Richard J. Durbin headshot
At a Glance
Seat
U.S. Senator from Illinois
Born
November 21, 1944
Age 81
Phone
(202) 224-2152
Office
711 Hart Senate Office Building Washington, DC 20510, Washington 20515
Congress Member Profile|U.S. Senator|Democrat|Illinois

Richard J. Durbin

Richard Joseph Durbin is an American politician and attorney serving as the senior United States senator from the state of Illinois, a seat he has held since 1997. A member of the Democratic Party, Durbin is in his fifth Senate term and has served since 2005 as the Senate Democratic Whip and since 2025 as the Senate minority whip. He is the longest-serving Democratic whip since the position was established in 1913. Durbin chaired the Senate Judiciary Committee from 2021 to 2025, and led the Ketanji Brown Jackson Supreme Court nomination hearings.

Source: WikipediaView full (CC BY-SA)
Voting Record — 789
Yes34%
No63%
Present0%
Not Voting3%
Party align93%
Cross-party6%
SoupScore
District Map

Senate District (Statewide)

U.S. Census Bureau boundary data.
Richard J. Durbin headshot
Richard J. Durbin
U.S. SenatorDemocratIllinois
SoupScore
Richard J.'s ATmosphere Activity
20 recent posts · 126 sponsored · 340 cosponsored
View profile

Recent ATmosphere posts, sponsorships, and cosponsorships.

The Epstein files must come to light. So, we provided an amendment to an appropriations bill to require Attorney General Bondi retain, preserve, and compile the Epstein files and submit a report to Congress. It passed unanimously.
The Illinois agricultural sector is vital to our state’s economy. This week, I sat down with members of the Illinois Corn Growers to discuss their federal policy priorities.
Thanks to fed funded research, Illinois is #1 in the nation and 5th in the world for growing soybeans. But Donald Trump’s cuts to USAID and USDA is Making China Great in ag research. This damages the long-term strategy for U.S. farming. Read more in my op-ed. ⬇️
Today, Chairman Grassley blocked Democratic members from discussing the controversial records of nominees like Emil Bove and Jeanine Pirro, shut down debate, and forced votes for no apparent reason. My question is this: what are my Senate Republican colleagues trying to hide?
When I was Chair, I only limited debate when Republicans invoked Senate rules to shut down Committee meetings, and after Committee members were given ample opportunities to voice their concerns about nominees on the agenda.
And today, he cut off debate time on Mr. Bove’s nomination before turning to his vote, as well as nine other nominations, including Ms. Pirro’s. Chairman Grassley claimed that he was following Committee precedent. This is simply untrue.
Given Mr. Reuveni’s credible allegations against Mr. Bove, which, if true, clearly disqualify him for a lifetime appointment to the federal bench, I called for the Committee to hear from Mr. Reuveni, under oath, before we voted on Mr. Bove’s nomination. But Chairman Grassley denied that request.
I asked Mr. Reuveni whether he could substantiate his claims, and in response, he provided text messages, email exchanges, and other documents corroborating his allegations.
Additionally, Erez Reuveni, a career Justice Department attorney who defended the first Trump Administration’s immigration policies, filed a whistleblower complaint with my office regarding Mr. Bove.
He led the Administration’s effort to strike a corrupt bargain with New York City Mayor Eric Adams and has been trailed by a history of complaints—long predating his affiliation with President Trump—about his temperament, poor judgment, and lack of candor before the court.
Today’s Committee executive business meeting included 10 nominees—among them Emil Bove, nominated for a lifetime appointment on the federal bench. Mr. Bove belongs nowhere near the federal bench.
Big Pharma’s newest scheme funnels patients to telehealth companies chosen and paid by drug companies—this can lead to inappropriate prescribing. My colleagues and I are exposing Big Pharma’s ploy to promote and sell expensive medications, risking inferior patient care.
BREAKING: I just released an investigative report on Big Pharma’s sales scheme to steer patients towards costly medications. Handpicking telehealth companies to treat Pfizer & Eli Lilly patients creates a potential conflict of interest & raises Rx costs.
SoupScore Breakdown
Loading analysis metrics…
Voting History
789 total votes
ExpandCollapse

Recent roll calls with party-majority context so it is easier to scan how this member tends to vote.

