Technically they only voted to table the motion. While it's quite unlikely, it could still technically be pulled out and voted on later.

@AndrewHartman true, but given the vote, and the overall context of how Congress works I counted this as effort was voted on (i.e. MTG did not withdraw it) and the effort to remove him failed.

Any insight into what would be needed to bring this up again using the original MTG motion to vacate? I would rate that as less likey than a different motion to vacate being filed (which I'd also rate pretty low for at least a couple months).

@NeilG I'd have to check their procedures to know if anyone could bring up a vote to pull it out again, or if that's the Speaker's prerogative. I believe any member of the body can do it, but there's something in Robert's that prevents the author of the original motion to vacate from constantly prompting a vote to bring it up again. As a practical matter, it's almost certainly dead in the water.

Resolving based on https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/interactive/2024/05/08/house-speaker-vote-mike-johnson-motion-to-vacate/

Press conference tomorrow at 9am. May lead to some actual movement on this.

@NeilG should this be extended again?

@Joshua yes, see updated description, thanks for the prompt.

Based on current congressional calendar I am going to close this Apr 8th and await action during session days to resolve.

For those who like binary questions: