.
Bush proposed creating two different age groups for Social Security: first, those fifty-five and older, where these citizens were still able to utilize their original retirement benefits. Those Americans who were younger than fifty-five would have additional deductions within their future disbursements, but they could invest money in the stock market. Bush received major political brushback over his failed attempt to redesign Social Security. During this State of the Union, the screams of “No” against these proposals of Bush twenty years ago were considered unusual.
In 2010, President Barack Obama opposed the recent Citizens United v. FEC decision that allowed greater campaign spending from large businesses and foreign nations. Listening to this address, Justice Samuel Alito shook his head and mouthed the words “not true.” The Associated Press reported that Obama, during his address, “scolded the high court.” Obama directed his comments toward the Supreme Court and stated, “With all due deference to separation of powers, last week the Supreme Court reversed a century of law that I believe will open the floodgates for special interests—including foreign corporations—to spend without limit in our elections. I don’t think American elections should be bankrolled by America’s most powerful interests, or worse, by foreign entities. They should be decided by the American people. And I’d urge Democrats and Republicans to pass a bill that helps to correct some of these problems.”
When the press asked Alito for a quote, they received the standard reply from a Supreme Court justice of “no comment.”
During Trump’s first term on February 4, 2020, he handed his speech to Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi and Vice President Mike Pence. Pelosi ripped up his transcript, which was seen by every viewer at home, as she later stated that it was “a manifesto of mistruths.” This incident occurred at the end of the first impeachment trial against Trump, as he was acquitted the following day after this address. The next day, Pelosi defended her actions by personally identifying Trump’s written “falsehoods” and explaining that it had to be “shredded.”
Even today, six years after this incident, both leaders despise each other, especially when they are interviewed on television. While it was an eventful week of resentment between these two political parties, there have been many tense moments over the course of our national history.