I make my case in an @latimes.com op-ed for why Democrats must unite around a simple and popular agenda to reform the Court:
www.latimes.com/opinion/stor...
Congress Member Profile|U.S. Senator|Democrat|California
Adam B. Schiff
SoupScoreanalysis-first civic rating · view full breakdown
Loading…
Voting Record — 890
Yes31%
No66%
Present0%
Not Voting3%
Party align94%
Cross-party4%
SoupScore
District Map
Senate District (Statewide)
U.S. Census Bureau boundary data.
Social & Web
External Resources
Adam B. Schiff
U.S. SenatorDemocratCalifornia
SoupScore
Adam B.'s ATmosphere Activity
20 recent posts · 95 sponsored · 360 cosponsored
Recent ATmosphere posts, sponsorships, and cosponsorships.
The next Democratic majority should make repairing trust in the Supreme Court and the judicial branch a priority to ensure it doesn't continue to operate as a partisan and retrograde institution.
@blumenthal.senate.gov and I are opening an investigation today into how DHS allowed a hostile government to attempt to coerce Iranian immigrants to drop their asylum claims.
As Trump's war with Iran drags on, his administration is reportedly giving the Iranian regime access to confidential information on asylum seekers.
Unless, of course, the goal is to cover up more corruption.
An inspector general is supposed to root out fraud, malfeasance, and corruption in executive branch agencies.
So maybe an advisor who worked for an agency head and told an intelligence council to rewrite its conclusion to suit the president’s preferred narrative is not the best choice.
Devastated to learn of the passing of California’s pride, Jackie, earlier today.
Any visitor to my office in the past year knows we proudly showed the livestream of Jackie’s nest showing alongside C-SPAN and national news.
We join all of CA of mourning the passing of one of our most famous icons.
I’ve partnered with Senator Joni Ernst on this bipartisan bill to change the law and expand the help cities can receive to process rebuilding projects more quickly following disasters.
After disaster strikes, communities should be able to access support from the federal government without delay or bureaucratic red tape. But our current laws are not working as they should.
These threats are not hypothetical—they are happening right now.
The federal government needs to step up and help protect our drinking water from cyberattacks by foreign states and criminals. Cyberattacks threaten both your health and your water bill.
Today I'm unveiling a bill with @klobuchar.senate.gov to have the EPA develop those cybersecurity standards and provide resources to help water and wastewater utilities protect their systems from hacks.
In 2023, a few states sued to stop the last administration from implementing a cybersecurity guideline for state utilities.
I’m introducing a comprehensive bill today to change that.
Recent cyberattacks by hostile foreign powers have exposed unacceptable risks to America’s water systems.
But federal law doesn’t allow the EPA to set minimum standards for cyber protections at our water utilities, or even get reports on cybersecurity practices or incidents.
Senator Young and I are introducing legislation to improve federal cybersecurity resources to help small businesses mitigate their cybersecurity vulnerabilities.
As small businesses face a growing threat of cyberattacks and phishing schemes, we must give them the tools they need to stop hacks and lower their risk.
The State Department must report on the full extent of Venezuela’s human rights violations to make clear the toll that millions of civilians continue to face, notwithstanding the U.S. role in that government’s decisions.
Venezuela’s government has a long record of widespread human rights abuses, including arbitrary detention and political repression, that have continued under Delcy Rodríguez.
Now, Trump’s ATF wants to roll this safeguard back — allow braces to proliferate again — and put the gun industry profits ahead of public safety.
We must stop this.
