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 — 825
Yes35%
No62%
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 · 128 sponsored · 341 cosponsored
View profile

Recent ATmosphere posts, sponsorships, and cosponsorships.

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.
In the dead of night, Senate Republicans are forcing through legislation to gut funding for foreign aid & public broadcasting. I joined @shaheen.senate.gov & Sen. Murkowski to push back with an amendment to restore $260M in assistance to Ukraine. Senate Republicans just voted it down.
Today, I filed amendments to President Trump’s rescissions request that would protect funding for Ukraine and Paul Simon global clean water programs. I urge my Senate colleagues to join me in preserving these strategic bipartisan programs and support these amendments.
Republicans voted against funding for critical mineral supply chains, cybersecurity infrastructure, and global health and assistance programs. This rescissions package threatens the long-term safety, stability, and global leadership of our country and Republicans know it.
I’m unconvinced she learned the lessons of her failed predecessor Ed Martin. I implore my Republican colleagues to hold a high bar for the top law enforcement officer in our nation’s capital—and reject this nomination.
And ultimately, she’s a Donald Trump loyalist, vengefully attacking his perceived political opponents and showing no willingness to put the rule of law ahead of the President’s wishes.
SoupScore Breakdown
Loading analysis metrics…
Voting History
825 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
2025-08-01H.R. 3944 (119th)Vote on amendmentYESYESAmendment Rejected (45-50)
2025-08-01H.R. 3944 (119th)Vote on amendmentYESYESAmendment Rejected (42-53)
2025-08-01H.R. 3944 (119th)Vote on amendmentYESYESAmendment Rejected (44-51)
2025-08-01Motion (Motion to Waive All Applicable Budgetary Points of Order Re: Merkley Amdt. No. 3114)YESYESMotion Rejected (44-51, 3/5 majority required)
2025-08-01End debateNONOCloture Motion Agreed to (52-45)
2025-08-01Confirm nomineeNONONomination Confirmed (54-43)
2025-08-01Confirm nomineeNONONomination Confirmed (52-44)
2025-08-01End debateNONOCloture Motion Agreed to (55-41)
2025-07-31End debateNONOCloture Motion Agreed to (52-45)
2025-07-31End debateNONOCloture Motion Agreed to (52-45)
2025-07-31End debateNONOCloture Motion Agreed to (52-44)
2025-07-31Confirm nomineeNONONomination Confirmed (52-45)
2025-07-31Confirm nomineeNONONomination Confirmed (53-44)
2025-07-31End debateNONOCloture Motion Agreed to (53-44)
2025-07-31Confirm nomineeNONONomination Confirmed (53-45)
2025-07-31Confirm nomineeYESNONomination Confirmed (59-39)
2025-07-31Confirm nomineeNONONomination Confirmed (52-45)
2025-07-31End debateNONOCloture Motion Agreed to (53-41)
2025-07-30End debateNONOCloture Motion Agreed to (53-44)
2025-07-30End debateYESNOCloture Motion Agreed to (59-38)
2025-07-30S.J. Res. 34 (119th)Motion to Discharge S.J.Res. 34YESYESMotion to Discharge Rejected (24-73)
2025-07-30S.J. Res. 41 (119th)Motion to Discharge S.J.Res. 41YESYESMotion to Discharge Rejected (27-70)
2025-07-30End debateNONOCloture Motion Agreed to (53-44)
2025-07-30Confirm nomineeNONONomination Confirmed (52-44)
2025-07-30End debateNONOCloture Motion Agreed to (53-44)
2025-07-30Confirm nomineeNONONomination Confirmed (53-45)
2025-07-30End debateNONOCloture Motion Agreed to (53-47)
2025-07-29Confirm nomineeNONONomination Confirmed (50-49)
2025-07-29Confirm nomineeNONONomination Confirmed (54-44)
2025-07-29End debateNONOCloture Motion Agreed to (53-45)
2025-07-29Confirm nomineeNONONomination Confirmed (51-47)
2025-07-29End debateNONOCloture Motion Agreed to (52-47)
2025-07-29Confirm nomineeNONONomination Confirmed (51-47)
2025-07-29End debateNONOCloture Motion Agreed to (51-47)
2025-07-29Confirm nomineeNONONomination Confirmed (50-47)
2025-07-28End debateNONOCloture Motion Agreed to (50-45)
2025-07-28Confirm nomineeNONONomination Confirmed (50-39)
2025-07-28End debateNONOCloture Motion Agreed to (51-45)
2025-07-24End debateNONOCloture Motion Agreed to (50-48)
2025-07-24Confirm nomineeNONONomination Confirmed (51-47)
2025-07-24End debateNONOCloture Motion Agreed to (52-46)
2025-07-24Confirm nomineeNONONomination Confirmed (52-46)
2025-07-23End debateNONOCloture Motion Agreed to (49-47)
2025-07-23Confirm nomineeNONONomination Confirmed (49-47)
2025-07-23End debateNONOCloture Motion Agreed to (48-47)
2025-07-23Confirm nomineeNONONomination Confirmed (49-47)
2025-07-23End debateNONOCloture Motion Agreed to (49-47)
2025-07-23H.R. 3944 (119th)Begin considerationYESYESMotion to Proceed Agreed to (90-8)
2025-07-23Confirm nomineeNONONomination Confirmed (51-47)
2025-07-23Confirm nomineeNONONomination Confirmed (52-41)

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 8 / 17Next →