DateBillQuestionPositionParty MajAlign?Result
2025-06-04End debateNONOCloture Motion Agreed to (60-37)
2025-06-04End debateNONOCloture Motion Agreed to (51-46)
2025-06-03Confirm nomineeNONONomination Confirmed (72-26)
2025-06-03End debateNONOCloture Motion Agreed to (66-28)
2025-06-03Confirm nomineeNONONomination Confirmed (59-36)
2025-06-03End debateNONOCloture Motion Agreed to (59-37)
2025-06-03Confirm nomineeNONONomination Confirmed (51-46)
2025-06-02End debateNONOCloture Motion Agreed to (51-45)
2025-05-22H.J. Res. 89 (119th)Approve resolutionNONOJoint Resolution Passed (49-46)
2025-05-22H.J. Res. 89 (119th)Begin considerationNONOMotion to Proceed Agreed to (51-46)
2025-05-22H.J. Res. 87 (119th)Approve resolutionNONOJoint Resolution Passed (51-45)
2025-05-22H.J. Res. 87 (119th)Begin considerationNONOMotion to Proceed Agreed to (51-46)
2025-05-22H.J. Res. 88 (119th)Approve resolutionNONOJoint Resolution Passed (51-44)
2025-05-21H.J. Res. 88 (119th)Begin considerationNONOMotion to Proceed Agreed to (51-46)
2025-05-21S.J. Res. 55 (119th)Approve resolutionNONOJoint Resolution Passed (51-46)
2025-05-21S.J. Res. 55 (119th)Point of Order S.J.Res. 55NONOPoint of Order Sustained (51-46)
2025-05-21S.J. Res. 55 (119th)Point of Order S.J.Res. 55NONOPoint of Order Sustained (51-46)
2025-05-21S.J. Res. 55 (119th)Motion to Adjourn S.J.Res. 55YESYESMotion to Adjourn Rejected (46-51)
2025-05-21Motion (Motion to Recess for Ten Minutes)YESYESMotion Rejected (45-52)
2025-05-21Motion (Motion to Recess for Fifteen Minutes)YESYESMotion Rejected (46-51)
2025-05-21Motion (Motion to Recess for Thirty Minutes)YESYESMotion Rejected (46-51)
2025-05-21Motion (Motion to Recess for 60 Minutes)YESYESMotion Rejected (45-51)
2025-05-21Motion (Motion to Recess for Ninety Minutes)YESYESMotion Rejected (46-51)
2025-05-21S.J. Res. 55 (119th)Kill the motionNONOMotion to Table Agreed to (51-46)
2025-05-21S.J. Res. 55 (119th)Kill the motionYESYESMotion to Table Failed (46-52)
2025-05-21S.J. Res. 55 (119th)Begin considerationNONOMotion to Proceed Agreed to (53-46)
2025-05-21S. 1582 (119th)Begin considerationNONOMotion to Proceed Agreed to (69-31)
2025-05-19S. 1582 (119th)End filibuster to begin debateNONOCloture on the Motion to Proceed Agreed to (66-32, 3/5 majority required)
2025-05-19Confirm nomineeNONONomination Confirmed (51-45)
2025-05-19End debateNONOCloture Motion Agreed to (52-46)
2025-05-15S. Res. 195 (119th)Motion to Discharge S.Res. 195YESYESMotion to Discharge Rejected (45-50)
2025-05-15Confirm nomineeNONONomination Confirmed (51-46)
2025-05-14End debateNONOCloture Motion Agreed to (52-47)
2025-05-14Confirm nomineeNONONomination Confirmed (52-45)
2025-05-14End debateNONOCloture Motion Agreed to (51-45)
2025-05-14Confirm nomineeNONONomination Confirmed (54-43)
2025-05-14End debateNOT_VOTINGNOCloture Motion Agreed to (53-43)
2025-05-14Confirm nomineeNONONomination Confirmed (51-46)
2025-05-14End debateNONOCloture Motion Agreed to (51-45)
2025-05-14Confirm nomineeNONONomination Confirmed (54-40)
2025-05-13End debateNONOCloture Motion Agreed to (57-41)
2025-05-13Confirm nomineeNONONomination Confirmed (52-44)
2025-05-13End debateNONOCloture Motion Agreed to (53-45)
2025-05-13Confirm nomineeNONONomination Confirmed (74-25)
2025-05-13End debateNONOCloture Motion Agreed to (72-26)
2025-05-13Confirm nomineeNONONomination Confirmed (52-46)
2025-05-12End debateNONOCloture Motion Agreed to (52-45)
2025-05-12Confirm nomineeNONONomination Confirmed (52-45)
2025-05-12End debateNONOCloture Motion Agreed to (53-47)
2025-05-08S. 1582 (119th)End filibuster to begin debateNONOCloture on the Motion to Proceed Rejected (48-49, 3/5 majority required)

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.

← PrevPage 11 / 16Next →