I introduced a Constitutional amendment to overturn this decision and put political power where it belongs: with the American people.
Congress Member Profile|U.S. Senator|Democrat|California
Adam B. Schiff
Source: Wikipedia • View full (CC BY-SA)
SoupScoreanalysis-first civic rating · view full breakdown
Loading…
Voting Record — 783
Yes30%
No68%
Present0%
Not Voting2%
Party align93%
Cross-party5%
SoupScore
District Map
Senate District (Statewide)
U.S. Census Bureau boundary data.
Social & Web
External Resources
Adam B. Schiff
U.S. SenatorDemocratCalifornia
SoupScore
Adam B.'s ATmosphere Activity
20 recent posts · 52 sponsored · 301 cosponsored
Recent ATmosphere posts, sponsorships, and cosponsorships.
16 years ago today, the Supreme Court erased the limit on how much the wealthy and big corporations could pump into elections.
Since Citizens United, we've seen billions of dollars of dark money drowning out the voice of American voters.
The Trump administration’s abuse of sensitive databases for immigration enforcement purposes has been a go-to intimidation tactic to serve their mass detention and deportation agenda.
But sharing data on our veterans is a disgraceful abuse even for an administration hellbent on spreading fear.
As his enemies lists grows, so does the list of people with the courage to fight back.
Trump was never going to stop at Mark Kelly, Jerome Powell, Letitia James, or me.
Targeting Minnesota officials is just Trump’s latest abuse of the DOJ, and his most recent attempt to silence and intimidate those who stand up to him. 🧵
And we are going to fight to put an end to the administration’s cruel mass deportation program which devastates families even as it is a body blow to our economy.
The American people deserve to know what’s happening inside these walls.
We are going to keep conducting oversight of what is happening when a friend, neighbor, or family member is detained by ICE.
But the trauma within ICE detention facilities is unseen, as individuals spend weeks, months, or longer without being reunited with family.
Threatened with deportation to countries they know nothing about. And ready to give up on their appeals, to avoid further detention.
And they described a lack of access to vital medical care, like insulin for diabetes.
We have all watched in horror as ICE has engaged in indiscriminate immigration raids, grabbing citizens and noncitizens alike, and often endangering the lives of our neighbors in the process.
Many of the people we met with had no criminal record and were showing up for immigration appointments when they were arrested by ICE.
They rarely get to see family members — who may live hundreds or thousands of miles away in the United States.
These are just some of the heartbreaking stories @padilla.senate.gov and I heard today at the California City Detention Center. 🧵
In just one year, Trump has abused his office at every turn. He has corruptly worked to enrich himself and his family, while doing nothing to help yours with the cost of living.
The fight to preserve our democracy isn’t over — it’s just getting started.
Spent a meaningful MLK Day with Angelenos at Big Sunday’s MLK Clothing Drive and Community Breakfast.
In 1967, MLK asked: “Where do we go from here, chaos or community?” We choose community.
Today, we honor the life and legacy of Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. His dream remains a call to action for all of us to continue the fight for justice, equality, and the right to vote.
The President’s betrayal of NATO is complete with this latest tariff threat.
It will only further alienate our allies, drive economic uncertainty, and raise costs.
Congress must act, and put a stop this self-destructive madness.
www.cnbc.com/amp/2026/01/...
This week, people from all over California came to the Capitol to talk about food, nutrition, healthcare and a host of other issues.
@padilla.senate.gov and I are so grateful to hear from constituents of the Golden State on what we can do to help.
Our servicemembers and their families deserve better than a Congress that lacks the courage to debate the military actions Trump is taking around the globe.
With the help of the former isolationist, JD Vance, who cast the tie-breaking vote, Republicans in the Senate abdicated again.
Yet another failed attempt by the Trump administration to intimidate voters and undermine California's free and fair elections.
The judge was absolutely right. Neither this president nor any other may “unilaterally usurp the authority over elections.”
apnews.com/article/cali...
Great news for Californians and anyone looking to cruise along one of our country's most scenic drives: Highway 1 is fully open!
www.ksbw.com/article/high...
$2 billion in grants to help stem opioid addiction and address mental health issues cancelled, then swiftly reinstated.
Why the flip flop?
Because of public outcry. Keep speaking out. Your voice matters.
www.nbcnews.com/politics/tru...
