Adam B. Schiff headshot
At a Glance
Seat
U.S. Senator from California
Born
June 22, 1960
Age 66
Phone
(202) 224-3841
Office
112 Hart Senate Office Building Washington, DC 20510, Washington 20515
Congress Member Profile|U.S. Senator|Democrat|California

Adam B. Schiff

Voting Record — 885
Yes31%
No66%
Present0%
Not Voting3%
Party align94%
Cross-party4%
SoupScore
District Map

Senate District (Statewide)

U.S. Census Bureau boundary data.
Adam B. Schiff headshot
Adam B. Schiff
U.S. SenatorDemocratCalifornia
SoupScore
Adam B.'s ATmosphere Activity
20 recent posts · 94 sponsored · 357 cosponsored
View profile

Recent ATmosphere posts, sponsorships, and cosponsorships.

Four servicemembers died this past weekend in the war with Iran. We mourn their loss, and grieve with their families. Even as we disagree with the President’s decision to take this country to war, we honor those who have fallen.
Three American servicemembers were tragically killed in the Iran war this weekend. It's clear that while this war rages on, the American people remain in the dark about the President’s strategy and war aims. How long will Republicans in the Senate allow this to continue?
Trump gave a rambling primetime speech about “election security” last week. The only thing it revealed is that the greatest threat to our elections comes from within. It comes from him. We break down his worst lies from the speech.
Trump's return to a trade war with Canada further imperils American businesses and industries – like California wine – that rely on Canadian markets. As Canada faces a serious natural disaster at home, this is the wrong message to send to our northern neighbor. www.nytimes.com/2026/07/20/b...
This latest attack on the freedom of the press, including weaponizing the FBI to subpoena even family members of journalists, shows how far Donald Trump is willing to go to hide the truth.
If the $400 million plane Qatar gifted the President of the United States is still not safe enough, and Trump is using it against the advice of his own Secret Service, the American people deserve to know.
The Supreme Court, and our federal judiciary at large, must be held to the highest standard — at a minimum it must follow the same ethics rules that apply to other federal officials. Today it does not. Cases should be decided based on merit, not personal profits. Americans deserve nothing less.
This must be just the beginning. We need a whole set of strong reforms to the Supreme Court. Comprehensive reform must include: ✔️ Term limits for Justices ✔️ An enforceable code of ethics ✔️ Expanding the Court
✔️ Prevent Supreme Court Justices and other federal judges from participating in cases where they hold personal financial interests ✔️ Enact a ban on individual stock trading by Justices and other federal judges ✔️ Expand the Freedom of Information Act to the federal judicial system
The Supreme Court is out of control and nakedly partisan. Today I'm making another push to strengthen accountability, transparency, and ethical standards across the federal judiciary. Here's what the bills I'm introducing would do: 🧵
Each time a servicemember is lost is a terrible reminder that those who choose to wear the uniform of our nation shoulder the greatest risk, and pay the highest price, for war.
I’m devastated to learn of the loss of two U.S. servicemembers and another missing in Jordan, and join every American in sending prayers to their loved ones in this heartbreaking moment.
We need to understand what role he played in helping his family’s company in the midst of the DOJ overturning 30 different gun safety regulations in the past year. I’m working to get those answers before Blanche faces a confirmation vote.
Donald Trump is using the same old playbook to discredit our elections in advance. He knows Republicans are in trouble this November and wants to lay the predicate to interfere, even before a single ballot is cast. He fears voters and facing their growing wrath over rising costs and corruption.
SoupScore Breakdown
Loading analysis metrics…
Voting History
885 total votes
ExpandCollapse

Recent roll calls with party-majority context so it is easier to scan how this member tends to vote.

