Analysis · Floor speech · beta

Richard J. Durbin

Democrat on Unanimous Consent Request--S. Res. 808 (Executive Calendar) 2026-07-21

830 words · 59 sentences · 72 clauses

Statement grade

Average 90 / 100

A score under 50 is red. Choose a measurement to see where it lost points and why; choose it again to clear.

Claims 59%The ask 2%Positioning 5%Reasoning 23%Procedure 3%Anecdote 7%

This view breaks the statement into its steps and names what each one does.

Mr. President, Claims · 17 wordsreserving the right to object, you heard her lay out the case of wrongdoing by a judge. The ask · 15 wordsI am going to ask for the Senate to take action to condemn that conduct. Positioning · 5 wordsSeems pretty straightforward, doesn’t it?Positioning Claims · 59 wordsTurns out, it would be the first time in the history of the Senate that we do something like this. We asked the Congressional Research Service: Is there any Senate precedent for what the Senator from Tennessee is doing? They responded: There is no Senate precedent for either introducing or passing a Senate resolution condemning a judge’s illegal misconduct.¹ Positioning · 1 wordsWhat?Positioning Claims · 31 wordsOut of thousands of judges in the United States at the Federal level, surely in history, someone has done something wrong that should be condemned, but it has never been done. Reasoning · 122 wordsWell, it gets down to some basic elements of constitutional law. You start with this, the Constitution of the United States. And the Constitution of the United States says in article I, section 2, the House of Representatives shall have the ``sole power of impeachment’’-- removal from office.² The sole power of impeachment is in the House of Representatives, not the Senate. So why is that stopping us from this condemnation? Well, let me explain. Under the Constitution, Congress does not respond to judicial misconduct in the form of a Senate resolution. It never has. It is the responsibility of the House of Representatives, specifically the House Judiciary Committee, to investigate the allegations of misconduct and consider the next steps, including impeachment. Procedure · 6 wordsBut here is the critical element: ProcedurePositioning · 12 wordsWho is the jury? Where is the trial? It is right here.Positioning Claims · 22 wordsAfter someone has been impeached in the House of Representatives, for example a President, the case comes to the Senate for trial. Anecdote · 11 wordsI have sat through at least three of those, maybe more.³Anecdote Claims · 62 wordsSo we are juries; the U.S. Senate is a jury. What this Constitution, again, tells us when it comes to the role of the Senate: The Senate shall have the sole power to try all impeachments.⁴ No question about that. If the House impeaches, it is our job to decide whether we agree or not. It takes an extraordinary vote to impeach. Procedure · 9 wordsAnd, also, let me be clear, this is critical: ProcedurePositioning · 8 wordsThat is a pretty high standard, isn’t it?Positioning Claims · 18 wordsYou have to swear that what you are doing is constitutional or to the best of your ability. Positioning · 6 wordsSo it is an awesome responsibility.Positioning Claims · 60 wordsWe sit like juries in criminal courts and civil courts across the United States, and we make bottom-line decisions as to whether the House impeachment shall be sustained. So the action starts in the House. If they vote to impeach, it comes to the Senate. The Senate sits as a jury and decides whether or not the impeachment goes through. Reasoning · 9 wordsThat is why this resolution needs to be defeated. Claims · 61 wordsSenators serve as jurors in impeachment matters. Passing this resolution--passing this resolution, calling on the Senate to condemn this judge before there has been any effort at impeachment in the House of Representatives--is going to do what they call ``taint the jury.’’ He would have already taken a position on the case as to who is right and who is wrong. Reasoning · 4 wordsYou can’t do that. Anecdote · 50 wordsVoir dire in the courtroom is the judge asking the basic question of potential jurors: Do you have any prejudice against this case that stops you from finding the truth? And people say: I don’t. I have an open mind, and I will listen to the evidence and the law.Anecdote Claims · 138 wordsWell, what the Senator from Tennessee wants us to do is to taint the jury, to get us on record before the House has any impeachment activity, before we sit as a jury as to how we are going to rule. That is why it has never been tried before on the floor of the U.S. Senate. I also note the resolution contains multiple material inconsistencies on what the Eleventh Circuit found during its investigation of Judge Ross’ misconduct. This underscores that the Senate has not engaged, prior to the election of this resolution, in its own investigation or factfinding. The only factfinding we have is from one Senator in Tennessee. According to the Congressional Research Service, there is no precedent for the Senate adopting a resolution condemning alleged judicial misconduct.⁵ The Senate has never done this before. Reasoning · 43 wordsWe should not establish a new precedent here, especially when it could taint the jury pool if the Senate later considers articles of impeachment, if that ever happens. It could also open the door to Senate resolutions about other instances of judicial misconduct. Positioning · 9 wordsWe must have the highest standards for Federal judges, PositioningClaims · 18 wordsand the alleged conduct in this case is inappropriate, unacceptable, perhaps even indefensible. But the Constitution is clear.Unearned certainty Reasoning · 16 wordsIt is a matter for the House to consider at this point rather than the Senate. The ask · 5 wordsFor these reasons, I object. Procedure · 13 wordsThe PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. Barrasso). The objection is heard. The Senator from Tennessee.Procedure

