Reposted byMike Levin
If reporting is accurate, Pete Hegseth ordered and oversaw plainly unlawful killings.
He has lost any legitimate claim to lead our armed forces.
He should resign immediately, and Congress must pursue full accountability.
Congress Member Profile|U.S. Representative|Democrat|California District 49
Mike Levin
Source: Wikipedia • View full (CC BY-SA)
SoupScoreanalysis-first civic rating · view full breakdown
Loading…
Voting Record — 550
Yes45%
No54%
Present1%
Not Voting1%
Party align97%
Cross-party3%
SoupScore
District Map
Congressional District 49
U.S. Census Bureau boundary data.
Social & Web
External Resources
Mike Levin
U.S. RepresentativeDemocratCalifornia District 49
SoupScore
Mike's ATmosphere Activity
20 recent posts · 24 sponsored · 93 cosponsored
Recent ATmosphere posts, sponsorships, and cosponsorships.
Killing shipwrecked survivors in that context is not a “tough call.”
It is an extrajudicial killing, and it may have amounted to murder.
Even if some of the individuals on the boat were acting against our interests, there is no lawful armed conflict between the United States and drug traffickers in the Caribbean.
The Department of Defense’s own Law of War Manual uses almost this exact scenario as the textbook example of what service members must refuse.
It states that firing on shipwrecked persons is clearly illegal.
The duty is to refuse, not to comply.
Experts in U.S. and international law agree that an order to “kill everyone” on a disabled boat, followed by a second strike that kills shipwrecked survivors clinging to wreckage, is totally unlawful.
If reporting is accurate, Pete Hegseth ordered and oversaw plainly unlawful killings.
He has lost any legitimate claim to lead our armed forces.
He should resign immediately, and Congress must pursue full accountability.
Our strength as a country has always come from holding individuals accountable for their own actions while refusing to paint entire communities with the same brush.
We honor the fallen by focusing on real solutions that keep people safe and uphold the values that define this nation.
Governments overseas have used this concept to justify sweeping expulsions of communities that had done nothing wrong.
That approach has no place in America.
We cannot allow this tragedy to erase who we are or lead us down a path that history has shown to be dangerous.
“Remigration” is the idea that entire groups of people who are here legally can be told to leave based on where they come from or what they look like.
Anyone who commits violence on our soil must face justice, and anyone who is a true threat to public safety should be removed from this country.
That is common sense.
What happened to the National Guard members in Washington DC was truly horrific.
My heart breaks for their families, and I am praying for everyone who loved them.
Passing the Restore Trust in Congress Act will not solve every problem in Washington. But it is one of the clearest and most meaningful steps we can take right now to show the American people that we work for them and only for them.
I will keep fighting for this bill because it is about integrity, accountability, and restoring faith in the institution I am honored to serve in.
Momentum is growing. Across the political spectrum, Americans want this reform. They want a Congress that plays by the rules and not one that profits from loopholes.
Public service requires sacrifice. Avoiding conflicts of interest, real or perceived, is one of those sacrifices.
Some colleagues argue that members of Congress should have the same right as anyone else to trade individual stocks, but when you take the oath of office, you accept responsibilities that ordinary citizens do not.
It is a simple reform with an important goal: ensuring that lawmakers make decisions for the country and not for their investment portfolios.
Members of Congress, their spouses, their dependent children, and any trustees acting on their behalf would be prohibited from owning, buying, or selling individual stocks, securities, commodities, futures, and comparable assets while in office.
This legislation would finally establish a clear and enforceable standard.
That erosion of trust is dangerous. It feeds cynicism, it fuels division, and it weakens our democracy.
That is why I am proud to be an original cosponsor of the bipartisan Restore Trust in Congress Act.
