Chris Van Hollen headshot
At a Glance
Seat
U.S. Senator from Maryland
Born
January 10, 1959
Age 67
Phone
(202) 224-4654
Office
730 Hart Senate Office Building Washington, DC 20510, Washington 20515
Congress Member Profile|U.S. Senator|Democrat|Maryland

Chris Van Hollen

Voting Record — 890
Yes28%
No71%
Present0%
Not Voting2%
Party align97%
Cross-party0%
SoupScore
District Map

Senate District (Statewide)

U.S. Census Bureau boundary data.
Chris Van Hollen headshot
Chris Van Hollen
U.S. SenatorDemocratMaryland
SoupScore
Chris's ATmosphere Activity
20 recent posts · 67 sponsored · 490 cosponsored
View profile

Recent ATmosphere posts, sponsorships, and cosponsorships.

🚨WATCH: This is what Trump doesn’t want you to know about his rotten deal with El Salvador. In exchange for Bukele imprisoning people abducted from the US, like Abrego Garcia, Trump stopped investigations into MS-13 suspects who could testify about Bukele’s collusion with MS-13:
Saifullah Kamel Musallet is the 7th U.S. citizen killed in the West Bank by settlers or the IDF since 2022, and the 5th in the last 19 months. Today I led 28 Senators in writing to Rubio & Bondi demanding an independent, U.S.-led investigation — and accountability for ALL these American lives lost:
Two months after catastrophic floods hit Western Maryland, communities in Allegany and Garrett Counties are still reeling — and still waiting for federal help. It’s unacceptable that the Admin is denying them support to help these communities recover. Our full statement below:
Statement from Senator Van Hollen.
It’s been obvious from the start that Hegseth compromised sensitive information in that Signal chat. Now we know he was sharing CLASSIFIED material — and lied through his teeth about it. He put American soldiers at risk. He should be fired.
As I have said from the start of the Abrego Garcia case, Trump, Bondi and their cronies love to spew stuff on social media — but they need to put up or shut up in court. As you can see below, when they are under penalty of perjury, the courts find their claims “fanciful”⬇️
Judge Crenshaw on the allegations of MS-13 membership: "[F]or the court to find that Abrego is a member of or in affiliation with MS-13, it would have to make so many inferences from the Government's proffered evidence in its favor that such conclusion would border on fanciful."
Nor does the Government’s poor attempts to tie Abrego to MS-13 get it there. Of the three witnesses Agent Joseph testified about that discussed Abrego’s purported affiliation with MS-13, the closest any of them come to stating that Abrego is a member of MS-13 is two witnesses stating he was “familial” with gang members and a third witness stating she “believed” him to be a member. Entirely absent from the record, however, are any indications that such “belief” is rooted in fact or that such “familial” nature came from his actual membership in or support of MS-13 rather than the simple fact that he, like many members of MS-13, is El Salvadorian. For instance, there is no evidence before the Court that Abrego: has markings or tattoos showing gang affiliation; has working relationships with known MS-13 members; ever told any of the witnesses that he is a MS-13 member; or has ever been affiliated with any sort of gang activity.12 To the contrary, Agent Joseph presented testimony based on statements from cooperating witnesses that Abrego transported both Barrio 18 and MS-13 members alike, and was cordial with both during those trips. This cuts against the already slim evidence demonstrating Abrego is a member of MS-13. Based on the record before it, for the Court to find that Abrego is member of or in affiliation with MS13, it would have to make so many inferences from the Government’s proffered evidence in its favor that such conclusion would border on fanciful.
Trump has known for at least TWO MONTHS that his name is in the Epstein files — and his administration refuses to release them or provide even a bit of transparency. He's doing all he can to bob, weave and distract, but the public deserves to know. RELEASE THE FILES NOW!
Today’s ruling in the Abrego Garcia case is important to upholding the rule of law against a lawless president. It’s clear Trump would rather deport him to a third country without regard for his due process rights than argue the case in court — but it just doesn't work that way:
Trump has brought a chainsaw to vital government services — including cuts to NOAA that are putting American lives in danger. Why? All to make room for more tax cuts for billionaires. It's the Great Betrayal and the American people won't tolerate it. We're fighting back.
The verdict is in from the nonpartisan CBO: Trump's billionaire tax giveaway will add $3.4T to the national debt and kick 10M people off their health care — and that doesn't include the 4M+ who will lose their care if Republicans don't extend the ACA tax credits. Shameful.
