My heart breaks for the family and loved ones of Detective Joseph Azcona of the Newark PD who was killed in the line of duty Friday night. Wishing the other officer involved a full recovery.
Please keep our community in your hearts as we work to heal from this terrible loss.
Congress Member Profile|U.S. Senator|Democrat|New Jersey
Cory A. Booker
Source: Wikipedia • View full (CC BY-SA)
SoupScoreanalysis-first civic rating · view full breakdown
Loading…
Voting Record — 776
Yes26%
No69%
Present1%
Not Voting4%
Party align94%
Cross-party3%
SoupScore
District Map
Senate District (Statewide)
U.S. Census Bureau boundary data.
Social & Web
External Resources
Cory A. Booker
U.S. SenatorDemocratNew Jersey
SoupScore
Cory A.'s ATmosphere Activity
20 recent posts · 99 sponsored · 460 cosponsored
Recent ATmosphere posts, sponsorships, and cosponsorships.
Amid the fear and division in President Trump's address to Congress I heard no concrete plans to lower prices or better serve the people.
Republicans in Congress want to cut nursing home care for seniors to pay for tax cuts for billionaires.
An honor to stand with activists and advocates this morning to make clear to Donald Trump, Elon Musk, and Congressional Republicans: Medicaid cuts will have devastating effects on New Jerseyans and raise costs for all Americans.
Wishing all those in New Jersey beginning the observance of Ramadan a joyous and peaceful month.
But no matter how hard he tries to hide police brutality, he can’t run from constitutional checks and balances. Trump must reestablish the database and reestablish trust in our federal law enforcement.
Trump obliterating the misconduct database is what’s anti-police because it strips law enforcement agencies of a vital tool that helps them avoid hiring officers with a disciplinary or misconduct history.
The point is that police misconduct records are critical to ensuring departments don’t hire bad or dangerous cops. So much so, that the conservative Manhattan Institute recommends departments report this information and review it as part of any applicant’s background check.
The cop who shot and killed 14-year-old Tamir Rice in a park left another police department 2 years before the shooting. Supervisors were in the process of firing him because he had an “inability to perform basic functions as instructed” and was “emotionally unstable.”
Four of the five officers who beat Tyre Nichols to death had disciplinary histories or suspensions, including for domestic violence and covering up use of force during arrests.
Cops with histories of misconduct who never should have worked in law enforcement again included the officer who shot Sonya Massey in the face after she called for help. He had a history of drunk driving and had been discharged from the Army for serious misconduct.
Before this, there was no way to know if an applicant had a history of misconduct. That is why police were supportive – because hiring bad officers is bad for their communities.
Misconduct hurts the entire profession and costs cash-strapped departments and cities millions of dollars every year.
Police organizations helped draft the order and other reforms. They applauded it as a positive step for law enforcement. They joined Trump to celebrate the reforms at a signing ceremony in the Rose Garden.
In response, Trump issued an executive order that reflected best practices in policing to keep officers and communities safe and hold officers who violate people’s civil rights accountable.
Even the Heritage Foundation said, “it was welcome news in troubled times.”
Why would Trump get rid of the database he created? Because Trump will drastically scale back police accountability to appease right-wing TV and X commentators.
After George Floyd was killed in 2020, Trump—and the country—had a moment of reckoning. We couldn’t turn a blind eye anymore.
Trump and Elon Musk have wiped out the national database of police misconduct. Nearly 150,000 records of misconduct by federal officers erased, like it never happened.
Three years after Putin’s unjust and illegal invasion of Ukraine, the Ukrainian people are still bravely fighting to protect their democracy. Their fight is our fight. As they defend their freedom, they deserve our continued support.
People across America—and across the political spectrum—want these things. They're not controversial.
Republicans in congress, however, have made it clear they're not working for you.
They're working to give handouts to their billionaire donors—and to stick you with the tab.
I filed an amendment to prevent Elon Musk from secretly rifling through your personal information. Republicans oppose it.
I filed an amendment to require Elon Musk to disclose his finances. Republicans oppose it.
SoupScore Breakdown
Loading analysis metrics…
Voting History776 total votesExpandCollapse
Voting History
776 total votes
Recent roll calls with party-majority context so it is easier to scan how this member tends to vote.
