The Supreme Court ruled that the federal government needs a warrant to get phone location history from cell providers. But it's still legal for it to buy up the same data from shady data brokers that harvest your data from apps, etc. That's the legal loophole my legislation would close.
Congress Member Profile|U.S. Senator|Democrat|Oregon
Ron Wyden
SoupScoreanalysis-first civic rating · view full breakdown
Loading…
Voting Record — 890
Yes28%
No70%
Present0%
Not Voting2%
Party align97%
Cross-party0%
SoupScore
District Map
Senate District (Statewide)
U.S. Census Bureau boundary data.
Social & Web
External Resources
Ron Wyden
U.S. SenatorDemocratOregon
SoupScore
Ron's ATmosphere Activity
20 recent posts · 90 sponsored · 404 cosponsored
Recent ATmosphere posts, sponsorships, and cosponsorships.
For YEARS I've been on the forefront of trying to pass real privacy reforms to stop an agency like Trump's ICE from weaponizing your private data. Now it's happened, but it's not too late to act. If you care about this as much as I do, please let your members of Congress know.
3. ICE is using government data from state DMVs and federal agencies and refuses to answer questions about how that data is used. I'm also leading that fight in the Senate to rein them in, and warned states that care about their residents to stop sharing DMV data with ICE.
2. ICE is buying your private location data from sleazy data brokers through a legal loophole. I've had a bill to stop this since 2021. I'm renewing my push to get it passed into black letter law as soon as possible.
1. ICE is using Palantir apps to collect biometric data on protestors. I'm working closely with @markey.senate.gov to stop this.
I am. But there are three things at play here regarding ICE collecting private data. Quick rundown on the issue, why you should be paying attention, and what I'm doing about it:
This video shows Donald Trump’s lawless federal agents again out of control. The Senate cannot vote to keep funding this. Every single agent complicit in these horrors should be put on trial at the state level for real accountability.
Reposted bySenator Ron Wyden
Quoting @wyden.senate.gov: "It makes a mockery of the idea that ICE is trying to make our country safer. Rather, agents are reportedly picking people to deport from our country the same way you'd choose a nearby coffee shop."
New: meet ELITE, the Palantir app ICE is using to find neighborhoods to raid. Map interface; officers search for immigrants; click person to bring up individual dossier. This is clearest link between what Palantir is building and ICE's activities on the ground yet www.404media.co/elite-the-pa...
Reposted bySenator Ron Wyden
I always assume you start first with following the money, and Senator Ron Wyden is doing that.
Republicans cut funding for health care to pay for Trump's lawless militia. Giving more money to use 5-year-olds as bait and shoot unarmed mothers is unacceptable. I will not vote to give more money to ICE until there is accountability and an end to these abuses.
Thank you for coming!
A secret memo allowing federal agents to invade Americans' homes without a warrant would be a historic violation of the Constitution and further justification for the immediate removal of Kristi Noem.
In the meantime, read more about my new inquiry with BNY here. When it comes to Epstein, what did they know and when did they know it?
I have a bill that would force Bessent and the Treasury to turn over its Epstein file for investigation. I’m continuing to build support, and I’m going to keep fighting for Congress to pass it. We’ve got to follow the money.
It’s not just Bondi and the Justice Department that’s stonewalling. Secretary Bessent and the Treasury Department is sitting on a massive file made up of Epstein bank records. My investigators have seen a portion of it. We need the whole thing to follow the money.
If the Trump administration wasn’t running a full-on pedophile protection program, they’d have these investigations up and running already. Instead, they’re hiding the vast majority of the Epstein files and letting Epstein’s enablers and co-conspirators off the hook.
Every bank and bank employee that enabled Epstein’s trafficking by failing to blow the whistle on his suspicious transactions should be under federal investigation.
With all the banks Epstein used, it’s the same pattern again and again. They could have blown the whistle, but they didn’t. His trafficking continued. The number of victims grew right up until the end.
But like we’ve seen with other banks, it appears BNY turned a blind eye to what Epstein was doing. They were legally required to flag these suspicious transactions in real time, but they waited more than a decade to do so, until Epstein was already behind bars.
These transactions had some of the key hallmarks of money laundering, including a series of 20 transactions spread over 9 months in which Epstein moved exactly $1 million out of BNY into his accounts at another bank, JPMorgan.
