As Justice Sotomayor said: “We should not have to live in a country where the Government can seize anyone who looks Latino, speaks Spanish, and appears to work a low wage job.”
Congress Member Profile|U.S. Representative|Democrat|Texas District 16
Veronica Escobar
Source: Wikipedia • View full (CC BY-SA)
SoupScoreanalysis-first civic rating · view full breakdown
Loading…
Voting Record — 498
Yes40%
No59%
Present0%
Not Voting1%
Party align98%
Cross-party0%
SoupScore
District Map
Congressional District 16
U.S. Census Bureau boundary data.
Social & Web
External Resources
Veronica Escobar
U.S. RepresentativeDemocratTexas District 16
SoupScore
Veronica's ATmosphere Activity
20 recent posts · 13 sponsored · 60 cosponsored
Recent ATmosphere posts, sponsorships, and cosponsorships.
This decision sends the full-throated message that Americans can be treated as suspects not because of their actions, but because of the color of their skin or the language they speak.
The court has effectively legitimized discrimination under the guise of law and order, given government-sanctioned racism a green light, and, again, abandoned its duty to protect the rights of all people.
The Supreme Court’s conservative majority decided today to permit racial profiling, betraying the Constitution and the values it’s meant to uphold.
Reposted byRep. Veronica Escobar
RSVP: Join us for a much-needed discussion on how we can fix the broken immigration system to benefit all Americans—without the cruelty of the Trump administration. @neeratanden.bsky.social will be joined by @repescobar.bsky.social, @tomsuozzi.bsky.social, and @fernandez.house.gov.
You can read my full letter, as well as examples and the 31 specific questions I’m requesting be answered, in my press release below.
escobar.house.gov/news/documen...
I understand and appreciate the value of USPS and the postal workers who serve El Pasoans every day. That is why I do not take lightly my obligation to conduct oversight when I consistently hear from my constituents that USPS is not meeting acceptable standards in our region
There have been several types of USPS casework inquiries, with the most recent trend being El Pasoans not receiving mail at their designated cluster box for months on end.
Our community needs answers to casework issues, updates on current and future operations and maintenance, staffing challenges, and infrastructure needs.
USPS is an agency that El Pasoans seem to consistently have problems navigating, and in turn, open casework with my office.
Last Friday, I sent a letter to El Paso Postmaster General Cindi J. Tabbot to express my deep concern regarding prevalent United States Postal Service (USPS) issues in the El Paso region that have been brought to my attention by constituents and postal workers alike
🧵
Reposted byRep. Veronica Escobar
Join us on Wednesday, September 10, for a timely conversation with @repescobar.bsky.social, @tomsuozzi.bsky.social, @fernandez.house.gov, and CAP President and CEO @neeratanden.bsky.social on solutions to actually fix our immigration system and strengthen border security.
This funding would allow state and local governments to be able to install solar panels on income-qualified households while increasing local jobs and utility savings for low-income families in the state of Texas.
Read my full press release below 👇🏽
escobar.house.gov/news/documen...
Today, I sent a letter to Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Administrator Lee Zeldin and White House Office of Management and Budget (OMB) Director Russell Vought to express grave concern over the EPA’s recission of $7 billion in already obligated funding for the Solar for All Program.
It's never been a more urgent time for immigration reform.
While Trump destroys our economy, separates families and dehumanizes immigrants, I will continue to push for the Dignity Act of 2025, the only bipartisan, comprehensive immigration reform bill in Congress.
escobar.house.gov/news/documen...
Immigrants being rounded up and deported are part of our
national economy and they deserve a shot at legal pathways, like those in the Dignity Act of 2025. Trump's mass deportation hurts our national economy AND is costing American taxpayers $170 BILLION.
www.brookings.edu/articles/the...
And there were still not enough federal employees on site to perform appropriate oversight.
This $1.24 BILLION corporate-run facility should not only NOT exist, but in a rush to be "operational," it's clear that DHS was willing to serve bad food, limit legal access and more.
Construction had just been completed for the family and legal visitation that had been completely unavailable for the first 11 days of being "operational."
Legal organizations couldn't meet in person with their clients for nearly two weeks and had difficulty connecting by phone.
One man said he was in pain and in desperate need of surgery (saying he had urinated blood) but was only given OTC pain meds; another was promised meds for severe allergies and never got it; all described being fed foul-smelling food and drinking water that made them sick.
Some men had work permits that were canceled, or were in legal proceedings to adjust their status when they were apprehended.
Many of the men we spoke to had come from Florida's "Alligator Alcatraz," which was shut down by a federal judge, and described terrible conditions there.
He'd never been arrested, wasn't speeding or breaking the law (he was racially profiled).
His U.S. citizen wife tried to get his truck, phone and the cash back, but she was told that if her husband wanted those items back, he'd have to go pick them up (he was in ICE custody).
