S. Res. 109 (119th)Bill Overview

A resolution expressing the sense of the Senate that Russian President Vladimir Putin should immediately withdraw Russian forces from Ukraine.

Simple ResolutionInternational Affairs|International Affairs
Cosponsors
Support
Independent
Introduced
Mar 5, 2025
Discussions
Bill Text
Current stageCommittee

Referred to the Committee on Foreign Relations. (text: CR S1583)

Introduced
Committee
Floor
President
Law
Congressional Activities
01 · The brief
Plain-English summaryWhat this bill actually does

This Senate resolution expresses the sense of the Senate that Russian President Vladimir Putin should immediately, completely, and unconditionally withdraw all Russian military forces from territory within Ukraine and cease attacks. The text recounts that Russia launched a full-scale invasion on February 24, 2022, violated the U.N. Charter and international law, occupies about 20 percent of Ukraine, and that Russian actions have caused hundreds of thousands of deaths and human rights violations.

Why people may split

All three favor the withdrawal demand, but differ on enforcement expectations.

Watch point

If introduced as a parallel measure, symbolic condemnations of aggression typically pass the House with modest difficulty unless politically contested.

This Senate resolution expresses the sense of the Senate that Russian President Vladimir Putin should immediately, completely, and unconditionally withdraw all Russian military forces from territory within Ukraine and cease attacks.

The text recounts that Russia launched a full-scale invasion on February 24, 2022, violated the U.N. Charter and international law, occupies about 20 percent of Ukraine, and that Russian actions have caused hundreds of thousands of deaths and human rights violations.

It is a non‑binding statement of position referred to the Senate Committee on Foreign Relations.

Passage1/100

S. Res. expressing 'sense of the Senate' is nonbinding and does not create law; passage is plausible but it cannot become statutory law.

CredibilityPartial

How solid the drafting looks.

Contention20/100

All three favor the withdrawal demand, but differ on enforcement expectations.

02 · What it does

Who stands to gain, and who may push back.

Likely benefits vs burdens50% / 50%
Likely helpedLikely burdened

These are examples from the analysis, not a ranked list of the most-affected groups.

Likely helped
  • Potential benefitReinforces U.S. support for Ukrainian sovereignty and territorial integrity on the international stage.
  • Potential benefitStrengthens diplomatic pressure on Russia by signaling unified Senate condemnation.
  • Potential benefitEncourages allies to sustain coordinated sanctions, assistance, and diplomatic measures for Ukraine.
Likely burdened
  • Potential burdenNon-binding wording limits the resolution’s practical effect on Russian military behavior.
  • Potential burdenCould harden Russian positions or risk retaliatory escalation in diplomacy or military posture.
  • Potential burdenMight constrain diplomatic flexibility by formalizing a maximal withdrawal demand during negotiations.
03 · Why people split

Why the argument around this bill splits.

All three favor the withdrawal demand, but differ on enforcement expectations.
Progressive85%

Likely strongly supportive of the resolution's demand for withdrawal and cessation of attacks as a defense of human rights and sovereignty.

Will view it as a morally necessary statement, but will criticize its purely symbolic nature and press for stronger measures for accountability, humanitarian aid, and refugee support.

Leans supportive
Centrist75%

Generally supportive of a clear, formal U.S. condemnation and demand for withdrawal, while cautious about unintended escalation.

Will favor pairing the statement with credible diplomatic steps and well-specified consequences to avoid purely symbolic posture.

Leans supportive
Conservative80%

Likely supportive of a strong, unequivocal demand that Russia withdraw, viewing it as necessary for deterrence and national security.

Will push for concrete deterrent measures, sanctions, and material support rather than a purely declaratory resolution.

Leans supportive
04 · Can it pass?

The path through Congress.

Introduced

Reached or meaningfully advanced

Committee

Reached or meaningfully advanced

Floor

Still ahead

President

Still ahead

Law

Still ahead

Passage likelihood1/100

S. Res. expressing 'sense of the Senate' is nonbinding and does not create law; passage is plausible but it cannot become statutory law.

Scope and complexity
24%
Scopenarrow
24%
Complexitylow
Why this could stall
  • Whether leadership will schedule committee or floor consideration
  • Potential floor amendments or alternate resolutions
05 · Recent votes

Recent votes on the bill.

No vote history yet

The bill has not accumulated any surfaced votes yet.

06 · Go deeper

Go deeper than the headline read.

Included on this page

All three favor the withdrawal demand, but differ on enforcement expectations.

S. Res. expressing 'sense of the Senate' is nonbinding and does not create law; passage is plausible but it cannot become statutory law.

Unlocked analysis

Pro readers get the full perspective split, passage barriers, legislative design review, stakeholder impact map, and lens-based policy tradeoff analysis for A resolution expressing the sense of the Senate that Russian P…

Go beyond the headline summary with full stakeholder mapping, legislative design analysis, passage barriers, and lens-by-lens tradeoff breakdowns.

Perspective breakdownsPassage barriersLegislative design reviewStakeholder impact map
Open full analysis