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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2026-08-08 | S. 5271 (119th) | End filibuster to begin debate | NO | NO | ✓ | Cloture on the Motion to Proceed Rejected (52-46, 3/5 majority required) |
| 2026-08-08 | — | Confirm nominee | NO | NO | ✓ | Nomination Confirmed (50-49) |
| 2026-08-08 | — | End debate | NO | NO | ✓ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (50-49) |
| 2026-08-08 | H.R. 6500 (119th) | Final passage | YES | YES | ✓ | Bill Passed (90-6, 3/5 majority required) |
| 2026-08-08 | H.R. 6500 (119th) | Kill the motion | YES | YES | ✓ | Motion to Table Agreed to (61-32) |
| 2026-08-07 | H.R. 6500 (119th) | End debate | YES | YES | ✓ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (91-6, 3/5 majority required) |
| 2026-08-07 | S. Res. 817 (119th) | Confirm nominee | NO | NO | ✓ | Nomination Confirmed (51-47) |
| 2026-08-07 | H.R. 5334 (119th) | Final passage | NO | YES | ✕ | Bill Passed (86-11, 3/5 majority required) |
| 2026-08-07 | H.R. 5334 (119th) | Vote on amendment | YES | YES | ✓ | Amendment Rejected (32-64) |
| 2026-08-05 | S.J. Res. 187 (119th) | Begin consideration | YES | YES | ✓ | Motion to Proceed Rejected (48-50) |
| 2026-08-05 | S. Res. 817 (119th) | End debate | NO | NO | ✓ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (50-44) |
| 2026-08-05 | — | Confirm nominee | NO | NO | ✓ | Nomination Confirmed (51-44) |
| 2026-08-05 | — | End debate | NO | NO | ✓ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (51-43) |
| 2026-08-03 | H.R. 6500 (119th) | End filibuster to begin debate | YES | YES | ✓ | Cloture on the Motion to Proceed Agreed to (89-4, 3/5 majority required) |
| 2026-07-30 | S. Res. 817 (119th) | Approve resolution | NO | NO | ✓ | Resolution Agreed to (50-47) |
| 2026-07-30 | S.J. Res. 181 (119th) | Motion to Discharge S.J.Res. 181 | YES | YES | ✓ | Motion to Discharge Rejected (49-50) |
| 2026-07-30 | S.J. Res. 199 (119th) | Begin consideration | YES | YES | ✓ | Motion to Proceed Rejected (47-52) |
| 2026-07-29 | S. Res. 817 (119th) | End debate | NO | NO | ✓ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (50-45) |
| 2026-07-29 | H.R. 5334 (119th) | Begin consideration | NO | YES | ✕ | Motion to Proceed Agreed to (84-12) |
| 2026-07-28 | H.R. 5334 (119th) | End filibuster to begin debate | NO | YES | ✕ | Cloture on the Motion to Proceed Agreed to (86-12, 3/5 majority required) |
| 2026-07-28 | — | Confirm nominee | NO | NO | ✓ | Nomination Confirmed (51-47) |
| 2026-07-27 | — | End debate | NO | NO | ✓ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (51-43) |
| 2026-07-23 | — | Confirm nominee | NO | NO | ✓ | Nomination Confirmed (49-44) |
| 2026-07-23 | — | Confirm nominee | NO | NO | ✓ | Nomination Confirmed (48-47) |
| 2026-07-23 | S.J. Res. 180 (119th) | Motion to Discharge S.J.Res. 180 | YES | YES | ✓ | Motion to Discharge Rejected (47-49) |
| 2026-07-22 | — | End debate | NO | NO | ✓ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (51-46) |
| 2026-07-22 | — | End debate | NO | NO | ✓ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (54-44) |
| 2026-07-22 | — | Confirm nominee | NO | NO | ✓ | Nomination Confirmed (62-36) |
| 2026-07-22 | — | End debate | NO | NO | ✓ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (60-35) |
| 2026-07-22 | — | Confirm nominee | NO | NO | ✓ | Nomination Confirmed (49-46) |
| 2026-07-21 | — | Confirm nominee | NO | NO | ✓ | Nomination Confirmed (50-48) |
| 2026-07-20 | — | End debate | NO | NO | ✓ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (43-40) |
| 2026-07-16 | S.J. Res. 198 (119th) | Begin consideration | YES | YES | ✓ | Motion to Proceed Rejected (46-50) |
| 2026-07-16 | — | End debate | NO | NO | ✓ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (49-48) |
| 2026-07-15 | — | Confirm nominee | NO | NO | ✓ | Nomination Confirmed (51-46) |
| 2026-07-15 | — | End debate | NO | NO | ✓ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (51-46) |
| 2026-07-14 | S. 4784 (119th) | End filibuster to begin debate | NO | NO | ✓ | Cloture on the Motion to Proceed Rejected (50-46, 3/5 majority required) |
| 2026-07-14 | — | Confirm nominee | NO | NO | ✓ | Nomination Confirmed (50-45) |
| 2026-07-13 | — | Confirm nominee | NO | NO | ✓ | Nomination Confirmed (46-44) |
| 2026-06-24 | S.J. Res. 185 (119th) | Begin consideration | YES | YES | ✓ | Motion to Proceed Rejected (47-50) |
| 2026-06-24 | — | End debate | NO | NO | ✓ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (52-45) |
| 2026-06-24 | S.J. Res. 196 (119th) | Begin consideration | YES | YES | ✓ | Motion to Proceed Rejected (45-52) |
| 2026-06-24 | — | End debate | NO | NO | ✓ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (50-44) |
| 2026-06-24 | — | Confirm nominee | NO | NO | ✓ | Nomination Confirmed (50-44) |
| 2026-06-24 | — | End debate | NO | NO | ✓ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (52-45) |
| 2026-06-24 | — | Confirm nominee | NO | NO | ✓ | Nomination Confirmed (52-45) |
| 2026-06-24 | — | End debate | NO | NO | ✓ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (52-45) |
| 2026-06-23 | H. Con. Res. 86 (119th) | Accept House changes | YES | YES | ✓ | Concurrent Resolution Agreed to (50-48) |
| 2026-06-23 | — | Confirm nominee | NO | NO | ✓ | Nomination Confirmed (67-30) |
| 2026-06-22 | H.R. 6644 (119th) | Accept House changes | YES | YES | ✓ | Motion Agreed to (85-5) |
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.
Page 1 / 18Next →