Sheldon Whitehouse headshot
At a Glance
Seat
U.S. Senator from Rhode Island
Born
October 20, 1955
Age 70
Phone
(202) 224-2921
Office
530 Hart Senate Office Building Washington, DC 20510, Washington 20510
Congress Member Profile|U.S. Senator|Democrat|Rhode Island

Sheldon Whitehouse

Voting Record — 890
Yes33%
No64%
Present0%
Not Voting4%
Party align95%
Cross-party5%
SoupScore
District Map

Senate District (Statewide)

U.S. Census Bureau boundary data.
Sheldon Whitehouse headshot
Sheldon Whitehouse
U.S. SenatorDemocratRhode Island
SoupScore
Sheldon's ATmosphere Activity
20 recent posts · 96 sponsored · 259 cosponsored
View profile

Recent ATmosphere posts, sponsorships, and cosponsorships.

The judge directed her order be sent “to the State Bar of New York, of which Acting Attorney General Blanche is a member,” having flagged what she called the “the stain of political interference” in reference to DOJ.
No surprise, since she found collusion, and it takes two to collude: “the Parties worked in tandem and were never actually adverse.” Blanche’s conduct showed “only one party whose interests were being represented throughout this case.”
In her final round-up the blame fell on both sides: “the Parties and counsel” tried “to use the Court to provide some legitimacy to an agreement to confer immunity … and to earmark billions of dollars from American taxpayers to redress grievances not defined in the law.”
“[T]he Government entered into a ‘settlement’ that deviated from its litigation posture in similar actions, disregarded DOJ policies, and accomplished objectives … specifically prohibited, by law.” Ouch.
As to the amnesty for Trumps, she said “acquiescing to any such demand is wholly incompatible with the duties of DOJ attorneys,” and may be an unconstitutional Emolument to the President, “a glaring omission.”
“Indeed, the DOJ seems to have purposefully adopted the strategy of creating a ‘slush fund disguised as a settlement, and then doling the money out to whatever constituency the Executive wants bankrolled.’”
On the defense side, DOJ did not get off much better: “Defendants’ conduct is equally untenable,” rooted in “obeisance to the mandate of [Trump’s] Executive Order,” and “abdicating its responsibility to zealously defend the interests of the United States.”
“Accordingly, the Court expressly finds that Plaintiffs [Trump et al] acted in bad faith,” and defined bad faith thus: “fraud has been practiced upon [the court], or that the very temple of justice has been defiled.” That’s the Trumps.
“Plaintiffs [Trumps] acted in bad faith and for an improper purpose by ‘collusively filing a lawsuit with claims subject to multiple dispositive defenses solely to provide cover for a collusive settlement.’”
Punchline: they did. “Plaintiffs [Trump et al] improperly employed this lawsuit to justify … access to taxpayer funds and exemption from audits and other investigations … accomplished by leveraging control over Defendants [Blanche et al].”
Whether Trump and the defendants “ignored ethical norms, court rules, and legal authority to manipulate the judicial process …. to gild their efforts to gain unprecedented access to the public fisc with the patina of legitimacy.”
Well, I told you to watch the Florida proceedings about whether a “fraud on the court” was committed in the slush fund case, and we now have the federal judge’s decision, and it’s a doozy. Here’s how she framed the question: 🧵
Trump wants to shut down the government in September to force Senate Republicans to pass the SAVE Act, rig the midterm elections, and disenfranchise millions of American citizens. If the government shuts down in September, remember one man was cheerleading for that outcome all along: Donald Trump.
I am stunned and saddened to hear the news this morning. Lindsey was a giant in the Senate. No one loved being a Senator more, or was more energetic. The Senate will be a lesser place without him. I’ve lost a dearly cherished friend.
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
