Horrible. There’s no such thing as “looking American.”
These are U.S. citizens being targeted by ICE for doing nothing wrong.
And President Trump is to blame.
Congress Member Profile|U.S. Senator|Democrat|Illinois
Richard J. Durbin
Source: Wikipedia • View full (CC BY-SA)
SoupScoreanalysis-first civic rating · view full breakdown
Loading…
Voting Record — 788
Yes34%
No63%
Present0%
Not Voting3%
Party align93%
Cross-party6%
SoupScore
District Map
Senate District (Statewide)
U.S. Census Bureau boundary data.
Social & Web
External Resources
Richard J. Durbin
U.S. SenatorDemocratIllinois
SoupScore
Richard J.'s ATmosphere Activity
20 recent posts · 124 sponsored · 337 cosponsored
Recent ATmosphere posts, sponsorships, and cosponsorships.
Horrible. There’s no such thing as “looking American.”
These are U.S. citizens being targeted by ICE for doing nothing wrong.
And President Trump is to blame.
Reposted bySenator Dick Durbin
A Supreme Court order in September allowed for racial profiling in immigration arrests when someone doesn’t “look” American.
Justice Brett Kavanaugh insisted “apparent ethnicity” can be a factor in arrest.
The Kavanaugh Stop is very real.
It just happened in Chicago. Terrifying.
I spoke with NORTHCOM leadership about the Trump Administration’s unlawful deployment of troops to American cities.
I appreciate NORTHCOM’s willingness to communicate with us about the size & scope of military presence in Illinois as DHS officials shut Illinois leaders out.
Republicans have failed to produce any plan to replace the Affordable Care Act for 15 years.
Why would we trust that they will suddenly have one in the next few months?
Secretary Noem made time to go to Chicago for a glossy promo video.
But she refuses to meet with me and Senator Duckworth or respond to oversight requests.
We need to hear from her under oath.
Secretary Noem made time to go to Chicago for a glossy promo video.
But she refuses to meet with me and Senator Duckworth or respond to oversight requests.
We need to hear from her under oath.
Reposted bySenator Dick Durbin
Sen. DURBIN: We need to hear from Secretary Kristi Noem. Democrats asked months ago when she’d appear. The Committee needs to schedule this oversight hearing ASAP.
My constituent told me that her health insurance premiums will jump from $278 a month to $1,800—a 550% increase.
That’s because Republicans refuse to extend the ACA enhanced tax credit.
This is not the first time Republicans shut down the government to deny Americans health care.
They did this already in 2013.
But Republicans failed then, and they will fail again.
@shaheen.senate.gov & I met with Nobel Peace Prize recipient, María Corina Machado.
She has fought for a peaceful democratic transition away from Maduro’s dictatorship. Her courage in the face of a stolen election & the Maduro regime’s cruelty is incredible & worthy of the Nobel.
Because of the enhanced premium tax credits, enrollment in the ACA doubled. Millions of people were able to have the peace of mind that affordable quality health care provides. That’s what Democrats are fighting to protect.
Everyone should have a fair say in who represents them in Congress.
The Voting Rights Act has helped provide stability for decades.
The Supreme Court must uphold it.
Everyone should have a fair say in who represents them in Congress.
The Voting Rights Act has helped provide stability for decades.
The Supreme Court must uphold it.
Reposted bySenator Dick Durbin
The Supreme Court is hearing oral arguments in a HUGE voting rights case today.
Louisiana v. Callais will determine whether the heart of the Voting Rights Act lasts beyond the midterms.
Uphold the VRA.
If Congress does not act, seniors across the country will be paying thousands of additional dollars in their monthly health insurance premiums.
It’s time to reach a bipartisan solution that will fix the health care cost crisis.
78% of Americans say they want Congress to renew the ACA tax credits. But Congressional Republicans would rather shut down the government than listen to their own constituents.
The House has not been in session since September 19th.
It is unconscionable that House Republicans continue to take an extended vacation as Americans face the costs of the Trump shutdown and Republican health care cuts.
The danger isn't in the streets in the city of Chicago.
The danger is what’s happening when troops are being sent in to stand on street corners with rifles.
What the Trump Administration is doing to Chicago is completely unnecessary.
They just want to use Illinois as a political pawn—even when it hurts the people here.
I’m all around Chicago telling folks: Keep your courage up. We’re fighting back.
SoupScore Breakdown
Loading analysis metrics…
Voting History788 total votesExpandCollapse
Voting History
788 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2025-02-24 | — | End debate | YES | NO | ✕↔ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (66-28) |
| 2025-02-21 | S. Con. Res. 7 (119th) | Accept House changes | NO | NO | ✓ | Concurrent Resolution Agreed to (52-48) |
| 2025-02-21 | S. Con. Res. 7 (119th) | Vote on amendment | YES | YES | ✓ | Amendment Rejected (49-51) |
| 2025-02-21 | S. Con. Res. 7 (119th) | Vote on amendment | NO | NO | ✓ | Amendment Agreed to (53-47) |
| 2025-02-21 | S. Con. Res. 7 (119th) | Vote on amendment | YES | YES | ✓ | Amendment Rejected (47-53) |
| 2025-02-21 | S. Con. Res. 7 (119th) | Vote on amendment | YES | YES | ✓ | Amendment Rejected (47-52) |
| 2025-02-21 | S. Con. Res. 7 (119th) | Vote on amendment | YES | YES | ✓ | Amendment Rejected (49-51) |
| 2025-02-21 | S. Con. Res. 7 (119th) | Vote on amendment | YES | YES | ✓ | Amendment Rejected (48-52) |
| 2025-02-21 | S. Con. Res. 7 (119th) | Vote on amendment | YES | YES | ✓ | Amendment Rejected (48-52) |
| 2025-02-21 | — | Motion (Motion to Waive All Applicable Budgetary Discipline Re: Van Hollen Amdt. No. 233) | YES | YES | ✓ | Motion Rejected (49-51, 3/5 majority required) |
| 2025-02-21 | S. Con. Res. 7 (119th) | Vote on amendment | YES | YES | ✓ | Amendment Rejected (47-53) |
| 2025-02-21 | S. Con. Res. 7 (119th) | Vote on amendment | NO | NO | ✓ | Amendment Rejected (24-76) |
| 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 | YES | 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 | NOT_VOTING | 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) |
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.