Nope, the Trump administration hasn't given up on trying to ban abortion.
Just this week, RFK Jr. pushed a fake report about the abortion medication mifepristone.
He's peddling misinformation so he can lay the groundwork for restricting abortion access no matter where you live.
Congress Member Profile|U.S. Senator|Democrat|Massachusetts
Elizabeth Warren
SoupScoreanalysis-first civic rating · view full breakdown
Loading…
Voting Record — 876
Yes27%
No72%
Present0%
Not Voting2%
Party align96%
Cross-party0%
SoupScore
District Map
Senate District (Statewide)
U.S. Census Bureau boundary data.
Social & Web
External Resources
Elizabeth Warren
U.S. SenatorDemocratMassachusetts
SoupScore
Elizabeth's ATmosphere Activity
20 recent posts · 80 sponsored · 341 cosponsored
Recent ATmosphere posts, sponsorships, and cosponsorships.
Republicans in Congress won’t tell you this:
Donald Trump’s “big beautiful bill” would be the biggest transfer of wealth from the poor to the rich in the history of our nation.
Musk's Starlink was having a hard time getting permits abroad.
Then Trump slapped tariffs on basically everything we buy from overseas—and suddenly countries negotiating trade deals started giving Starlink sweet deals!
Looks like textbook corruption—and we're all paying for it.
Republicans are going back to the drawing board on their "big beautiful bill" because it didn't cut health care for ENOUGH people.
Reposted byElizabeth Warren
.0018% odds that a Social Security claim is “likely fraudulent.” We literally have a better chance of getting hit by an asteroid.
So why are Republicans letting Trump, Musk, and DOGE destroy Social Security over it?
Donald Trump wants Congress to pass the GENIUS Act, which will make it easier for him and his family to line their pockets.
The Senate has an opportunity to stop this kind of corruption and fix this bill.
Watch this @weeklyshowpodcast.bsky.social clip:
I hosted a Senate forum about the Trump administration’s attacks on public education, and Secretary Linda McMahon refused to show.
The American people have questions, and I’m going to get them answers.
World Liberty Financial is setting the stage for a foreign government and a criminally convicted company to line the President’s pockets through his own stablecoin.
This is a staggering vehicle for corruption, so Senator Merkley and I are pressing for answers.
Lead Republican tax bill writer says the quiet part out loud.
This “big beautiful bill” CUTS health care for millions of people.
A $2B foreign crypto deal using Trump’s stablecoin.
The convicted criminal, who still owns 90% of the crypto exchange, asking Trump for a pardon.
All while Republicans push a bill to boost the stablecoin market.
Corruption doesn’t get clearer than this.
This is a HUGE scandal.
Elon Musk, JD Vance, and Trump are lying about Social Security fraud.
Internal documents show DOGE found "no significant fraud"—but did slow retirement claim processing by 25%.
Nothing efficient about making it harder for people to get their benefits.
I agree with Speaker Johnson.
No one should wonder whether a lawmaker is advancing their own financial interest or the public interest.
It makes no sense for lawmakers to own individual stocks. Just ban it.
Members of Congress shouldn't even have the appearance of conflicts.
Is there anybody on God's green earth who thinks that the Qataris are giving a plane to Donald Trump without expecting something in return?
This Republican bill should be dead on arrival in the Senate.
No lawmaker in Congress — with access to all kinds of non-public information — should own, buy, and sell individuals stocks.
It's time to BAN congressional stock trading.
A company with ties to China is pouring as much as $300 million into Donald Trump’s memecoin—while the Senate is negotiating a crypto bill that can supercharge the President’s crypto corruption.
We're at a crossroads, and the GENIUS Act must not pass without serious guardrails.
I’m hosting a Senate forum on Republicans’ attacks on public education. It’s time for students, teachers, parents, and leaders to link arms, share stories, and fight back.
Tune in.
youtube.com/live/smM60NE...
@chrismurphyct.bsky.social is right.
The GENIUS Act, without serious fixes, rubber-stamps the President’s corruption.
Democrats should not be helping the President cash in.
"Probably"?!
The United States is suffering from the largest measles outbreak in modern history. Children have died.
And America’s top health official says this about the solution to a horrific and deadly disease outbreak.
While Donald Trump wrecks the American economy, one family is getting richer: the Trump family.
