The Trump-packed SCOTUS—like the Republican Congress—is ceding its constitutional duties to a lawless, authoritarian president.
The dissent is right: “No right is safe in the new legal regime the Court creates.”
Congress Member Profile|U.S. Senator|Democrat|Maryland
Chris Van Hollen
SoupScoreanalysis-first civic rating · view full breakdown
Loading…
Voting Record — 890
Yes28%
No71%
Present0%
Not Voting2%
Party align97%
Cross-party0%
SoupScore
District Map
Senate District (Statewide)
U.S. Census Bureau boundary data.
Social & Web
External Resources
Chris Van Hollen
U.S. SenatorDemocratMaryland
SoupScore
Chris's ATmosphere Activity
20 recent posts · 67 sponsored · 490 cosponsored
Recent ATmosphere posts, sponsorships, and cosponsorships.
Buried in the Republicans' billionaire tax giveaway is a special interest provision that would essentially ban states from regulating AI for a decade.
This is a dangerous proposal that has nothing to do with taxes. It cannot become law.
Today marks 10 years since the historic Obergefell v. Hodges decision guaranteed marriage equality nationwide.
As extremists continue to attack equal rights, we can never stop fighting to protect the right of everyone to be who they are and love who they love.
My telephone town hall with @alsobrooks.senate.gov is getting underway.
Tune in as we take questions from Marylanders about how we're fighting this terrible Republican bill that takes health care from millions to help pay for billionaire tax cuts:
Nothing I learned from the briefing today would justify President Trump’s decision to bomb Iran or his failure to obtain Congressional approval as required by the Constitution.
My full statement:
Today @alsobrooks.senate.gov and I are taking questions from Marylanders about the GOP's billionaire tax giveaway and attacks on health care — and how we're fighting back.
Tune in at 5:30: vanhollen.senate.gov/live
The Trump Admin continues to attack our independent judiciary — this time taking the unprecedented step of suing every federal judge in Maryland.
I made clear to AG Bondi yesterday: the DOJ is aiding and abetting Trump's assault on due process and our Constitution. We cannot stand for it.
The Republican tax plan would take health care from millions and add $4.2T to the deficit — to help finance billionaire tax cuts.
Tomorrow @alsobrooks.senate.gov and I are answering questions from Marylanders about this bill and how we're fighting back.
📋RSVP: outreach.senate.gov/iqextranet/E...
Today I confronted AG Bondi about the lawlessness of the Trump Admin — aided by a politicized DOJ hellbent on undermining due process and the rule of law.
I cited a recently-fired DOJ whistleblower who said simply, but powerfully: "I didn't sign up to lie."
Watch⬇️
Look, Republicans are trying all sorts of tricks to pretend their billionaire tax giveaway doesn't blow up the deficit.
The fact is, their bill would add $4.2T to the deficit over 10 years—even AFTER the cuts they made to kick 16M off their health care.
This bill is a disaster.
It's been three years since the Trump-packed Supreme Court overturned Roe — stripping millions of women of their rights and upending reproductive care across America.
Today I spoke with a doctor about the untenable reality now facing women and their doctors⬇️
Senate Republicans claim they're going after waste in Medicaid, but all they’re doing is adding bureaucratic red tape to kick millions of eligible recipients off their health care — to pay for billionaire tax cuts.
Make no mistake: if they succeed in gutting Medicaid, people will die.
"They'll get over it."
That's apparently the closing message from Senate Republicans before they vote to take away health care from millions of Americans — all to pay for tax cuts for billionaires.
Unbelievable.
You know things are bad when House Republicans — who voted to cut Medicaid by $800B — are worried about Medicaid cuts in the Senate GOP's bill.
But make no mistake: both the House and Senate bills kick millions off their health care. We're fighting them with everything we've got.
These clean energy projects represented thousands of good-paying jobs and more affordable energy for Americans.
This is a result of Trump's war on clean energy and his payoff to Big Oil — and it'll only get worse if Republicans pass their giveaway to billionaires.
What a disgrace.
Yesterday Secretary Rubio admitted the administration ignored its own intelligence reports while illegally dragging us into the conflict in Iran. He literally said "forget about intelligence."
That's the type of "leadership" that started the Iraq War.
Trump said he would end wars. Tonight, he dragged us into one. His decision violates the Constitution, endangers American lives and risks unleashing dangerous forces we can’t control.