2025-06-30Motion (Motion to Waive Section 302(F) of the CBA Re: Amdt. No. 2414)YESYESMotion Rejected (47-53, 3/5 majority required)
2025-06-30H.R. 1 (119th)Motion (Blunt Rochester Motion to Commit H.R. 1 to the Committee on Finance with Instructions)YESYESMotion Rejected (48-52)
2025-06-30Motion (Motion to Waive Section 302(F) of the CBA Re: Amdt. No. 2696)YESYESMotion Rejected (47-53, 3/5 majority required)
2025-06-30H.R. 1 (119th)Motion (Reed Motion to Commit H.R. 1 to the Committee on Finance with Instructions)YESYESMotion Rejected (48-52)
2025-06-30H.R. 1 (119th)Motion (Lujan Motion to Commit H.R. 1 to the Committee on Finance with Instructions)YESYESMotion Rejected (49-51)
2025-06-30H.R. 1 (119th)Motion (Motion to Commit H.R. 1 to the Committee on Finance with Instructions)YESYESMotion Rejected (48-52)
2025-06-30H.R. 1 (119th)Motion (Wyden Motion to Commit H.R. 1 to the Committee on Finance with Instructions)YESYESMotion Rejected (47-53)
2025-06-30H.R. 1 (119th)Motion (Motion to Commit H.R. 1 to the Committee on Finance with Instructions)YESYESMotion Rejected (49-51)
2025-06-30H.R. 1 (119th)Motion (Schumer Motion to Commit H.R. 1 to the Committee on Finance with Instructions)YESYESMotion Rejected (47-53)
2025-06-30H.R. 1 (119th)Decision of the Chair H.R. 1NONODecision of Chair Sustained (53-47)
2025-06-30H.R. 1 (119th)Decision of the Chair S.Amdt. 2360 to H.R. 1 (No short title on file)NONODecision of Chair Sustained (53-47)
2025-06-28H.R. 1 (119th)Begin considerationNONOMotion to Proceed Agreed to (51-49)
2025-06-27S.J. Res. 59 (119th)Motion to Discharge S.J.Res. 59YESYESMotion to Discharge Rejected (47-53)
2025-06-26Confirm nomineeNONONomination Confirmed (53-45)
2025-06-25End debateNONOCloture Motion Agreed to (53-44)
2025-06-25Confirm nomineeNONONomination Confirmed (56-40)
2025-06-24End debateNONOCloture Motion Agreed to (56-42)
2025-06-24Confirm nomineeNONONomination Confirmed (61-35)
2025-06-23End debateNONOCloture Motion Agreed to (58-33)
2025-06-18Confirm nomineeNONONomination Confirmed (51-46)
2025-06-18Confirm nomineeNONONomination Confirmed (53-45)
2025-06-18End debateNONOCloture Motion Agreed to (50-46)
2025-06-17S. 1582 (119th)Final passageNONOBill Passed (68-30)
2025-06-17Confirm nomineeNONONomination Confirmed (53-45)
2025-06-17Confirm nomineeYESNONomination Confirmed (57-40)
2025-06-17End debateNONOCloture Motion Agreed to (53-44)
2025-06-17End debateNONOCloture Motion Agreed to (46-39)
2025-06-16End debateYESNOCloture Motion Agreed to (44-33)
2025-06-12S. 1582 (119th)End debateNONOCloture Motion Agreed to (67-27, 3/5 majority required)
2025-06-12S. 1582 (119th)Vote on amendmentNONOAmendment Agreed to (67-30)
2025-06-12Motion (Motion to Waive All Applicable Budgetary Discipline Re: Amdt. No. 2307)NONOMotion Agreed to (64-33, 3/5 majority required)
2025-06-12S. 1582 (119th)Kill the motionYESYESMotion to Table Failed (45-52)
2025-06-12Confirm nomineeNONONomination Confirmed (53-44)
2025-06-11S.J. Res. 54 (119th)Motion to Discharge S.J.Res. 54YESYESMotion to Discharge Rejected (39-56)
2025-06-11S.J. Res. 53 (119th)Motion to Discharge S.J.Res. 53YESYESMotion to Discharge Rejected (39-56)
2025-06-11S. 1582 (119th)End debateNONOCloture Motion Agreed to (68-30, 3/5 majority required)
2025-06-11End debateNONOCloture Motion Agreed to (53-46)
2025-06-10Confirm nomineeNONONomination Confirmed (51-43)
2025-06-10End debateNONOCloture Motion Agreed to (51-44)
2025-06-10Confirm nomineeNONONomination Confirmed (51-44)
2025-06-10End debateNONOCloture Motion Agreed to (48-45)
2025-06-10Confirm nomineeNONONomination Confirmed (53-41)
2025-06-09End debateNONOCloture Motion Agreed to (53-43)
2025-06-09Confirm nomineeNONONomination Confirmed (51-41)
2025-06-05End debateNONOCloture Motion Agreed to (49-40)
2025-06-05Confirm nomineeNONONomination Confirmed (52-43)
2025-06-05End debateNONOCloture Motion Agreed to (52-43)
2025-06-05Confirm nomineeNONONomination Confirmed (52-43)
2025-06-04Confirm nomineeNONONomination Confirmed (57-38)
2025-06-04Confirm nomineeNONONomination Confirmed (48-46)

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 12 / 18Next →