Kaila Kuhn
Winter Vinecki
Christina Carreira
Madison Chock & Evan Bates
Emeila Zingas
Connor Hellebuyck
Jack Hughes
Quinn Hughes
Dylan Larkin
Zach Werenski
Megan Keller
Kirsten Simms
Nick Baumgartner
Jake Vedder
Congress Member Profile|U.S. Senator|Democrat|Michigan
Elissa Slotkin
SoupScoreanalysis-first civic rating · view full breakdown
Loading…
Voting Record — 890
Yes36%
No62%
Present0%
Not Voting3%
Party align92%
Cross-party7%
SoupScore
District Map
Senate District (Statewide)
U.S. Census Bureau boundary data.
Social & Web
External Resources
Elissa Slotkin
U.S. SenatorDemocratMichigan
SoupScore
Elissa's ATmosphere Activity
20 recent posts · 28 sponsored · 131 cosponsored
Recent ATmosphere posts, sponsorships, and cosponsorships.
The Winter Olympics are here, and Michiganders are extremely well-represented. Get to know them — they make Michigan proud! Go get ‘em!
Reposted bySenator Elissa Slotkin
I will not be intimidated by any harassment campaign. I do not intend to sit down for a voluntary interview with DOJ or FBI officials sent to interfere with the important work I’m doing for my constituents.
This should end. And I will fight hard against any further unlawful escalation. [2/2]
Reposted bySenator Elissa Slotkin
Members of Congress from both political parties expressed dismay and disappointment Friday after President Donald Trump shared a video on social media depicting former President Barack Obama and first lady Michelle Obama as monkeys. Michigan’s U.S. Sen. Elissa Slotkin called it “racist garbage”
Any effort to turn the Intelligence Community against our own citizens is illegal and would undercut longstanding American values of a right to privacy and the ability to speak out against our government without fear of retribution. www.bloomberg.com/news/article...
This is racist garbage from President Trump. If you’re finding yourself defending it, you’re on the wrong side of history. www.nbcnews.com/politics/whi...
Reposted bySenator Elissa Slotkin
Sen. Elissa Slotkin is refusing to voluntarily comply with the Justice Department investigation into that video she organized urging U.S. military members to resist illegal orders.
Slotkin's legal team is requesting Jeanine Pirro preserve all relevant documents for "anticipated litigation."
Reposted bySenator Elissa Slotkin
Sen. Slotkin refuses DOJ interview request over troops video: 'The intimidation is the point'
Reposted bySenator Elissa Slotkin
Sen. Elissa Slotkin (D-MI) has refused to meet for a voluntary interview with Jeanine Pirro, the former Fox News host-turned-U.S. Attorney for the District of Columbia. talkingpointsmemo.com/where-things...
Reposted bySenator Elissa Slotkin
The Michigan senator won't sit for a Justice Department interview and says she's considering a lawsuit for a violation of her rights.
Reposted bySenator Elissa Slotkin
In case you missed it, Senator Slotkin makes a great point here about how lawyers have advised her to lay low and not make any waves with Trump. And instead, she has done the exact opposite by standing up to him. This is the way. open.substack.com/pub/jimacost...
I was glad to have the opportunity to meet with the Lebanese Chief of Defense General Haykal yesterday. Michigan is home to the largest Lebanese-American community in the country, with so many who have deep ties and family trying to make it in this dynamic country.
I was glad to have the opportunity to meet with the Lebanese Chief of Defense General Haykal yesterday. Michigan is home to the largest Lebanese-American community in the country, with so many who have deep ties and family trying to make it in this dynamic country.
Reposted bySenator Elissa Slotkin
U.S. Sen. Elissa Slotkin has notified federal authorities she will not interview with the DOJ over a video in which she and several other lawmakers, all former military and intelligence officers, urged military members to “refuse illegal orders.”
Story from @kdailey.bsky.social
Today, I sent a letter to Attorney General Pam Bondi and U.S. Attorney Jeanine Pirro informing them that I will not be sitting down with them for their inquiry over a 90-second video I filmed in November.
Here's why.
Michigan mayors also visited Senator Peters and me. They shared their concerns, and we brainstormed what we can do about them at the federal level.
The theme at both of these meetings is that people want ALL their elected officials to work together, cut through partisan noise and deliver results.
Last week I spoke with mayors from across the country. They’re concerned– about housing costs, data centers, and ICE – and feel more pressure than ever as the bridge between their community and the federal government.
There couldn't be a more important time to stand up for our kids in our schools.
This week, I met with Michigan Sheriffs on their annual trip to Washington to hear directly from them about what we can do on the federal level to make sure they have the resources they need to keep our communities safe.
