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 — 851
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 · 129 sponsored · 356 cosponsored
View profile

Recent ATmosphere posts, sponsorships, and cosponsorships.

The Library of Congress is America’s library—not Donald Trump’s. The next Librarian of Congress must emulate Dr. Hayden’s example of expanding the Library for all and not embolden Donald Trump’s efforts to whitewash history and restrict Americans’ access to knowledge, information, and culture.
To fire Dr. Hayden, a highly respected professional who has done an upstanding job as our nation’s Librarian of Congress, in a two-sentence email shows the depravity of this administration. The heartlessness of this President knows no bounds.
Today, I hosted former Lithuanian Foreign Minister Gabrielius Landsbergis and Lithuanian Ambassador to the U.S. Audra Plepytė to discuss U.S. support for a strong NATO alliance, Russia's war in Ukraine, and pushing back against increasing Russian aggressions in the region.
Secretary Noem: hear the plea of Emma Shafer’s mother and stop using the memory of a loving, giving, understanding young woman to advance your anti-immigrant agenda. Your disgraceful remarks are only making their loss more painful.
Mr. Martin’s record made it clear that he does not have the temperament or judgment to be entrusted with the power and responsibility of being U.S. Attorney for the District of Columbia. I’m relieved to see that his nomination will be withdrawn by the White House.
Nearly every day, new disqualifying information surfaced—including a history of judge intimidation... downplaying the January 6 insurrection and attacking prosecutors and law enforcement officers who were assigned to work on January 6 cases or defended the Capitol on that day...
Teachers shape the minds of the next generation. This Teacher Appreciation Week, I’m introducing a bill to provide teachers and educators with a fully refundable tax credit to help address teaching shortages and incentivize them to stay in classrooms with the most need.
Taxpayer resources must be used appropriately, including government aircraft. We must know the extent to which Justice Department executives are using government aircraft for personal or political use, and if they are complying with the reimbursement requirements.
BREAKING: Sen. DURBIN requests probe into Justice Department use of aircraft for personal or political purposes amid recent reporting of Kash Patel’s questionable use of government aircraft.
BREAKING: The nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office confirms—the only way Republican plans to cut Medicaid would “save money” is by throwing millions off health insurance, slashing benefits, or cutting access to doctors, nurses, & dentists. So much for only focusing on “waste, fraud, & abuse.”
It’s a shame that the Supreme Court temporarily paved the way for a misguided trans troop ban to take effect. If you answer the call to serve our country in uniform, we should be GRATEFUL—not hesitant.
I couldn’t agree more. Supreme Court decisions affect generations of Americans—and everyone should be able to bear witness to these cases. That’s why Senator Grassley and I introduced a bill to shine a light in the SCOTUS Courtroom and televise proceedings.
As Ranking Member of the Judiciary Committee, I will thoroughly review and vet every judicial nomination from this President and will not support them unless they will stand up for due process and Americans’ constitutional rights.
SoupScore Breakdown
Loading analysis metrics…
Voting History
851 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
2025-02-12End debateNONOCloture Motion Agreed to (53-47)
2025-02-12Confirm nomineeNONONomination Confirmed (52-48)
2025-02-10End debateNONOCloture Motion Agreed to (52-46)
2025-02-06Begin considerationNOT_VOTINGNOMotion to Proceed Agreed to (53-45)
2025-02-06Begin considerationNONOMotion to Proceed Agreed to (53-46)
2025-02-06Begin considerationNONOMotion to Proceed Agreed to (52-46)
2025-02-06Begin considerationNONOMotion to Proceed Agreed to (51-46)
2025-02-06Begin considerationNONOMotion to Proceed Agreed to (52-46)
2025-02-06Begin considerationNONOMotion to Proceed Agreed to (52-46)
2025-02-06Begin considerationNONOMotion to Proceed Agreed to (52-47)
2025-02-06Begin considerationNONOMotion to Proceed Agreed to (52-47)
2025-02-06Begin considerationNONOMotion to Proceed Agreed to (52-46)
2025-02-06Begin considerationNONOMotion to Proceed Agreed to (52-47)
2025-02-06Kill the motionNONOMotion to Table Agreed to (52-47)
2025-02-06Confirm nomineeNONONomination Confirmed (53-47)
2025-02-05End debateNONOCloture Motion Agreed to (53-47)
2025-02-05Confirm nomineeNONONomination Confirmed (55-44)
2025-02-04End debateNONOCloture Motion Agreed to (55-45)
2025-02-04Confirm nomineeNONONomination Confirmed (54-46)
2025-02-04Confirm nomineeYESNONomination Confirmed (77-23)
2025-02-03End debateNONOCloture Motion Agreed to (52-46)
2025-02-03Confirm nomineeNONONomination Confirmed (59-38)
2025-02-03Begin considerationNONOMotion to Proceed Agreed to (51-46)
2025-01-30End debateYESYESCloture Motion Agreed to (83-13)
2025-01-30End debateNONOCloture Motion Agreed to (62-35)
2025-01-30Confirm nomineeYESYESNomination Confirmed (80-17)
2025-01-29End debateNOYESCloture Motion Agreed to (78-20)
2025-01-29Confirm nomineeNONONomination Confirmed (56-42)
2025-01-29End debateNONOCloture Motion Agreed to (56-42)
2025-01-28H.R. 23 (119th)End filibuster to begin debateNONOCloture on the Motion to Proceed Rejected (54-45, 3/5 majority required)
2025-01-28Confirm nomineeNOYESNomination Confirmed (77-22)
2025-01-27End debateYESYESCloture Motion Agreed to (97-0)
2025-01-27Confirm nomineeNONONomination Confirmed (68-29)
2025-01-25End debateNOT_VOTINGNOCloture Motion Agreed to (67-23)
2025-01-25Confirm nomineeNONONomination Confirmed (59-34)
2025-01-24End debateNONOCloture Motion Agreed to (61-39)
2025-01-24Confirm nomineeNONONomination Confirmed (50-50, Vice President of the United States, voted Yea)
2025-01-23End debateNONOCloture Motion Agreed to (51-49)
2025-01-23Confirm nomineeYESNONomination Confirmed (74-25)
2025-01-23End debateYESNOCloture Motion Agreed to (72-26)
2025-01-22S. 6 (119th)End filibuster to begin debateNONOCloture on the Motion to Proceed Rejected (52-47, 3/5 majority required)
2025-01-21Begin considerationNONOMotion to Proceed Agreed to (53-45)
2025-01-21Begin considerationNONOMotion to Proceed Agreed to (54-46)
2025-01-20Confirm nomineeYESYESNomination Confirmed (99-0)
2025-01-20S. 5 (119th)Final passageNONOBill Passed (64-35)
2025-01-20S. 5 (119th)Vote on amendmentNONOAmendment Agreed to (75-24)
2025-01-17S. 5 (119th)End debateNONOCloture Motion Agreed to (61-35, 3/5 majority required)
2025-01-15S. 5 (119th)Vote on amendmentYESYESAmendment Rejected (46-49)
2025-01-15S. 5 (119th)Vote on amendmentNONOAmendment Agreed to (70-25)
2025-01-13S. 5 (119th)Begin considerationYESYESMotion to Proceed Agreed to (82-10)

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 17 / 18Next →