SoupScore Breakdown
Loading analysis metrics…
Voting History876 total votesExpandCollapse
Voting History
876 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2025-02-21 | S. Con. Res. 7 (119th) | Vote on amendment | YES | YES | ✓ | Amendment Rejected (47-53) |
| 2025-02-21 | — | Motion (Motion to Waive All Applicable Budgetary Discipline Re: Reed Amdt. No. 172) | YES | YES | ✓ | Motion Rejected (49-51, 3/5 majority required) |
| 2025-02-20 | — | Motion (Motion to Waive All Applicable Budgetary Discipline Re: Baldwin Amdt. No. 276) | YES | YES | ✓ | Motion Rejected (48-52, 3/5 majority required) |
| 2025-02-20 | — | Motion (Motion to Waive All Applicable Budgetary Discipline Re: Wyden Amdt. No. 1156) | YES | YES | ✓ | Motion Rejected (47-53, 3/5 majority required) |
| 2025-02-20 | S. Con. Res. 7 (119th) | Vote on amendment | YES | YES | ✓ | Amendment Rejected (49-51) |
| 2025-02-20 | — | Motion (Motion to Waive All Applicable Budgetary Discipline Re: Schumer Amdt. No. 776) | YES | YES | ✓ | Motion Rejected (49-51, 3/5 majority required) |
| 2025-02-20 | S. Con. Res. 7 (119th) | Vote on amendment | NO | NO | ✓ | Amendment Agreed to (51-49) |
| 2025-02-20 | S. Con. Res. 7 (119th) | Vote on amendment | YES | YES | ✓ | Amendment Rejected (48-52) |
| 2025-02-20 | S. Con. Res. 7 (119th) | Vote on amendment | YES | YES | ✓ | Amendment Rejected (48-52) |
| 2025-02-20 | — | Motion (Motion to Waive All Applicable Budgetary Discipline Re: Hickenlooper Amdt. No. 925) | YES | YES | ✓ | Motion Rejected (47-53, 3/5 majority required) |
| 2025-02-20 | S. Con. Res. 7 (119th) | Vote on amendment | YES | YES | ✓ | Amendment Rejected (47-53) |
| 2025-02-20 | — | Motion (Motion to Waive All Applicable Budgetary Discipline Re: Warner Amdt. No. 130) | YES | YES | ✓ | Motion Rejected (47-53, 3/5 majority required) |
| 2025-02-20 | S. Con. Res. 7 (119th) | Vote on amendment | YES | YES | ✓ | Amendment Rejected (48-52) |
| 2025-02-20 | — | Motion (Motion to Waive All Applicable Budgetary Discipline Re: Klobuchar Amdt. No. 494) | YES | YES | ✓ | Motion Rejected (48-52, 3/5 majority required) |
| 2025-02-20 | — | Motion (Motion to Waive All Applicable Budgetary Discipline Re: Schumer Amdt. No. 454) | YES | YES | ✓ | Motion Rejected (47-52, 3/5 majority required) |
| 2025-02-20 | — | Confirm nominee | NO | NO | ✓ | Nomination Confirmed (51-49) |
| 2025-02-20 | — | End debate | NO | NO | ✓ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (51-47) |
| 2025-02-19 | — | Confirm nominee | NO | NO | ✓ | Nomination Confirmed (52-46) |
| 2025-02-18 | S. Con. Res. 7 (119th) | Begin consideration | NO | NO | ✓ | Motion to Proceed Agreed to (50-47) |
| 2025-02-18 | — | Confirm nominee | NO | NO | ✓ | Nomination Confirmed (51-45) |
| 2025-02-18 | — | Begin consideration | NO | NO | ✓ | Motion to Proceed Agreed to (48-45) |
| 2025-02-13 | — | End debate | NO | NO | ✓ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (51-43) |
| 2025-02-13 | — | End debate | NO | NO | ✓ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (52-45) |
| 2025-02-13 | — | Confirm nominee | NO | NO | ✓ | Nomination Confirmed (72-28) |
| 2025-02-13 | — | Confirm nominee | NO | NO | ✓ | Nomination Confirmed (52-48) |
| 2025-02-12 | — | End debate | NO | NO | ✓ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (53-47) |
| 2025-02-12 | — | Confirm nominee | NO | NO | ✓ | Nomination Confirmed (52-48) |
| 2025-02-10 | — | End debate | NO | NO | ✓ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (52-46) |
| 2025-02-06 | — | Begin consideration | NO | NO | ✓ | Motion to Proceed Agreed to (53-45) |
| 2025-02-06 | — | Begin consideration | NO | NO | ✓ | Motion to Proceed Agreed to (53-46) |
| 2025-02-06 | — | Begin consideration | NO | NO | ✓ | Motion to Proceed Agreed to (52-46) |
| 2025-02-06 | — | Begin consideration | NO | NO | ✓ | Motion to Proceed Agreed to (51-46) |
| 2025-02-06 | — | Begin consideration | NO | NO | ✓ | Motion to Proceed Agreed to (52-46) |
| 2025-02-06 | — | Begin consideration | NO | NO | ✓ | Motion to Proceed Agreed to (52-46) |
| 2025-02-06 | — | Begin consideration | NO | NO | ✓ | Motion to Proceed Agreed to (52-47) |
| 2025-02-06 | — | Begin consideration | NO | NO | ✓ | Motion to Proceed Agreed to (52-47) |
| 2025-02-06 | — | Begin consideration | NO | NO | ✓ | Motion to Proceed Agreed to (52-46) |
| 2025-02-06 | — | Begin consideration | NO | NO | ✓ | Motion to Proceed Agreed to (52-47) |
| 2025-02-06 | — | Kill the motion | NO | NO | ✓ | Motion to Table Agreed to (52-47) |
| 2025-02-06 | — | Confirm nominee | NO | NO | ✓ | Nomination Confirmed (53-47) |
| 2025-02-05 | — | End debate | NO | NO | ✓ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (53-47) |
| 2025-02-05 | — | Confirm nominee | NO | NO | ✓ | Nomination Confirmed (55-44) |
| 2025-02-04 | — | End debate | NO | NO | ✓ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (55-45) |
| 2025-02-04 | — | Confirm nominee | NO | NO | ✓ | Nomination Confirmed (54-46) |
| 2025-02-04 | — | Confirm nominee | NO | NO | ✓ | Nomination Confirmed (77-23) |
| 2025-02-03 | — | End debate | NO | NO | ✓ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (52-46) |
| 2025-02-03 | — | Confirm nominee | NO | NO | ✓ | Nomination Confirmed (59-38) |
| 2025-02-03 | — | Begin consideration | NO | NO | ✓ | Motion to Proceed Agreed to (51-46) |
| 2025-01-30 | — | End debate | NO | YES | ✕ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (83-13) |
| 2025-01-30 | — | End debate | NO | NO | ✓ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (62-35) |
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.