We've seen this playbook in the darkest days of history: Dictators targeting independent journalists and dissenting views — using power and threats to silence those who tell the truth. Today it's WSJ, AP, NPR, Colbert. Who's next? We must resist together or we will fall apart.
We all know one thing for sure: Trump cares only about himself. The notion that he’s taking political heat on the Epstein files to shield anyone else is absurd. It’s all about protecting HIMSELF from whatever is in those files. The public deserves to know. Release them now!
The more we learn with every report, the more it becomes clear the Trump Admin MUST release ALL the Epstein files. The American people need transparency and they need it NOW — which is why Senator Durbin and I have called on AG Bondi to release these records within 30 days:
Emil Bove has been nothing but a rubber stamp for Trump’s lawlessness at DOJ — complicit in illegal firings, defying court orders, pressuring DOJ lawyers to lie in court about the Kilmar Abrego Garcia case, and more. He has no business getting a lifetime judicial appointment.
SoupScore Breakdown
Loading analysis metrics…
Voting History
890 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
2026-08-08S. 5271 (119th)End filibuster to begin debateNONOCloture on the Motion to Proceed Rejected (52-46, 3/5 majority required)
2026-08-08Confirm nomineeNONONomination Confirmed (50-49)
2026-08-08End debateNONOCloture Motion Agreed to (50-49)
2026-08-08H.R. 6500 (119th)Final passageYESYESBill Passed (90-6, 3/5 majority required)
2026-08-08H.R. 6500 (119th)Kill the motionYESYESMotion to Table Agreed to (61-32)
2026-08-07H.R. 6500 (119th)End debateYESYESCloture Motion Agreed to (91-6, 3/5 majority required)
2026-08-07S. Res. 817 (119th)Confirm nomineeNONONomination Confirmed (51-47)
2026-08-07H.R. 5334 (119th)Final passageYESYESBill Passed (86-11, 3/5 majority required)
2026-08-07H.R. 5334 (119th)Vote on amendmentYESYESAmendment Rejected (32-64)
2026-08-05S.J. Res. 187 (119th)Begin considerationYESYESMotion to Proceed Rejected (48-50)
2026-08-05S. Res. 817 (119th)End debateNONOCloture Motion Agreed to (50-44)
2026-08-05Confirm nomineeNONONomination Confirmed (51-44)
2026-08-05End debateNONOCloture Motion Agreed to (51-43)
2026-08-03H.R. 6500 (119th)End filibuster to begin debateYESYESCloture on the Motion to Proceed Agreed to (89-4, 3/5 majority required)
2026-07-30S. Res. 817 (119th)Approve resolutionNONOResolution Agreed to (50-47)
2026-07-30S.J. Res. 181 (119th)Motion to Discharge S.J.Res. 181YESYESMotion to Discharge Rejected (49-50)
2026-07-30S.J. Res. 199 (119th)Begin considerationYESYESMotion to Proceed Rejected (47-52)
2026-07-29S. Res. 817 (119th)End debateNONOCloture Motion Agreed to (50-45)
2026-07-29H.R. 5334 (119th)Begin considerationYESYESMotion to Proceed Agreed to (84-12)
2026-07-28H.R. 5334 (119th)End filibuster to begin debateYESYESCloture on the Motion to Proceed Agreed to (86-12, 3/5 majority required)
2026-07-28Confirm nomineeNONONomination Confirmed (51-47)
2026-07-27End debateNONOCloture Motion Agreed to (51-43)
2026-07-23Confirm nomineeNONONomination Confirmed (49-44)
2026-07-23Confirm nomineeNONONomination Confirmed (48-47)
2026-07-23S.J. Res. 180 (119th)Motion to Discharge S.J.Res. 180YESYESMotion to Discharge Rejected (47-49)
2026-07-22End debateNONOCloture Motion Agreed to (51-46)
2026-07-22End debateNONOCloture Motion Agreed to (54-44)
2026-07-22Confirm nomineeNONONomination Confirmed (62-36)
2026-07-22End debateNONOCloture Motion Agreed to (60-35)
2026-07-22Confirm nomineeNONONomination Confirmed (49-46)
2026-07-21Confirm nomineeNONONomination Confirmed (50-48)
2026-07-20End debateNONOCloture Motion Agreed to (43-40)
2026-07-16S.J. Res. 198 (119th)Begin considerationYESYESMotion to Proceed Rejected (46-50)
2026-07-16End debateNONOCloture Motion Agreed to (49-48)
2026-07-15Confirm nomineeNONONomination Confirmed (51-46)
2026-07-15End debateNONOCloture Motion Agreed to (51-46)
2026-07-14S. 4784 (119th)End filibuster to begin debateNONOCloture on the Motion to Proceed Rejected (50-46, 3/5 majority required)
2026-07-14Confirm nomineeNONONomination Confirmed (50-45)
2026-07-13Confirm nomineeNONONomination Confirmed (46-44)
2026-06-24S.J. Res. 185 (119th)Begin considerationYESYESMotion to Proceed Rejected (47-50)
2026-06-24End debateNONOCloture Motion Agreed to (52-45)
2026-06-24S.J. Res. 196 (119th)Begin considerationYESYESMotion to Proceed Rejected (45-52)
2026-06-24End debateNONOCloture Motion Agreed to (50-44)
2026-06-24Confirm nomineeNONONomination Confirmed (50-44)
2026-06-24End debateNONOCloture Motion Agreed to (52-45)
2026-06-24Confirm nomineeNONONomination Confirmed (52-45)
2026-06-24End debateNONOCloture Motion Agreed to (52-45)
2026-06-23H. Con. Res. 86 (119th)Accept House changesYESYESConcurrent Resolution Agreed to (50-48)
2026-06-23Confirm nomineeNONONomination Confirmed (67-30)
2026-06-22H.R. 6644 (119th)Accept House changesYESYESMotion Agreed to (85-5)

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.

Page 1 / 18Next →