At a glance

Lost points for

Switch Claims on to list the checkable claims here.

What the tags mean

Signal · 78

21 of 22 deductions are Signal

Signal checks whether every part makes a point, gives a reason, or asks for action. A low score means the speaker filled time with fluff, pleasantries, or attacks.

Praise, blame or attack with no claim, reason or ask in it.What the tags mean “Seems pretty straightforward, doesn’t it?”Positioning: praise, blame or attack. No claim, reason or ask.
Praise, blame or attack with no claim, reason or ask in it.What the tags mean “What?”Positioning: praise, blame or attack. No claim, reason or ask.
Throat-clearing: announcing what you are about to say, or the House’s routine business.What the tags mean “But here is the critical element:”Procedure or throat-clearing: no claim, reason or ask.
Praise, blame or attack with no claim, reason or ask in it.What the tags mean “Who is the jury?”Positioning: praise, blame or attack. No claim, reason or ask.
Praise, blame or attack with no claim, reason or ask in it.What the tags mean “Where is the trial?”Positioning: praise, blame or attack. No claim, reason or ask.
Praise, blame or attack with no claim, reason or ask in it.What the tags mean “It is right here.”Positioning: praise, blame or attack. No claim, reason or ask.
A story that illustrates instead of making a point.What the tags mean “I have sat through at least three of those, maybe more.”An anecdote: it illustrates, it does not claim, reason or ask.
Throat-clearing: announcing what you are about to say, or the House’s routine business.What the tags mean “And, also, let me be clear, this is critical:”Procedure or throat-clearing: no claim, reason or ask.
Praise, blame or attack with no claim, reason or ask in it.What the tags mean “That is a pretty high standard, isn’t it?”Positioning: praise, blame or attack. No claim, reason or ask.
Praise, blame or attack with no claim, reason or ask in it.What the tags mean “So it is an awesome responsibility.”Positioning: praise, blame or attack. No claim, reason or ask.
A story that illustrates instead of making a point.What the tags mean “Voir dire in the courtroom is the judge asking the basic question of potential jurors:”An anecdote: it illustrates, it does not claim, reason or ask.
A story that illustrates instead of making a point.What the tags mean “Do you have any prejudice against this case that stops you from finding the truth?”An anecdote: it illustrates, it does not claim, reason or ask.
A story that illustrates instead of making a point.What the tags mean “And people say:”An anecdote: it illustrates, it does not claim, reason or ask.
A story that illustrates instead of making a point.What the tags mean “I don’t.”An anecdote: it illustrates, it does not claim, reason or ask.
A story that illustrates instead of making a point.What the tags mean “I have an open mind,”An anecdote: it illustrates, it does not claim, reason or ask.
A story that illustrates instead of making a point.What the tags mean “and I will listen to the evidence and the law.”An anecdote: it illustrates, it does not claim, reason or ask.
Praise, blame or attack with no claim, reason or ask in it.What the tags mean “We must have the highest standards for Federal judges,”Positioning: praise, blame or attack. No claim, reason or ask.
Throat-clearing: announcing what you are about to say, or the House’s routine business.What the tags mean “The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr.”Procedure or throat-clearing: no claim, reason or ask.
Throat-clearing: announcing what you are about to say, or the House’s routine business.What the tags mean “Barrasso).”Procedure or throat-clearing: no claim, reason or ask.
Throat-clearing: announcing what you are about to say, or the House’s routine business.What the tags mean “The objection is heard.”Procedure or throat-clearing: no claim, reason or ask.
Throat-clearing: announcing what you are about to say, or the House’s routine business.What the tags mean “The Senator from Tennessee.”Procedure or throat-clearing: no claim, reason or ask.