SoupScore Breakdown
Loading analysis metrics…
Voting History783 total votesExpandCollapse
Voting History
783 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2025-03-14 | H.R. 1968 (119th) | Final passage | NO | NO | ✓ | Bill Passed (54-46) |
| 2025-03-14 | H.R. 1968 (119th) | Vote on amendment | NO | NO | ✓ | Amendment Rejected (27-73) |
| 2025-03-14 | H.R. 1968 (119th) | Vote on amendment | YES | YES | ✓ | Amendment Rejected (48-52, 3/5 majority required) |
| 2025-03-14 | H.R. 1968 (119th) | Vote on amendment | YES | YES | ✓ | Amendment Rejected (47-53, 3/5 majority required) |
| 2025-03-14 | H.R. 1968 (119th) | Vote on amendment | YES | YES | ✓ | Amendment Rejected (47-53, 3/5 majority required) |
| 2025-03-14 | H.R. 1968 (119th) | End debate | NO | NO | ✓ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (62-38, 3/5 majority required) |
| 2025-03-14 | S. 331 (119th) | Final passage | NO | YES | ✕ | Bill Passed (84-16) |
| 2025-03-14 | — | Confirm nominee | NO | NO | ✓ | Nomination Confirmed (59-40) |
| 2025-03-14 | — | End debate | NO | NO | ✓ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (56-39) |
| 2025-03-13 | — | Confirm nominee | NO | NO | ✓ | Nomination Confirmed (54-45) |
| 2025-03-13 | S. 331 (119th) | End debate | NO | YES | ✕ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (84-15, 3/5 majority required) |
| 2025-03-13 | — | End debate | NO | NO | ✓ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (54-45) |
| 2025-03-13 | — | Confirm nominee | NO | NO | ✓ | Nomination Confirmed (56-43) |
| 2025-03-13 | — | End debate | NO | NO | ✓ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (57-41) |
| 2025-03-12 | — | Confirm nominee | NO | NO | ✓ | Nomination Confirmed (53-46) |
| 2025-03-12 | — | End debate | NO | NO | ✓ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (53-45) |
| 2025-03-12 | — | Confirm nominee | NO | NO | ✓ | Nomination Confirmed (53-46) |
| 2025-03-12 | — | End debate | NO | NO | ✓ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (52-45) |
| 2025-03-11 | — | Confirm nominee | YES | YES | ✓ | Nomination Confirmed (78-19) |
| 2025-03-11 | — | End debate | YES | YES | ✓ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (76-20) |
| 2025-03-11 | — | Confirm nominee | NO | NO | ✓ | Nomination Confirmed (51-46) |
| 2025-03-11 | — | End debate | NO | NO | ✓ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (51-46) |
| 2025-03-10 | — | Confirm nominee | YES | NO | ✕↔ | Nomination Confirmed (67-32) |
| 2025-03-06 | S. 331 (119th) | End filibuster to begin debate | NO | YES | ✕ | Cloture on the Motion to Proceed Agreed to (82-12, 3/5 majority required) |
| 2025-03-06 | — | End debate | YES | NO | ✕↔ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (66-30) |
| 2025-03-06 | — | Confirm nominee | NO | NO | ✓ | Nomination Confirmed (53-43) |
| 2025-03-06 | — | End debate | NO | NO | ✓ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (53-43) |
| 2025-03-05 | S.J. Res. 28 (119th) | Approve resolution | NO | NO | ✓ | Joint Resolution Passed (51-47) |
| 2025-03-05 | — | Confirm nominee | NO | NO | ✓ | Nomination Confirmed (52-46) |
| 2025-03-05 | — | End debate | NO | NO | ✓ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (51-46) |
| 2025-03-04 | S.J. Res. 28 (119th) | Begin consideration | NO | NO | ✓ | Motion to Proceed Agreed to (50-47) |
| 2025-03-04 | S.J. Res. 3 (119th) | Approve resolution | YES | NO | ✕↔ | Joint Resolution Passed (70-27) |
| 2025-03-04 | S.J. Res. 3 (119th) | Begin consideration | YES | NO | ✕↔ | Motion to Proceed Agreed to (70-28) |
| 2025-03-03 | S. 9 (119th) | End filibuster to begin debate | NO | NO | ✓ | Cloture on the Motion to Proceed Rejected (51-45, 3/5 majority required) |
| 2025-03-03 | — | Confirm nominee | NO | NO | ✓ | Nomination Confirmed (51-45) |
| 2025-02-27 | — | End debate | NO | NO | ✓ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (51-47) |
| 2025-02-27 | H.J. Res. 35 (119th) | Approve resolution | NO | NO | ✓ | Joint Resolution Passed (52-47) |
| 2025-02-26 | S.J. Res. 12 (119th) | Begin consideration | NO | NO | ✓ | Motion to Proceed Agreed to (52-47) |
| 2025-02-26 | S.J. Res. 10 (119th) | Approve resolution | YES | YES | ✓ | Joint Resolution Defeated (47-52) |
| 2025-02-26 | — | Confirm nominee | NO | NO | ✓ | Nomination Confirmed (56-43) |
| 2025-02-25 | — | Begin consideration | NO | NO | ✓ | Motion to Proceed Agreed to (51-47) |
| 2025-02-25 | S.J. Res. 11 (119th) | Approve resolution | NO | NO | ✓ | Joint Resolution Passed (54-44) |
| 2025-02-25 | S.J. Res. 11 (119th) | Begin consideration | NO | NO | ✓ | Motion to Proceed Agreed to (54-42) |
| 2025-02-25 | — | Confirm nominee | NO | NO | ✓ | Nomination Confirmed (66-28) |
| 2025-02-24 | — | End debate | NO | NO | ✓ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (54-43) |
| 2025-02-24 | — | End debate | NO | 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) |
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.