This ruling amounts to a nationwide abortion ban. Mifepristone is safe, full stop. This isn’t about science and protecting women, it’s a calculated plot by Republicans obsessed with controlling the private health care decisions of women in America.
Congress Member Profile|U.S. Senator|Democrat|Oregon
Ron Wyden
Source: Wikipedia • View full (CC BY-SA)
SoupScoreanalysis-first civic rating · view full breakdown
Loading…
Voting Record — 772
Yes26%
No72%
Present0%
Not Voting2%
Party align97%
Cross-party1%
SoupScore
District Map
Senate District (Statewide)
U.S. Census Bureau boundary data.
Social & Web
External Resources
Ron Wyden
U.S. SenatorDemocratOregon
SoupScore
Ron's ATmosphere Activity
20 recent posts · 73 sponsored · 333 cosponsored
Recent ATmosphere posts, sponsorships, and cosponsorships.
Reposted bySenator Ron Wyden
They’ll argue about budgets while women miss cancer screenings.
They’ll call it policy while clinics close in the places that need them most.
This isn’t abstract.
Ron Wyden just made that real on the Senate floor.
Reposted bySenator Ron Wyden
"It sure feels like the other side of the aisle is covering the abuses up,” Wyden said.
Reposted bySenator Ron Wyden
Congress Passes Another Short-Term Extension of Expiring Surveillance Law
Senator Ron Wyden secured an agreement to seek the declassification of a recent intelligence court ruling about the FISA Section 702 program.
www.nytimes.com/2026/04/30/u...
Big update: I secured a commitment that the FISA court opinion revealing abuses of Americans' rights will be DECLASSIFIED before Congress votes on reauthorization. The more Americans know about these abuses, the more they’ll demand real reforms.
Reposted bySenator Ron Wyden
Palantir’s manifesto confirms our worst fears: the company running our surveillance state is fueled by dangerous prejudice.
@wyden.senate.gov @velazquez.house.gov & I are demanding answers from DHS & ICE to reveal how this data is being used & on whom. There must be proper oversight of these tools.
This is a big win. Congress is waking up to the insanity of letting the government spy on Americans without a warrant. The only path forward on FISA is reform.
Teen suicide rates are down 11% since I helped create the national teen suicide hotline. Republicans are actively trying to defund it so they can pay for Trump's war in the Middle East. They don't care if kids die as a result as long as they get their oil.
Nearly 4,400 fewer U.S. teens and young adults died by suicide than projected in the first two-and-a-half years of the 988 mental health crisis hotline, a sign the program is working even as it faces long-term funding challenges. https://to.pbs.org/4cFt4ao
Any member of Congress that votes for a clean FISA reauthorization is voting to hand Kash Patel, Stephen Miller and Donald Trump the power to spy on Americans without a warrant on a silver platter.
Reposted bySenator Ron Wyden
US Senator Ron Wyden (D-OR) explains why reforming Section 702 of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) is so critical in this moment. It’s allll about AI—and if we don’t get some protections we’re gonna be cooked.
#fisa
Jared Kushner is already on the UAE payroll. How much of this taxpayer money will go directly into his pocket?
Reposted bySenator Ron Wyden
House leaders are selling a new FISA deal as reform. A careful read shows the "Fourth Amendment" section bars conduct that's already illegal, the new oversight office is a fraction of what Patel just shuttered, and the FBI can still search Americans' comms without a warrant.
I’ll continue fighting like hell to sound the alarm and throw up roadblocks. But if the thought of the Trump administration having these powers scares you, now’s the time to make your voice heard.
The deadline to renew the law is coming up next week. Trump needs both Republicans AND Democrats to vote to reauthorize this law. Anyone with a pulse ought to see that in no world should Trump and Kash Patel have these powers.
But rubber-stamping these powers for Donald Trump poses a unique and chilling threat to Americans’ most basic constitutional rights.
702 abuses span across administrations and political spectrums. I’ve fought for reforms to Section 702 of FISA during every administration. This isn’t a red issue or a blue issue – it’s a civil liberties issue. Security and liberty aren’t mutually exclusive.
Also in 2024, Congress expanded the range of who can be forced to comply with Section 702 surveillance orders. Your cable guy could be forced to install spyware on behalf of the government and help them surveil you.
Stephen Miller is behind the Trump administration’s push to reauthorize 702. They have already designated “Antifa” organizations as foreign terrorist groups. It’s likely Miller will use 702 to surveil, target, and suppress activists on the left.
In 2024, Congress expanded Section 702 to cover “illicit synthetic drugs.” I fear the Trump administration could target women living in states with abortion restrictions that get abortion medications from overseas providers.