Relevance · no score

Not applicable: nothing to answer. Excluded from the average.

Relevance checks whether the speaker stays on topic and answers the question asked. A low score means the speaker dodged the issue.

Reasoning · 93

0 of 22 deductions are Reasoning

Reasoning checks for sound logic and solid support for any conclusion. A low score means the speaker made unsupported leaps or used weak arguments.

Nothing lost points.

Conclusions found · 2

Conclusion“That is why this resolution needs to be defeated.”

Because“Under the Constitution, Congress does not respond to judicial misconduct in the form of a Senate resolution.”

“It is the responsibility of the House of Representatives, specifically the House Judiciary Committee, to investigate the allegations of misconduct and consider the next steps, including impeachment.”

“Passing this resolution--passing this resolution, calling on the Senate to condemn this judge before there has been any effort at impeachment in the House of Representatives--is going to do what they call ``taint the jury.’’”

“Well, what the Senator from Tennessee wants us to do is to taint the jury, to get us on record before the House has any impeachment activity, before we sit as a jury as to how we are going to rule.”

“We should not establish a new precedent here, especially when it could taint the jury pool if the Senate later considers articles of impeachment,”

“It could also open the door to Senate resolutions about other instances of judicial misconduct.”

“It is a matter for the House to consider at this point rather than the Senate.”

Reason given
Conclusion“For these reasons, I object.”

Because“And the Constitution of the United States says in article I, section 2, the House of Representatives shall have the ``sole power of impeachment’’-- removal from office.”

“The sole power of impeachment is in the House of Representatives, not the Senate.”

“It is the responsibility of the House of Representatives, specifically the House Judiciary Committee, to investigate the allegations of misconduct and consider the next steps, including impeachment.”

“But the Constitution is clear.”

“It is a matter for the House to consider at this point rather than the Senate.”

Reason given

Respect · no score

Not checked: graded before this measurement existed. Excluded from the average.

Respect checks whether the speaker argued with people’s positions and records rather than attacking the people: insults, mockery, or bad motives assigned to them. Criticism of what someone did, however strong, is not marked.

Clarity · 99

1 of 22 deductions are Clarity

Clarity checks for plain speaking, clear ownership of actions, and honest limits on certainty. A low score means vague promises or evasive language.

Something stated as certain with nothing to back it.What the tags mean “the Constitution is clear”Asserts certainty about a contested constitutional interpretation without citing any source or authority.

Claims · 5

This list shows the factual statements you can check for yourself: the words as said, and the claim restated to stand on its own.

1“There is no Senate precedent for either introducing or passing a Senate resolution condemning a judge’s illegal misconduct.”The Congressional Research Service found no Senate precedent for introducing or passing a Senate resolution condemning a judge’s illegal misconduct.search
2“the House of Representatives shall have the ``sole power of impeachment’’”Article I, section 2 of the U.S. Constitution says the House of Representatives shall have the sole power of impeachment.search
3“I have sat through at least three of those”Senator Richard Durbin says he has sat through at least three Senate impeachment trials.search
4“The Senate shall have the sole power to try all impeachments.”The U.S. Constitution gives the Senate the sole power to try all impeachments.search
5“According to the Congressional Research Service, there is no precedent for the Senate adopting a resolution condemning alleged judicial misconduct.”The Congressional Research Service found no precedent for the Senate adopting a resolution condemning alleged judicial misconduct.search

Analyzed on 2026-09-16