My full statement:
Joined #BaltimorePride50 last week to celebrate #PrideMonth and the idea that everyone must be free to be who they are and love who they love.
I stand with the LGBTQ community in face of attacks from Trump and his cronies. Bullies only succeed when others retreat. We will not.
The Trump Admin is trying to wipe out federal employee unions by claiming their already limited bargaining rights at agencies like the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases are a national security risk.
The judge hearing the case pointed out how absurd that is: tinyurl.com/2tbtr57d
Richard is a metastatic cancer patient whose life could be saved by a custom cell therapy — one that is currently sitting unused in a freezer because of Trump's NIH cuts.
Yet another example of the real impacts of the Trump Admin's attacks on science and our federal workforce.
SoupScore Breakdown
Loading analysis metrics…
Voting History890 total votesExpandCollapse
Voting History
890 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2026-06-01 | — | End debate | NO | NO | ✓ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (50-44) |
| 2026-05-20 | — | Confirm nominee | NO | NO | ✓ | Nomination Confirmed (52-47) |
| 2026-05-19 | S.J. Res. 185 (119th) | Motion to Discharge S.J.Res. 185 | YES | YES | ✓ | Motion to Discharge Agreed to (50-47) |
| 2026-05-19 | — | End debate | NO | NO | ✓ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (50-47) |
| 2026-05-19 | — | Confirm nominee | NO | NO | ✓ | Nomination Confirmed (52-38) |
| 2026-05-19 | — | End debate | NO | NO | ✓ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (57-38) |
| 2026-05-18 | S. Res. 690 (119th) | Confirm nominee | NO | NO | ✓ | Nomination Confirmed (46-43) |
| 2026-05-14 | S. Res. 690 (119th) | End debate | NO | NO | ✓ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (51-46) |
| 2026-05-13 | S.J. Res. 130 (119th) | Begin consideration | YES | YES | ✓ | Motion to Proceed Rejected (47-53) |
| 2026-05-13 | S.J. Res. 141 (119th) | Begin consideration | YES | YES | ✓ | Motion to Proceed Rejected (50-50) |
| 2026-05-13 | S.J. Res. 132 (119th) | Begin consideration | YES | YES | ✓ | Motion to Proceed Rejected (48-52) |
| 2026-05-13 | — | Confirm nominee | NO | NO | ✓ | Nomination Confirmed (54-45) |
| 2026-05-13 | S. Res. 526 (119th) | End filibuster to begin debate | YES | YES | ✓ | Cloture on the Motion to Proceed Agreed to (99-0, 3/5 majority required) |
| 2026-05-13 | S.J. Res. 163 (119th) | Motion to Discharge S.J.Res. 163 | YES | YES | ✓ | Motion to Discharge Rejected (49-50) |
| 2026-05-12 | — | End debate | NO | NO | ✓ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (51-45) |
| 2026-05-12 | — | Confirm nominee | NO | NO | ✓ | Nomination Confirmed (51-45) |
| 2026-05-11 | — | End debate | NO | NO | ✓ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (49-44) |
| 2026-05-11 | S. Res. 690 (119th) | Approve resolution | NO | NO | ✓ | Resolution Agreed to (46-45) |
| 2026-04-30 | S.J. Res. 184 (119th) | Motion to Discharge S.J.Res. 184 | YES | YES | ✓ | Motion to Discharge Rejected (47-50) |
| 2026-04-30 | S. Res. 690 (119th) | End debate | NO | NO | ✓ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (51-46) |
| 2026-04-29 | S.J. Res. 99 (119th) | Begin consideration | YES | YES | ✓ | Motion to Proceed Rejected (47-50) |
| 2026-04-29 | S.J. Res. 139 (119th) | Begin consideration | YES | YES | ✓ | Motion to Proceed Rejected (46-52) |
| 2026-04-29 | — | Confirm nominee | NO | NO | ✓ | Nomination Confirmed (59-39) |
| 2026-04-28 | S.J. Res. 124 (119th) | Point of Order S.J.Res. 124 | NO | NO | ✓ | Point of Order Well Taken (51-47) |
