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

Adam Bennett Schiff is an American lawyer and politician serving as the junior United States senator from California, a seat he has held since 2024. A member of the Democratic Party, Schiff served 12 terms in the United States House of Representatives from 2001 to 2024 and was a member of the California State Senate from 1996 to 2000.

Source: WikipediaView full (CC BY-SA)
Voting Record — 851
Yes31%
No66%
Present0%
Not Voting3%
Party align93%
Cross-party5%
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 · 71 sponsored · 330 cosponsored
View profile

Recent ATmosphere posts, sponsorships, and cosponsorships.

President Donald Trump, EPA Administrator Zeldin and Republicans in Congress are undermining our state’s ability to protect the health of millions of Americans. From the party that once claimed the mantle of champion of state’s rights, the GOP is now only the party of polluter rights.
Under both Republican and Democratic administrations, California was consistently granted waivers under the Clean Air Act to implement stronger standards to help ensure cleaner air for our families. By eliminating the filibuster and passing these polluter resolutions- 🧵
President Donald Trump, EPA Administrator Zeldin and Republicans in Congress are undermining our state’s ability to protect the health of millions of Americans. From the party that once claimed the mantel of champion of state’s rights, the GOP is now only the party of polluter rights.
California’s farmworkers are the backbone of our economy. They work through grueling conditions – rain and shine, heat and cold, even a pandemic – to feed the nation. Targeting these workers is just wrong. And meant to stoke fear, not improve public safety.
Donald Trump wants to be a strongman. So he’s abusing taxpayer resources to appear that way. And he’s abusing the military. Anything but what he was elected to do — make life more affordable for American families.
Monitoring the situation in my hometown of Burbank as a brush fire has led to several evacuations. As always, make sure to follow any and all evacuation notices from local officials.
The deployment of Marines to Los Angeles was uncalled for, rushed, and potentially dangerous for everyone involved. We’re demanding answers from Sec. Hegseth. This isn't just a California problem. What Trump does in Los Angeles could become the authoritarian blueprint elsewhere in the country.
David Huerta, SEIU California President and a leading voice for California workers and communities, was injured, arrested and detained by federal officials. @schumer.senate.gov, @padilla.senate.gov , and I are demanding answers from the Trump Administration.
Los Angeles — violence is never the answer. Assaulting law enforcement is never ok. Indeed, doing so plays directly into the hands of those who seek to antagonize and weaponize the situation for their own gain. Don’t let them succeed.
Violence must stop, and we need to keep the focus on protecting fundamental rights. There is nothing President Trump would like more than a violent confrontation with protestors to justify the unjustifiable — invocation of the Insurrection Act or some form of martial law.
If the Guard is needed to restore peace, the Governor will ask for it. But continuing down this path will erode trust in the National Guard and set a dangerous precedent for unilateral misuse of the Guard across the country.
The Trump Administration’s calling on the California National Guard without the authorization of the Governor is unprecedented. This action is designed to inflame tensions, sow chaos, and escalate the situation.
I went to the Senate Floor to bring up my resolution urging the Pentagon not to rename ships in the John Lewis class, named after American civil rights legends like the USNS Harvey Milk. Republicans blocked it. On the first week of Pride Month no less.
A glimmer of good news. The reality is she never should have been put through this ordeal in the first place. Glad all of the public support for her resulted in a reprieve from what would have been a deadly deportation. Praying for her health and healing.
SoupScore Breakdown
Loading analysis metrics…
Voting History
851 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
2025-10-08H.R. 5371 (119th)End filibuster to begin debateNONOCloture on the Motion to Proceed Rejected (54-45, 3/5 majority required)
2025-10-08S. 2882 (119th)End filibuster to begin debateYESYESCloture on the Motion to Proceed Rejected (47-52, 3/5 majority required)
2025-10-08H.J. Res. 104 (119th)Approve resolutionNONOJoint Resolution Passed (52-47)
2025-10-07H.J. Res. 104 (119th)Begin considerationNONOMotion to Proceed Agreed to (50-47)
2025-10-07S. Res. 412 (119th)Confirm nomineeNONONomination Confirmed (51-47)
2025-10-06S. Res. 412 (119th)End debateNONOCloture Motion Agreed to (50-45)