DateBillQuestionPositionParty MajAlign?Result
2025-12-08End debateNONOCloture Motion Agreed to (52-44)
2025-12-04Confirm nomineeNOT_VOTINGNONomination Confirmed (57-32)
2025-12-04S. Res. 520 (119th)End debateNOT_VOTINGNOCloture Motion Rejected (43-37, 3/5 majority required)
2025-12-04H.J. Res. 131 (119th)Approve resolutionNOT_VOTINGNOJoint Resolution Passed (49-45)
2025-12-03End debateNONOCloture Motion Agreed to (63-34)
2025-12-03S.J. Res. 91 (119th)Begin considerationNONOMotion to Proceed Agreed to (49-47)
2025-12-03Confirm nomineeNONONomination Confirmed (57-41)
2025-12-03End debateNONOCloture Motion Agreed to (56-40)
2025-12-02Confirm nomineeNONONomination Confirmed (60-39)
2025-12-02End debateNONOCloture Motion Agreed to (61-36)
2025-12-02Confirm nomineeNONONomination Confirmed (53-45)
2025-12-01End debateNOT_VOTINGNOCloture Motion Agreed to (50-41)
2025-11-20H.J. Res. 130 (119th)Approve resolutionNONOJoint Resolution Passed (51-43)
2025-11-19S.J. Res. 76 (119th)Begin considerationYESYESMotion to Proceed Rejected (46-51)
2025-11-19S.J. Res. 89 (119th)Begin considerationNONOMotion to Proceed Agreed to (51-47)
2025-11-19Confirm nomineeNONONomination Confirmed (66-32)
2025-11-18End debateNONOCloture Motion Agreed to (65-32)
2025-11-10H.R. 5371 (119th)Final passageNONOBill Passed (60-40)
2025-11-10H.R. 5371 (119th)End debateNONOCloture Motion Agreed to (60-40, 3/5 majority required)
2025-11-10H.R. 5371 (119th)Vote on amendmentNONOAmendment Agreed to (60-40)
2025-11-10H.R. 5371 (119th)End debateNONOCloture Motion Agreed to (60-40, 3/5 majority required)
2025-11-10H.R. 5371 (119th)Kill the motionYESYESMotion to Table Agreed to (76-24)
2025-11-10H.R. 5371 (119th)Kill the motionYESYESMotion to Table Failed (47-53)
2025-11-10H.R. 5371 (119th)Kill the motionYESYESMotion to Table Failed (47-53)
2025-11-10H.R. 5371 (119th)Begin considerationNONOMotion to Proceed Agreed to (60-40)
2025-11-09H.R. 5371 (119th)End filibuster to begin debateNONOCloture on the Motion to Proceed Agreed to (60-40, 3/5 majority required)
2025-11-07S. 3012 (119th)End filibuster to begin debateNONOCloture on the Motion to Proceed Rejected (53-43, 3/5 majority required)
2025-11-06S.J. Res. 90 (119th)Motion to Discharge S.J.Res. 90YESYESMotion to Discharge Rejected (49-51)
2025-11-05Confirm nomineeNONONomination Confirmed (57-43)
2025-11-05End debateNONOCloture Motion Agreed to (57-41)
2025-11-05Confirm nomineeNONONomination Confirmed (52-45)
2025-11-04Confirm nomineeNONONomination Confirmed (52-46)
2025-11-04H.R. 5371 (119th)End filibuster to begin debateNONOCloture on the Motion to Proceed Rejected (54-44, 3/5 majority required)
2025-11-03End debateNONOCloture Motion Agreed to (51-46)
2025-10-30End debateNONOCloture Motion Agreed to (51-47)
2025-10-30S.J. Res. 88 (119th)Approve resolutionYESYESJoint Resolution Passed (51-47)
2025-10-30S.J. Res. 80 (119th)Approve resolutionNONOJoint Resolution Passed (52-45)
2025-10-29S.J. Res. 77 (119th)Approve resolutionYESYESJoint Resolution Passed (50-46)
2025-10-29S.J. Res. 69 (119th)Begin considerationNONOMotion to Proceed Rejected (25-72)
2025-10-29Confirm nomineeNONONomination Confirmed (51-47)
2025-10-29S.J. Res. 80 (119th)Begin considerationNONOMotion to Proceed Agreed to (54-46)
2025-10-28S.J. Res. 81 (119th)Approve resolutionYESYESJoint Resolution Passed (52-48)
2025-10-28End debateNONOCloture Motion Agreed to (53-46)
2025-10-28Confirm nomineeNONONomination Confirmed (52-47)
2025-10-28End debateNONOCloture Motion Agreed to (52-47)
2025-10-28H.R. 5371 (119th)End filibuster to begin debateNONOCloture on the Motion to Proceed Rejected (54-45, 3/5 majority required)
2025-10-27Confirm nomineeYESNONomination Confirmed (58-40)
2025-10-27Confirm nomineeNONONomination Confirmed (52-46)
2025-10-23End debateNONOCloture Motion Agreed to (50-45)
2025-10-23Confirm nomineeNONONomination Confirmed (48-45)

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 6 / 18Next →