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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2025-03-25 | — | End debate | NO | NO | ✓ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (53-46) |
| 2025-03-25 | — | Confirm nominee | YES | NO | ✕↔ | Nomination Confirmed (74-25) |
| 2025-03-25 | — | End debate | YES | NO | ✕↔ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (73-25) |
| 2025-03-24 | — | Confirm nominee | NO | NO | ✓ | Nomination Confirmed (60-31) |
| 2025-03-24 | — | Confirm nominee | NO | NO | ✓ | Nomination Confirmed (62-30) |
| 2025-03-14 | — | End debate | NO | NO | ✓ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (63-32) |
| 2025-03-14 | — | End debate | NO | NO | ✓ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (64-33) |
| 2025-03-14 | H.R. 1968 (119th) | Final passage | NO | NO | ✓ | Bill Passed (54-46) |
| 2025-03-14 | H.R. 1968 (119th) | Vote on amendment | NO | NO | ✓ | Amendment Rejected (27-73) |
| 2025-03-14 | H.R. 1968 (119th) | Vote on amendment | YES | YES | ✓ | Amendment Rejected (48-52, 3/5 majority required) |
| 2025-03-14 | H.R. 1968 (119th) | Vote on amendment | YES | YES | ✓ | Amendment Rejected (47-53, 3/5 majority required) |
| 2025-03-14 | H.R. 1968 (119th) | Vote on amendment | YES | YES | ✓ | Amendment Rejected (47-53, 3/5 majority required) |
| 2025-03-14 | H.R. 1968 (119th) | End debate | NO | NO | ✓ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (62-38, 3/5 majority required) |
| 2025-03-14 | S. 331 (119th) | Final passage | YES | YES | ✓ | Bill Passed (84-16) |
| 2025-03-14 | — | Confirm nominee | YES | NO | ✕↔ | Nomination Confirmed (59-40) |
| 2025-03-14 | — | End debate | YES | NO | ✕↔ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (56-39) |
| 2025-03-13 | — | Confirm nominee | YES | NO | ✕↔ | Nomination Confirmed (54-45) |
| 2025-03-13 | S. 331 (119th) | End debate | YES | YES | ✓ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (84-15, 3/5 majority required) |
| 2025-03-13 | — | End debate | YES | NO | ✕↔ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (54-45) |
| 2025-03-13 | — | Confirm nominee | YES | NO | ✕↔ | Nomination Confirmed (56-43) |
| 2025-03-13 | — | End debate | YES | NO | ✕↔ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (57-41) |
| 2025-03-12 | — | Confirm nominee | NO | NO | ✓ | Nomination Confirmed (53-46) |
| 2025-03-12 | — | End debate | NO | NO | ✓ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (53-45) |
| 2025-03-12 | — | Confirm nominee | NO | NO | ✓ | Nomination Confirmed (53-46) |
| 2025-03-12 | — | End debate | NO | NO | ✓ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (52-45) |
| 2025-03-11 | — | Confirm nominee | NO | YES | ✕ | Nomination Confirmed (78-19) |
| 2025-03-11 | — | End debate | NOT_VOTING | YES | — | Cloture Motion Agreed to (76-20) |
| 2025-03-11 | — | Confirm nominee | NOT_VOTING | NO | — | Nomination Confirmed (51-46) |
| 2025-03-11 | — | End debate | NOT_VOTING | NO | — | Cloture Motion Agreed to (51-46) |
| 2025-03-10 | — | Confirm nominee | YES | NO | ✕↔ | Nomination Confirmed (67-32) |
| 2025-03-06 | S. 331 (119th) | End filibuster to begin debate | YES | YES | ✓ | Cloture on the Motion to Proceed Agreed to (82-12, 3/5 majority required) |
| 2025-03-06 | — | End debate | YES | NO | ✕↔ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (66-30) |
| 2025-03-06 | — | Confirm nominee | NO | NO | ✓ | Nomination Confirmed (53-43) |
| 2025-03-06 | — | End debate | NO | NO | ✓ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (53-43) |
| 2025-03-05 | S.J. Res. 28 (119th) | Approve resolution | NO | NO | ✓ | Joint Resolution Passed (51-47) |
| 2025-03-05 | — | Confirm nominee | NO | NO | ✓ | Nomination Confirmed (52-46) |
| 2025-03-05 | — | End debate | NOT_VOTING | NO | — | Cloture Motion Agreed to (51-46) |
| 2025-03-04 | S.J. Res. 28 (119th) | Begin consideration | NOT_VOTING | NO | — | Motion to Proceed Agreed to (50-47) |
| 2025-03-04 | S.J. Res. 3 (119th) | Approve resolution | NOT_VOTING | NO | — | Joint Resolution Passed (70-27) |
| 2025-03-04 | S.J. Res. 3 (119th) | Begin consideration | NOT_VOTING | NO | — | Motion to Proceed Agreed to (70-28) |
| 2025-03-03 | S. 9 (119th) | End filibuster to begin debate | NOT_VOTING | NO | — | Cloture on the Motion to Proceed Rejected (51-45, 3/5 majority required) |
| 2025-03-03 | — | Confirm nominee | NOT_VOTING | NO | — | Nomination Confirmed (51-45) |
| 2025-02-27 | — | End debate | NO | NO | ✓ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (51-47) |
| 2025-02-27 | H.J. Res. 35 (119th) | Approve resolution | NO | NO | ✓ | Joint Resolution Passed (52-47) |
| 2025-02-26 | S.J. Res. 12 (119th) | Begin consideration | NO | NO | ✓ | Motion to Proceed Agreed to (52-47) |
| 2025-02-26 | S.J. Res. 10 (119th) | Approve resolution | YES | YES | ✓ | Joint Resolution Defeated (47-52) |
| 2025-02-26 | — | Confirm nominee | YES | NO | ✕↔ | Nomination Confirmed (56-43) |
| 2025-02-25 | — | Begin consideration | NO | NO | ✓ | Motion to Proceed Agreed to (51-47) |
| 2025-02-25 | S.J. Res. 11 (119th) | Approve resolution | NO | NO | ✓ | Joint Resolution Passed (54-44) |
| 2025-02-25 | S.J. Res. 11 (119th) | Begin consideration | NO | NO | ✓ | Motion to Proceed Agreed to (54-42) |
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.