CONGRESS FOR VOTERS

David McCormick (R-PA)

A resolution condemning the rise in ideologically motivated attacks on Jewish individuals in the United States, including the recent violent assault in Boulder, Colorado, and reaffirming the commitment of the Senate to combating antisemitism and politically motivated violence.

S.Res. 288 · Senate resolution Civil Rights and Liberties, Minority Issues

A Republican resolution with 11 Democratic cosponsors · See all 40 cosponsors

Last activity — Resolution agreed to in Senate without amendment and with a preamble by Unanimous Consent. (consideration: CR S90; text: CR 6/18/2025 S3474)

Adopted

The chamber formally agreed to it, and for a resolution that is the finish line: what it says is now officially the chamber's position, rule or tribute.

Nothing more is needed. A resolution is how a chamber speaks for itself or sets its own rules, so adopting it is what puts it into effect. It is not a law, so there is nothing for the President to sign.

Its path through Congress

  1. Introduced
  2. Adopted by the Senate unanimous consent

A Senate resolution is the Senate speaking for itself: stating a position, honouring someone, or setting its own rules. Adopting it is the whole process. Once the Senate agrees to it, it is officially the Senate's word; it is not a law, so the House and the President have no part in it.

The Senate by unanimous consent (no one objected, so there was no vote): no senator's position on it was recorded.

What this bill would do

This resolution condemns the increase in ideologically motivated attacks against Jewish individuals in the United States. It highlights specific violent incidents, such as an attack in Boulder, Colorado, and fatal shootings in Washington, DC. The Senate aims to recognize these events as part of a pattern of targeted aggression. Furthermore, the resolution reaffirms the Senate's commitment to fighting antisemitism and politically motivated violence. It calls for law enforcement to investigate and prosecute these crimes. Finally, it urges leaders to speak out against such violence.

Yes

  • Scored +5

    Would people over 65 be better off under this?

    The resolution specifically mentions protecting elderly participants from violent attacks.

  • Scored +5

    Does this protect the freedom to practise a religion?

    The resolution reaffirms the right to practice faith without fear of violence.

The opposite

No question was scored the opposite.