Why Trump Pulled Elise Stefanik’s Nomination

T
This piece is a segment of The D.C. Brief, TIME’s newsletter focused on politics. Subscribe
here to receive similar stories directly in your inbox.

On Thursday, the White House revealed its decision to withdraw the nomination of Elise Stefanik as the United States’ ambassador to the United Nations. This prestigious role has historically served as a significant stepping stone for figures like George H.W. Bush and Madeleine Albright. The Trump administration’s choice to retract the nomination came with the acknowledgment that Stefanik’s departure from Congress could jeopardize the fragile Republican majority in the House.

Stefanik, a practical and forthright millennial, was seen as one of Trump’s most sensible appointments amidst an otherwise tumultuous Cabinet. Faced with a decision between a capable representative on the international stage and a reliable vote in Congress, Trump opted for short-term gains, compromising the integrity of his diplomatic strategy in the process.

“There are others who can effectively represent the U.S. at the United Nations,” the President remarked on his social media platform, Truth Social.

Earlier this year, Stefanik had stepped back from her leadership role within the House GOP to gear up for her anticipated position in New York, where she was set to embody MAGA’s vision on the international front while also facing the potential backlash from that very world.

Instead, she finds herself sidelined, with the argument that her House seat in Upstate New York is too critical to risk. This unexpected turn of events caught many in Congress—both Republicans and Democrats—off guard, as they were eager to see how she would maneuver the complexities of global diplomacy while balancing the demands of Trumpism and sound policy.

House Republicans are currently navigating a delicate majority, which will face a test in the upcoming special elections in Florida. These races, typically considered safe for Republicans, have raised concerns that a backlash against Trump might be more significant than anticipated. As ballots head to school gyms, church basements, and community centers on Tuesday, House Republicans are acutely aware that their slim majority leaves little room for error. Losing Stefanik’s seat would further expose their vulnerability, especially in a district Trump had previously won with ease.

Stefanik possessed an ideal background for the role she has now lost. Prior to her congressional career, she served in the George W. Bush administration and was a policy adviser for Mitt Romney’s vice-presidential campaign, collaborating with future Speaker Paul Ryan. Her Harvard education and experience positioned her as a potential future leader within the GOP. During the two Trump impeachment trials, she donned the mantle of his loyal defender, understanding the risks but choosing to play that hand nonetheless.

Just months ago, Trump had urged Stefanik to relinquish her hard-earned congressional seat, and she complied. She excelled in her Senate confirmation hearing, established connections with key diplomats, and engaged with influential figures in foreign policy think tanks, all while maintaining a keen awareness of Cold War-era strategic principles. Even some Democrats, who typically regard the Trump 2.0 administration as lacking expertise, acknowledged her efforts.

However, the situation unraveled when Trump decided it was more prudent to safeguard a precarious House majority rather than secure what many hoped would be a strong ambassadorial appointment. This led House Speaker Mike Johnson to half-jokingly suggest in November that Trump was aware of the political calculations necessary to maintain their majority and advised him against further disruptions.

At Trump’s first joint address to Congress during his second term, instead of joining the Cabinet members in prime seating, Stefanik found herself among the rank-and-file members. Her presence in the “cheap seats” was a strategic choice to ensure Johnson’s continued leadership. The expectation was that she would eventually ascend to the U.N. position once the political climate in Florida stabilized, with voters deciding on replacements for Mike Waltz and Matt Gaetz.

Instead, Stefanik is now being pushed back onto the sidelines. The White House has indicated she could return to House Leadership, but there are no vacancies in that realm. Historically, parties have created new roles for exceptional talent willing to step up, but Stefanik had already sacrificed a significant position for the daunting challenge of representing Trump internationally. Now, she faces a return to her previous role as Republicans hold 218 seats in the House against the Democrats’ 213, with four open seats.

Many may find a sense of schadenfreude in Stefanik’s predicament. Eight years ago, she calculated that aligning with Trump would be more beneficial than maintaining ties with former mentors like Karl Rove. She defended Trump’s more controversial actions, amassed substantial funds to support fellow Republicans, and committed herself to the MAGA movement. “I look forward to the day when Elise can join my Administration in the future,” Trump once expressed. For now, she becomes yet another casualty of a President expending his political capital more rapidly than anticipated.