Posts page 1Older posts →
SoupScore Breakdown
Loading analysis metrics…
Voting History890 total votesExpandCollapse
Voting History
890 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2025-06-04 | — | End debate | NO | NO | ✓ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (51-46) |
| 2025-06-04 | — | End debate | NO | NO | ✓ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (60-37) |
| 2025-06-04 | — | End debate | NO | NO | ✓ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (51-46) |
| 2025-06-03 | — | Confirm nominee | YES | NO | ✕↔ | Nomination Confirmed (72-26) |
| 2025-06-03 | — | End debate | YES | NO | ✕↔ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (66-28) |
| 2025-06-03 | — | Confirm nominee | NO | NO | ✓ | Nomination Confirmed (59-36) |
| 2025-06-03 | — | End debate | NO | NO | ✓ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (59-37) |
| 2025-06-03 | — | Confirm nominee | NO | NO | ✓ | Nomination Confirmed (51-46) |
| 2025-06-02 | — | End debate | NO | NO | ✓ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (51-45) |
| 2025-05-22 | H.J. Res. 89 (119th) | Approve resolution | NO | NO | ✓ | Joint Resolution Passed (49-46) |
| 2025-05-22 | H.J. Res. 89 (119th) | Begin consideration | NO | NO | ✓ | Motion to Proceed Agreed to (51-46) |
| 2025-05-22 | H.J. Res. 87 (119th) | Approve resolution | NO | NO | ✓ | Joint Resolution Passed (51-45) |
| 2025-05-22 | H.J. Res. 87 (119th) | Begin consideration | NO | NO | ✓ | Motion to Proceed Agreed to (51-46) |
| 2025-05-22 | H.J. Res. 88 (119th) | Approve resolution | NO | NO | ✓ | Joint Resolution Passed (51-44) |
| 2025-05-21 | H.J. Res. 88 (119th) | Begin consideration | NO | NO | ✓ | Motion to Proceed Agreed to (51-46) |
| 2025-05-21 | S.J. Res. 55 (119th) | Approve resolution | NO | NO | ✓ | Joint Resolution Passed (51-46) |
| 2025-05-21 | S.J. Res. 55 (119th) | Point of Order S.J.Res. 55 | NO | NO | ✓ | Point of Order Sustained (51-46) |
| 2025-05-21 | S.J. Res. 55 (119th) | Point of Order S.J.Res. 55 | NO | NO | ✓ | Point of Order Sustained (51-46) |
| 2025-05-21 | S.J. Res. 55 (119th) | Motion to Adjourn S.J.Res. 55 | YES | YES | ✓ | Motion to Adjourn Rejected (46-51) |
| 2025-05-21 | — | Motion (Motion to Recess for Ten Minutes) | YES | YES | ✓ | Motion Rejected (45-52) |
| 2025-05-21 | — | Motion (Motion to Recess for Fifteen Minutes) | YES | YES | ✓ | Motion Rejected (46-51) |
| 2025-05-21 | — | Motion (Motion to Recess for Thirty Minutes) | YES | YES | ✓ | Motion Rejected (46-51) |
| 2025-05-21 | — | Motion (Motion to Recess for 60 Minutes) | YES | YES | ✓ | Motion Rejected (45-51) |
| 2025-05-21 | — | Motion (Motion to Recess for Ninety Minutes) | YES | YES | ✓ | Motion Rejected (46-51) |
| 2025-05-21 | S.J. Res. 55 (119th) | Kill the motion | NO | NO | ✓ | Motion to Table Agreed to (51-46) |
| 2025-05-21 | S.J. Res. 55 (119th) | Kill the motion | YES | YES | ✓ | Motion to Table Failed (46-52) |
| 2025-05-21 | S.J. Res. 55 (119th) | Begin consideration | NO | NO | ✓ | Motion to Proceed Agreed to (53-46) |
| 2025-05-21 | S. 1582 (119th) | Begin consideration | YES | NO | ✕↔ | Motion to Proceed Agreed to (69-31) |
| 2025-05-19 | S. 1582 (119th) | End filibuster to begin debate | YES | NO | ✕↔ | Cloture on the Motion to Proceed Agreed to (66-32, 3/5 majority required) |
| 2025-05-19 | — | Confirm nominee | NO | NO | ✓ | Nomination Confirmed (51-45) |
| 2025-05-19 | — | End debate | NO | NO | ✓ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (52-46) |
| 2025-05-15 | S. Res. 195 (119th) | Motion to Discharge S.Res. 195 | YES | YES | ✓ | Motion to Discharge Rejected (45-50) |
| 2025-05-15 | — | Confirm nominee | NO | NO | ✓ | Nomination Confirmed (51-46) |
| 2025-05-14 | — | End debate | NO | NO | ✓ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (52-47) |
| 2025-05-14 | — | Confirm nominee | NO | NO | ✓ | Nomination Confirmed (52-45) |
| 2025-05-14 | — | End debate | NO | NO | ✓ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (51-45) |
| 2025-05-14 | — | Confirm nominee | NO | NO | ✓ | Nomination Confirmed (54-43) |
| 2025-05-14 | — | End debate | NO | NO | ✓ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (53-43) |
| 2025-05-14 | — | Confirm nominee | NO | NO | ✓ | Nomination Confirmed (51-46) |
| 2025-05-14 | — | End debate | NO | NO | ✓ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (51-45) |
| 2025-05-14 | — | Confirm nominee | NO | NO | ✓ | Nomination Confirmed (54-40) |
| 2025-05-13 | — | End debate | NO | NO | ✓ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (57-41) |
| 2025-05-13 | — | Confirm nominee | NO | NO | ✓ | Nomination Confirmed (52-44) |
| 2025-05-13 | — | End debate | NO | NO | ✓ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (53-45) |
| 2025-05-13 | — | Confirm nominee | YES | NO | ✕↔ | Nomination Confirmed (74-25) |
| 2025-05-13 | — | End debate | YES | NO | ✕↔ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (72-26) |
| 2025-05-13 | — | Confirm nominee | NO | NO | ✓ | Nomination Confirmed (52-46) |
| 2025-05-12 | — | End debate | NO | NO | ✓ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (52-45) |
| 2025-05-12 | — | Confirm nominee | NO | NO | ✓ | Nomination Confirmed (52-45) |
| 2025-05-12 | — | End debate | NO | NO | ✓ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (53-47) |
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.