Posts page 1Older posts →
SoupScore Breakdown
Loading analysis metrics…
Voting History772 total votesExpandCollapse
Voting History
772 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2025-09-17 | — | End debate | NO | NO | ✓ | Cloture Motion Rejected (51-48, 3/5 majority required) |
| 2025-09-16 | S. Con. Res. 22 (119th) | Begin consideration | NO | NO | ✓ | Motion to Proceed Rejected (36-62) |
| 2025-09-16 | S.J. Res. 60 (119th) | Begin consideration | YES | YES | ✓ | Motion to Proceed Rejected (47-51) |
| 2025-09-15 | — | Confirm nominee | NO | NO | ✓ | Nomination Confirmed (48-47) |
| 2025-09-15 | — | End debate | NO | NO | ✓ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (50-44) |
| 2025-09-15 | S. Res. 377 (119th) | Resolution S.Res. 377 | NO | NO | ✓ | Resolution Agreed to (51-44) |
| 2025-09-11 | S. Res. 377 (119th) | End debate | NO | NO | ✓ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (53-43) |
| 2025-09-11 | S. Res. 377 (119th) | Decision of the Chair S.Res. 377 | YES | YES | ✓ | Decision of Chair Not Sustained (45-53) |
| 2025-09-11 | S. Res. 377 (119th) | Motion to Reconsider S.Res. 377 | NO | NO | ✓ | Motion to Reconsider Agreed to (52-45) |
| 2025-09-11 | S. Res. 377 (119th) | End debate | NO | NO | ✓ | Cloture Motion Rejected (52-47, 3/5 majority required) |
| 2025-09-10 | S. 2296 (119th) | Kill the motion | NO | NO | ✓ | Motion to Table Agreed to (51-49) |
| 2025-09-09 | S. Res. 377 (119th) | Begin consideration | NO | NO | ✓ | Motion to Proceed Agreed to (53-45) |
| 2025-09-09 | S. Res. 377 (119th) | Kill the motion | NO | NO | ✓ | Motion to Table Agreed to (53-46) |
| 2025-09-09 | — | Confirm nominee | NO | NO | ✓ | Nomination Confirmed (53-45) |
| 2025-09-09 | — | End debate | NOT_VOTING | NO | — | Cloture Motion Agreed to (53-44) |
| 2025-09-09 | — | Confirm nominee | NOT_VOTING | NO | — | Nomination Confirmed (49-46) |
| 2025-09-09 | — | End debate | NOT_VOTING | NO | — | Cloture Motion Agreed to (51-46) |
| 2025-09-09 | — | Confirm nominee | NOT_VOTING | NO | — | Nomination Confirmed (52-45) |
| 2025-09-08 | — | Confirm nominee | NOT_VOTING | NO | — | Nomination Confirmed (50-43) |
| 2025-09-04 | S. 2296 (119th) | Begin consideration | NO | YES | ✕ | Motion to Proceed Agreed to (83-13) |
| 2025-09-04 | — | End debate | NO | NO | ✓ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (53-46) |
| 2025-09-04 | — | End debate | NO | NO | ✓ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (53-45) |
| 2025-09-02 | S. 2296 (119th) | End filibuster to begin debate | NO | YES | ✕ | Cloture on the Motion to Proceed Agreed to (84-14, 3/5 majority required) |
| 2025-08-02 | — | Confirm nominee | NO | NO | ✓ | Nomination Confirmed (71-23) |
| 2025-08-02 | — | Confirm nominee | NO | — | — | Nomination Confirmed (72-22) |
| 2025-08-02 | — | Confirm nominee | NO | NO | ✓ | Nomination Confirmed (59-35) |
| 2025-08-02 | — | Confirm nominee | NO | NO | ✓ | Nomination Confirmed (52-42) |
| 2025-08-02 | — | Confirm nominee | NO | NO | ✓ | Nomination Confirmed (50-45) |
| 2025-08-02 | — | Confirm nominee | NO | YES | ✕ | Nomination Confirmed (78-17) |
| 2025-08-02 | — | End debate | NO | YES | ✕ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (76-19) |
| 2025-08-02 | — | Confirm nominee | NO | NO | ✓ | Nomination Confirmed (50-45) |
| 2025-08-02 | — | End debate | NO | NO | ✓ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (51-45) |
| 2025-08-02 | — | Confirm nominee | NO | NO | ✓ | Nomination Confirmed (52-44) |
| 2025-08-02 | — | End debate | NO | NO | ✓ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (49-45) |
| 2025-08-02 | — | Confirm nominee | NO | NO | ✓ | Nomination Confirmed (49-44) |
| 2025-08-02 | — | End debate | NO | NO | ✓ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (51-45) |
| 2025-08-02 | — | Confirm nominee | NO | NO | ✓ | Nomination Confirmed (53-44) |
| 2025-08-02 | — | End debate | NO | NO | ✓ | Cloture Motion Agreed to (52-41) |
| 2025-08-01 | — | Confirm nominee | NO | NO | ✓ | Nomination Confirmed (50-45) |
| 2025-08-01 | — | Confirm nominee | NO | NO | ✓ | Nomination Confirmed (51-43) |
| 2025-08-01 | — | Confirm nominee | NO | NO | ✓ | Nomination Confirmed (51-44) |
| 2025-08-01 | H.R. 3944 (119th) | Vote on amendment | YES | YES | ✓ | Amendment Agreed to (81-15) |
| 2025-08-01 | H.R. 3944 (119th) | Final passage | YES | YES | ✓ | Bill Passed (87-9, 3/5 majority required) |
| 2025-08-01 | H.R. 3944 (119th) | Vote on amendment | YES | YES | ✓ | Amendment Agreed to (87-9, 3/5 majority required) |
| 2025-08-01 | H.R. 3944 (119th) | Vote on amendment | NO | NO | ✓ | Amendment Rejected (21-75) |
| 2025-08-01 | H.R. 3944 (119th) | Vote on amendment | NO | NO | ✓ | Amendment Rejected (15-81) |
| 2025-08-01 | H.R. 3944 (119th) | Vote on amendment | NO | NO | ✓ | Amendment Rejected (14-81) |
| 2025-08-01 | H.R. 3944 (119th) | Vote on amendment | YES | YES | ✓ | Amendment Rejected (45-50) |
| 2025-08-01 | H.R. 3944 (119th) | Vote on amendment | YES | YES | ✓ | Amendment Rejected (42-53) |
| 2025-08-01 | H.R. 3944 (119th) | Vote on amendment | YES | YES | ✓ | Amendment Rejected (44-51) |
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.