SoupScore Breakdown
Loading analysis metrics…
Voting History550 total votesExpandCollapse
Voting History
550 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2025-02-26 | H. Con. Res. 14 (119th) | Approve resolution | NO | NO | ✓ | Passed |
| 2025-02-26 | H.R. 804 (119th) | Fast-track passage | YES | YES | ✓ | Passed |
| 2025-02-26 | H.R. 788 (119th) | Fast-track passage | YES | YES | ✓ | Passed |
| 2025-02-25 | H. Res. 161 (119th) | Approve resolution | NO | NO | ✓ | Passed |
| 2025-02-25 | H. Res. 161 (119th) | End debate now | NO | NO | ✓ | Passed |
| 2025-02-25 | H.R. 818 (119th) | Fast-track passage | YES | YES | ✓ | Passed |
| 2025-02-25 | H.R. 832 (119th) | Fast-track passage | YES | YES | ✓ | Passed |
| 2025-02-24 | H.R. 825 (119th) | Fast-track passage | YES | YES | ✓ | Passed |
| 2025-02-13 | H.R. 35 (119th) | Final passage | NO | NO | ✓ | Passed |
| 2025-02-12 | H.R. 77 (119th) | Final passage | NO | NO | ✓ | Passed |
| 2025-02-12 | H.R. 77 (119th) | Send back to committee | YES | YES | ✓ | Failed |
| 2025-02-11 | H. Res. 122 (119th) | Approve resolution | NO | NO | ✓ | Passed |
| 2025-02-11 | H. Res. 122 (119th) | End debate now | NO | NO | ✓ | Passed |
| 2025-02-10 | H.R. 736 (119th) | Fast-track passage | YES | YES | ✓ | Passed |
| 2025-02-10 | H.R. 692 (119th) | Fast-track passage | YES | YES | ✓ | Passed |
| 2025-02-07 | H.R. 26 (119th) | Final passage | NO | NO | ✓ | Passed |
| 2025-02-07 | H.R. 26 (119th) | Send back to committee | YES | YES | ✓ | Failed |
| 2025-02-06 | H.R. 27 (119th) | Final passage | YES | NO | ✕↔ | Passed |
| 2025-02-06 | H.R. 27 (119th) | Approve amendment | YES | YES | ✓ | Failed |
| 2025-02-05 | H. Res. 93 (119th) | Approve resolution | NO | NO | ✓ | Passed |
| 2025-02-05 | H. Res. 93 (119th) | End debate now | NO | NO | ✓ | Passed |
| 2025-02-05 | H.R. 776 (119th) | Fast-track passage | YES | YES | ✓ | Passed |
| 2025-02-04 | H.R. 43 (119th) | Fast-track passage | YES | YES | ✓ | Passed |
| 2025-01-23 | H.R. 21 (119th) | Final passage | NO | NO | ✓ | Passed |
| 2025-01-23 | H.R. 21 (119th) | Send back to committee | YES | YES | ✓ | Failed |
| 2025-01-23 | H.R. 471 (119th) | Final passage | YES | NO | ✕↔ | Passed |
| 2025-01-23 | H.R. 375 (119th) | Fast-track passage | YES | YES | ✓ | Passed |
| 2025-01-22 | S. 5 (119th) | Final passage | YES | NO | ✕↔ | Passed |
| 2025-01-22 | H.R. 165 (119th) | Fast-track passage | YES | YES | ✓ | Passed |
| 2025-01-22 | H. Res. 53 (119th) | Approve resolution | NO | NO | ✓ | Passed |
| 2025-01-22 | H. Res. 53 (119th) | End debate now | NO | NO | ✓ | Passed |
| 2025-01-22 | H.R. 187 (119th) | Fast-track passage | YES | YES | ✓ | Passed |
| 2025-01-21 | H.R. 186 (119th) | Fast-track passage | YES | YES | ✓ | Passed |
| 2025-01-16 | H.R. 30 (119th) | Final passage | YES | NO | ✕↔ | Passed |
| 2025-01-16 | H.R. 30 (119th) | Send back to committee | YES | YES | ✓ | Failed |
| 2025-01-15 | H.R. 33 (119th) | Final passage | YES | YES | ✓ | Passed |
| 2025-01-15 | H.R. 144 (119th) | Fast-track passage | YES | YES | ✓ | Passed |
| 2025-01-15 | H.R. 164 (119th) | Fast-track passage | YES | YES | ✓ | Passed |
| 2025-01-14 | H.R. 28 (119th) | Final passage | NO | NO | ✓ | Passed |
| 2025-01-14 | H.R. 28 (119th) | Send back to committee | YES | YES | ✓ | Failed |
| 2025-01-14 | H.R. 153 (119th) | Fast-track passage | YES | YES | ✓ | Passed |
| 2025-01-14 | H.R. 152 (119th) | Fast-track passage | YES | YES | ✓ | Passed |
| 2025-01-13 | H.R. 192 (119th) | Fast-track passage | YES | YES | ✓ | Passed |
| 2025-01-09 | H.R. 23 (119th) | Final passage | YES | NO | ✕↔ | Passed |
| 2025-01-07 | H.R. 29 (119th) | Final passage | YES | NO | ✕↔ | Passed |
| 2025-01-03 | H. Res. 5 (119th) | Approve resolution | NO | NO | ✓ | Passed |
| 2025-01-03 | H. Res. 5 (119th) | Motion to Commit with Instructions | YES | YES | ✓ | Failed |
| 2025-01-03 | H. Res. 5 (119th) | End debate now | NO | NO | ✓ | Passed |
| 2025-01-03 | — | Election of the Speaker | NOT_VOTING | — | — | Johnson (LA) |
| 2025-01-03 | — | Call by States | PRESENT | — | — | Passed |
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.
← PrevPage 11 / 11