SoupScore Breakdown
Loading analysis metrics…
Voting History498 total votesExpandCollapse
Voting History
498 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2026-01-21 | H.R. 6945 (119th) | Final passage | NO | NO | ✓ | Passed |
| 2026-01-21 | H.R. 6945 (119th) | Send back to committee | YES | YES | ✓ | Failed |
| 2026-01-21 | H. Res. 1009 (119th) | Approve resolution | NO | NO | ✓ | Passed |
| 2026-01-21 | H. Res. 1009 (119th) | End debate now | NO | NO | ✓ | Passed |
| 2026-01-21 | H.R. 5764 (119th) | Fast-track passage | YES | YES | ✓ | Passed |
| 2026-01-20 | H.R. 5763 (119th) | Fast-track passage | YES | YES | ✓ | Passed |
| 2026-01-15 | H.R. 2988 (119th) | Final passage | NO | NO | ✓ | Passed |
| 2026-01-15 | H.R. 2988 (119th) | Send back to committee | YES | YES | ✓ | Failed |
| 2026-01-15 | H.R. 2988 (119th) | Approve amendment | NO | YES | ✕ | Agreed to |
| 2026-01-14 | H.R. 7006 (119th) | Final passage | NO | YES | ✕ | Passed |
| 2026-01-14 | H.R. 7006 (119th) | Approve amendment | NO | NO | ✓ | Failed |
| 2026-01-14 | H.R. 7006 (119th) | Approve amendment | NO | NO | ✓ | Failed |
| 2026-01-14 | H. Res. 992 (119th) | Approve resolution | NO | NO | ✓ | Passed |
| 2026-01-14 | H. Res. 992 (119th) | End debate now | NO | NO | ✓ | Passed |
| 2026-01-13 | H.R. 4593 (119th) | Final passage | NO | NO | ✓ | Passed |
| 2026-01-13 | H.R. 4593 (119th) | Send back to committee | YES | YES | ✓ | Failed |
| 2026-01-13 | H.R. 2312 (119th) | Send back to committee | YES | YES | ✓ | Failed |
| 2026-01-13 | H.R. 2270 (119th) | Send back to committee | YES | YES | ✓ | Failed |
| 2026-01-13 | H.R. 2262 (119th) | Final passage | NO | NO | ✓ | Failed |
| 2026-01-13 | H.R. 2262 (119th) | Send back to committee | YES | YES | ✓ | Failed |
| 2026-01-13 | H. Res. 988 (119th) | Approve resolution | NO | NO | ✓ | Passed |
| 2026-01-13 | H. Res. 988 (119th) | End debate now | NO | NO | ✓ | Passed |
| 2026-01-13 | H.R. 6504 (119th) | Fast-track passage | YES | YES | ✓ | Passed |
| 2026-01-13 | H.R. 6500 (119th) | Fast-track passage | YES | YES | ✓ | Passed |
| 2026-01-12 | H.R. 2683 (119th) | Fast-track passage | YES | YES | ✓ | Passed |
| 2026-01-09 | H.R. 5184 (119th) | Final passage | NO | NO | ✓ | Passed |
| 2026-01-08 | H.R. 1834 (119th) | Final passage | YES | YES | ✓ | Passed |
| 2026-01-08 | H. Res. 780 (119th) | Approve resolution | YES | YES | ✓ | Passed |
| 2026-01-08 | H.R. 131 (119th) | Passage, Objections of the President To The Contrary Notwithstanding | YES | YES | ✓ | Failed |
| 2026-01-08 | H.R. 504 (119th) | Passage, Objections of the President To The Contrary Notwithstanding | YES | YES | ✓ | Failed |
| 2026-01-08 | H.R. 6938 (119th) | Final passage | YES | YES | ✓ | Passed |
| 2026-01-08 | H.R. 6938 (119th) | Retaining Divisions B and C | YES | YES | ✓ | Passed |
| 2026-01-08 | H.R. 6938 (119th) | Retaining Division A | NOT_VOTING | YES | — | Passed |
| 2026-01-07 | H. Res. 780 (119th) | Motion to Discharge | YES | YES | ✓ | Passed |
| 2026-01-07 | H. Res. 977 (119th) | Approve resolution | NO | NO | ✓ | Passed |
| 2026-01-07 | H. Res. 977 (119th) | End debate now | NO | NO | ✓ | Passed |
| 2026-01-06 | — | Call of the House | PRESENT | — | — | Passed |
| 2025-12-18 | H.R. 498 (119th) | Final passage | NO | NO | ✓ | Passed |
| 2025-12-18 | H.R. 498 (119th) | Send back to committee | YES | YES | ✓ | Failed |
| 2025-12-18 | H.R. 845 (119th) | Final passage | NO | NO | ✓ | Passed |
| 2025-12-18 | H.R. 845 (119th) | Send back to committee | YES | YES | ✓ | Failed |
| 2025-12-18 | H.R. 1366 (119th) | Final passage | NO | NO | ✓ | Passed |
| 2025-12-18 | H.R. 1366 (119th) | Send back to committee | YES | YES | ✓ | Failed |
| 2025-12-18 | H.R. 4776 (119th) | Final passage | NO | NO | ✓ | Passed |
| 2025-12-18 | H.R. 4776 (119th) | Send back to committee | YES | YES | ✓ | Failed |
| 2025-12-18 | H.R. 4776 (119th) | Approve amendment | NO | NO | ✓ | Failed |
| 2025-12-18 | H.R. 4776 (119th) | Approve amendment | NO | NO | ✓ | Failed |
| 2025-12-18 | H.R. 4776 (119th) | Approve amendment | NO | NO | ✓ | Failed |
| 2025-12-17 | H.R. 3492 (119th) | Final passage | NO | NO | ✓ | Passed |
| 2025-12-17 | H.R. 3492 (119th) | Send back to committee | YES | YES | ✓ | Failed |
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.