| 2026-04-28 | S. Res. 690 (119th) | Begin consideration | NO | NO | ✓ | Motion to Proceed Agreed to (52-47) |
| 2026-04-27 | — | End debate | NO | NO | ✓ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (54-37) |
| 2026-04-23 | S. Con. Res. 33 (119th) | Accept House changes | NO | NO | ✓ | Concurrent Resolution Agreed to (50-48) |
| 2026-04-23 | S. Con. Res. 33 (119th) | Vote on amendment | YES | YES | ✓ | Amendment Rejected (49-49) |
| 2026-04-23 | S. Con. Res. 33 (119th) | Vote on amendment | YES | YES | ✓ | Amendment Rejected (48-50) |
| 2026-04-23 | — | Motion (Motion to Waive All Applicable Budgetary Discipline Re: Padilla Amdt. No. 4855) | YES | YES | ✓ | Motion Rejected (46-52, 3/5 majority required) |
| 2026-04-23 | — | Motion (Motion to Waive All Applicable Budgetary Discipline Re: Sanders Amdt. No. 5159) | YES | YES | ✓ | Motion Rejected (49-49, 3/5 majority required) |
| 2026-04-23 | S. Con. Res. 33 (119th) | Vote on amendment | YES | YES | ✓ | Amendment Rejected (46-52) |
| 2026-04-23 | S. Con. Res. 33 (119th) | Vote on amendment | NO | NO | ✓ | Amendment Rejected (25-73) |
| 2026-04-23 | — | Motion (Motion to Waive All Applicable Budgetary Discipline Re: Markey Amdt. No. 5001) | YES | YES | ✓ | Motion Rejected (48-50, 3/5 majority required) |
| 2026-04-23 | — | Motion (Motion to Waive All Applicable Budgetary Discipline Re: Hawley Amdt. No. 4794) | NO | NO | ✓ | Motion Rejected (50-48, 3/5 majority required) |
| 2026-04-23 | — | Motion (Motion to Waive All Applicable Budgetary Discipline Re: Kennedy Amdt. No. 5414) | NO | NO | ✓ | Motion Rejected (48-50, 3/5 majority required) |
| 2026-04-22 | — | Motion (Motion to Waive All Applicable Budgetary Discipline Re: Alsobrooks Amdt. No. 5294) | YES | YES | ✓ | Motion Rejected (47-51, 3/5 majority required) |
| 2026-04-22 | — | Motion (Motion to Waive All Applicable Budgetary Discipline Re: Hickenlooper Amdt. No. 4956) | YES | YES | ✓ | Motion Rejected (47-51, 3/5 majority required) |
| 2026-04-22 | — | Motion (Motion to Waive All Applicable Budgetary Discipline Re: Hirono Amdt. No. 4884) | YES | YES | ✓ | Motion Rejected (48-50, 3/5 majority required) |
| 2026-04-22 | S. Con. Res. 33 (119th) | Vote on amendment | YES | YES | ✓ | Amendment Agreed to (98-0) |
| 2026-04-22 | — | Motion (Motion to Waive All Applicable Budgetary Discipline Re: Ossoff Amdt. No. 4897) | YES | YES | ✓ | Motion Rejected (49-49, 3/5 majority required) |
| 2026-04-22 | — | Motion (Motion to Waive All Applicable Budgetary Discipline Re: Lujan Amdt. No. 4798) | YES | YES | ✓ | Motion Rejected (47-50, 3/5 majority required) |
| 2026-04-22 | — | Motion (Motion to Waive All Applicable Budgetary Discipline Re: Schumer Amdt. No. 4799) | YES | YES | ✓ | Motion Rejected (48-50, 3/5 majority required) |
| 2026-04-22 | S.J. Res. 114 (119th) | Motion to Discharge S.J.Res. 114 | YES | YES | ✓ | Motion to Discharge Rejected (46-51) |
| 2026-04-21 | S. Con. Res. 33 (119th) | Begin consideration | NO | NO | ✓ | Motion to Proceed Agreed to (52-46) |
| 2026-04-20 | — | Confirm nominee | NO | NO | ✓ | Nomination Confirmed (47-46) |
| 2026-04-16 | — | End debate | NO | NO | ✓ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (49-48) |
| 2026-04-16 | H.J. Res. 140 (119th) | Approve resolution | NO | NO | ✓ | Joint Resolution Passed (50-49) |
| 2026-04-15 | H.J. Res. 140 (119th) | Begin consideration | NO | NO | ✓ | Motion to Proceed Agreed to (51-49) |
| 2026-04-15 | H.J. Res. 140 (119th) | Kill the motion | NO | NO | ✓ | Motion to Table Agreed to (51-48) |
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.