| Date | Bill | Question | Position | Party Maj | Align? | Result |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2026-03-24 | S. 1383 (119th) | Kill the motion | NO | NO | ✓ | Motion to Table Agreed to (53-47) |
| 2026-03-24 | — | Begin consideration | NO | NO | ✓ | Motion to Proceed Agreed to (51-47) |
| 2026-03-24 | — | Confirm nominee | NO | NO | ✓ | Nomination Confirmed (52-47) |
| 2026-03-23 | — | End debate | NO | NO | ✓ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (51-45) |
| 2026-03-23 | — | Confirm nominee | NO | NO | ✓ | Nomination Confirmed (54-45) |
| 2026-03-22 | — | End debate | NOT_VOTING | NO | — | Cloture Motion Agreed to (54-37) |
| 2026-03-21 | S. 1383 (119th) | End debate | YES | YES | ✓ | Cloture Motion Rejected (41-49, 3/5 majority required) |
| 2026-03-21 | S. 1383 (119th) | End debate | NO | NO | ✓ | Cloture Motion Rejected (49-41, 3/5 majority required) |
| 2026-03-20 | H.R. 7147 (119th) | End debate | NO | NO | ✓ | Cloture Motion Rejected (47-37, 3/5 majority required) |
| 2026-03-18 | S.J. Res. 118 (119th) | Motion to Discharge S.J.Res. 118 | YES | YES | ✓ | Motion to Discharge Rejected (47-53) |
| 2026-03-17 | S. 1383 (119th) | Begin consideration | NO | NO | ✓ | Motion to Proceed Agreed to (51-48) |
| 2026-03-17 | — | Confirm nominee | NO | NO | ✓ | Nomination Confirmed (51-45) |
| 2026-03-17 | — | End debate | NO | NO | ✓ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (48-45) |
| 2026-03-12 | H.R. 7147 (119th) | End debate | NO | NO | ✓ | Cloture Motion Rejected (51-46, 3/5 majority required) |
| 2026-03-12 | H.R. 6644 (119th) | Final passage | YES | YES | ✓ | Bill Passed (89-10) |
| 2026-03-11 | H.R. 6644 (119th) | End debate | PRESENT | YES | — | Cloture Motion Agreed to (82-11, 3/5 majority required) |
| 2026-03-11 | H.R. 6644 (119th) | Vote on amendment | PRESENT | YES | — | Amendment Agreed to (84-10) |
| 2026-03-10 | H.R. 6644 (119th) | End debate | PRESENT | YES | — | Cloture Motion Agreed to (89-9, 3/5 majority required) |
| 2026-03-10 | — | Confirm nominee | NO | NO | ✓ | Nomination Confirmed (71-29) |
| 2026-03-09 | — | End debate | NO | NO | ✓ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (68-28) |
| 2026-03-05 | H.R. 7147 (119th) | End filibuster to begin debate | NO | NO | ✓ | Cloture on the Motion to Proceed Rejected (51-45, 3/5 majority required) |
| 2026-03-04 | S.J. Res. 104 (119th) | Motion to Discharge S.J.Res. 104 | YES | YES | ✓ | Motion to Discharge Rejected (47-53) |
| 2026-03-04 | H.R. 6644 (119th) | Begin consideration | PRESENT | YES | — | Motion to Proceed Agreed to (90-8) |
| 2026-03-02 | H.R. 6644 (119th) | End debate | PRESENT | YES | — | Cloture Motion Agreed to (84-6, 3/5 majority required) |
| 2026-02-26 | — | Confirm nominee | NO | NO | ✓ | Nomination Confirmed (57-33) |
| 2026-02-26 | — | End debate | NO | NO | ✓ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (60-34) |
| 2026-02-25 | — | Confirm nominee | NO | NO | ✓ | Nomination Confirmed (50-45) |
| 2026-02-25 | — | End debate | NO | NO | ✓ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (50-45) |
| 2026-02-24 | H.R. 7147 (119th) | End filibuster to begin debate | NO | NO | ✓ | Cloture on the Motion to Proceed Rejected (50-45, 3/5 majority required) |
| 2026-02-12 | H.R. 7147 (119th) | End debate | NO | NO | ✓ | Cloture Motion Rejected (52-47, 3/5 majority required) |
| 2026-02-12 | H.J. Res. 142 (119th) | Approve resolution | NO | NO | ✓ | Joint Resolution Passed (49-47) |
| 2026-02-11 | H.J. Res. 142 (119th) | Begin consideration | NO | NO | ✓ | Motion to Proceed Agreed to (51-46) |
| 2026-02-10 | S.J. Res. 95 (119th) | Begin consideration | YES | YES | ✓ | Motion to Proceed Rejected (47-51) |
| 2026-02-10 | — | Confirm nominee | NO | NO | ✓ | Nomination Confirmed (52-46) |
| 2026-02-09 | — | End debate | NO | NO | ✓ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (51-47) |
| 2026-02-05 | — | Confirm nominee | NO | NO | ✓ | Nomination Confirmed (50-47) |
| 2026-02-05 | — | End debate | NO | NO | ✓ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (51-47) |
| 2026-02-05 | — | Confirm nominee | NO | NO | ✓ | Nomination Confirmed (50-46) |
| 2026-02-04 | — | End debate | NO | NO | ✓ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (50-47) |
| 2026-02-04 | — | Confirm nominee | NO | NO | ✓ | Nomination Confirmed (51-46) |
| 2026-02-04 | — | End debate | NO | NO | ✓ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (51-47) |
| 2026-02-04 | — | Confirm nominee | NO | NO | ✓ | Nomination Confirmed (58-39) |
| 2026-02-03 | — | End debate | NO | NO | ✓ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (55-39) |
| 2026-02-03 | — | Confirm nominee | NO | NO | ✓ | Nomination Confirmed (51-45) |
| 2026-02-03 | — | End debate | NO | NO | ✓ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (49-44) |
| 2026-02-03 | — | Confirm nominee | NO | NO | ✓ | Nomination Confirmed (54-40) |
| 2026-02-02 | — | End debate | NO | NO | ✓ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (49-40) |
| 2026-01-30 | H.R. 7148 (119th) | Final passage | NO | NO | ✓ | Bill Passed (71-29, 3/5 majority required) |
| 2026-01-30 | — | Motion (Motion to Waive All Applicable Budgetary Discipline Re: Merkley Amdt. No. 4287) | YES | YES | ✓ | Motion Rejected (47-52, 3/5 majority required) |
| 2026-01-30 | H.R. 7148 (119th) | Vote on amendment | YES | YES | ✓ | Amendment Rejected (49-51, 3/5 majority required) |
Alignment stats consider only votes where a clear yes/no majority existed for the legislator's party. Cross-party marks divergence where the vote matched the opposite party majority. ↔ indicates cross-party divergence.