2025-10-06H.R. 5371 (119th)End filibuster to begin debateNONOCloture on the Motion to Proceed Rejected (52-42, 3/5 majority required)
2025-10-06S. 2882 (119th)End filibuster to begin debateYESYESCloture on the Motion to Proceed Rejected (45-50, 3/5 majority required)
2025-10-03H.R. 5371 (119th)End filibuster to begin debateNONOCloture on the Motion to Proceed Rejected (54-44, 3/5 majority required)
2025-10-03S. 2882 (119th)End filibuster to begin debateYESYESCloture on the Motion to Proceed Rejected (46-52, 3/5 majority required)
2025-10-03S. Res. 412 (119th)Approve resolutionNONOResolution Agreed to (51-46)
2025-10-01S. Res. 412 (119th)End debateNONOCloture Motion Agreed to (53-46)
2025-10-01Confirm nomineeNONONomination Confirmed (52-45)
2025-10-01End debateNONOCloture Motion Agreed to (52-47)
2025-10-01H.R. 5371 (119th)End filibuster to begin debateNONOCloture on the Motion to Proceed Rejected (55-45, 3/5 majority required)
2025-10-01S. 2882 (119th)End filibuster to begin debateYESYESCloture on the Motion to Proceed Rejected (47-53, 3/5 majority required)
2025-09-30H.R. 5371 (119th)Final passageNONOBill Defeated (55-45, 3/5 majority required)
2025-09-30S. 2882 (119th)Final passageYESYESBill Defeated (47-53, 3/5 majority required)
2025-09-29S. 2806 (119th)End filibuster to begin debateNONOCloture on the Motion to Proceed Rejected (37-61, 3/5 majority required)
2025-09-29Confirm nomineeNONONomination Confirmed (54-45)
2025-09-29End debateNONOCloture Motion Agreed to (54-45)
2025-09-19Confirm nomineeNONONomination Confirmed (47-43)
2025-09-19End debateNONOCloture Motion Agreed to (47-45)
2025-09-19H.R. 5371 (119th)Final passageNONOBill Defeated (44-48, 3/5 majority required)
2025-09-19S. 2882 (119th)Final passageYESYESBill Defeated (47-45, 3/5 majority required)
2025-09-18Confirm nomineeNONONomination Confirmed (51-47)
2025-09-17End debateNONOCloture Motion Agreed to (52-47)
2025-09-17Decision of the Chair PN12-19 and PN25-28 and PN12-45 and PN22-1 and PN22-2 and PN22-5 and PN22-27 and PN22-20 and PN22-21 and PN26-8 and PN26-34 and PN26-35 and PN55-41 and PN22-4 and PN22-8 and PN22-19 and PN26-1 and PN22-23 and PN25-40 and PN26-7 and PN26-19 and PN26-31 and PN60-3 and PN26-44 and PN25-2 and PN55-16 and PN60-9 and PN60-10 and PN129-8 and PN26-45 and PN141-37 and PN141-7 and PN141-28 and PN12-22 and PN25-21 and PN22-3 and PN26-22 and PN13-5 and PN22-24 and PN25-33 and PN141-18 and PN150-5 and PN345-16 and PN55-42 and PN54-6 and PN54-7 and PN55-45 and PN55-25YESYESDecision of Chair Not Sustained (47-52)
2025-09-17Motion to Reconsider PN55-25 and PN55-45 and PN54-7 and PN54-6 and PN55-42 and PN345-16 and PN150-5 and PN141-18 and PN25-33 and PN22-24 and PN13-5 and PN26-22 and PN22-3 and PN25-21 and PN12-22 and PN141-28 and PN141-7 and PN141-37 and PN26-45 and PN129-8 and PN60-10 and PN60-9 and PN55-16 and PN25-2 and PN26-44 and PN60-3 and PN26-31 and PN26-19 and PN26-7 and PN25-40 and PN22-23 and PN26-1 and PN22-19 and PN22-8 and PN22-4 and PN55-41 and PN26-35 and PN26-34 and PN26-8 and PN22-21 and PN22-20 and PN22-27 and PN22-5 and PN22-2 and PN22-1 and PN12-45 and PN12-19 and PN25-28NONOMotion to Reconsider Agreed to (51-47)
2025-09-17End debateNONOCloture Motion Rejected (51-48, 3/5 majority required)
2025-09-16S. Con. Res. 22 (119th)Begin considerationNONOMotion to Proceed Rejected (36-62)
2025-09-16S.J. Res. 60 (119th)Begin considerationYESYESMotion to Proceed Rejected (47-51)
2025-09-15Confirm nomineeNONONomination Confirmed (48-47)
2025-09-15End debateNONOCloture Motion Agreed to (50-44)
2025-09-15S. Res. 377 (119th)Approve resolutionNONOResolution Agreed to (51-44)
2025-09-11S. Res. 377 (119th)End debateNONOCloture Motion Agreed to (53-43)
2025-09-11S. Res. 377 (119th)Decision of the Chair S.Res. 377YESYESDecision of Chair Not Sustained (45-53)
2025-09-11S. Res. 377 (119th)Motion to Reconsider S.Res. 377NONOMotion to Reconsider Agreed to (52-45)
2025-09-11S. Res. 377 (119th)End debateNONOCloture Motion Rejected (52-47, 3/5 majority required)
2025-09-10S. 2296 (119th)Kill the motionNONOMotion to Table Agreed to (51-49)
2025-09-09S. Res. 377 (119th)Begin considerationNONOMotion to Proceed Agreed to (53-45)
2025-09-09S. Res. 377 (119th)Kill the motionNONOMotion to Table Agreed to (53-46)
2025-09-09Confirm nomineeNONONomination Confirmed (53-45)
2025-09-09End debateNONOCloture Motion Agreed to (53-44)
2025-09-09Confirm nomineeNONONomination Confirmed (49-46)
2025-09-09End debateNONOCloture Motion Agreed to (51-46)
2025-09-09Confirm nomineeNONONomination Confirmed (52-45)
2025-09-08Confirm nomineeNONONomination Confirmed (50-43)
2025-09-04S. 2296 (119th)Begin considerationYESYESMotion to Proceed Agreed to (83-13)
2025-09-04End debateNONOCloture Motion Agreed to (53-46)

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 7 / 18Next →