CONGRESS FOR VOTERS

Ruben Gallego (D-AZ)

A resolution expressing the sense of the Senate that under no circumstances should Samuel Bankman-Fried receive executive clemency, including a pardon or commutation, and affirming the Senate's commitment to the rule of law and integrity of the United States financial system.

S.Res. 772 · Senate resolution Crime and Law Enforcement

A Democratic resolution with 2 Republican cosponsors · See all 2 cosponsors

Last activity — Resolution agreed to in Senate without amendment and with a preamble by Unanimous Consent. (consideration: CR S4117)

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

S. Res. 772 expresses the Senate's position that Samuel Bankman-Fried should not receive a presidential pardon, commutation, or any other form of Federal clemency. The resolution highlights Bankman-Fried's conviction on seven counts of fraud and money laundering related to the collapse of FTX. It affirms that his 25-year sentence serves the interests of justice given the scale of the financial harm caused to millions of victims. The Senate also rejects the idea that the prosecution was "lawfare." Finally, the resolution reaffirms a commitment to the rule of law and the integrity of United States financial markets.

Yes

  • Scored +5

    Does this give people more protection from unfair business practices?

    Affirms commitment to safeguarding investors and consumers by ensuring accountability for large-scale financial fraud.

  • Scored +5

    Does this protect the right to fair treatment by the courts?

    Affirms the integrity of the Federal criminal justice process and the rule of law.

The opposite

  • Scored -5

    Would billionaires be better off under this?

    Sends a message that high-status individuals are not above the law and will be held accountable for fraud.