S.J.Res. 190

S.J.Res. 190: A joint resolution providing for congressional disapproval under chapter 8 of title 5, United States Code, of the rule submitted by the Executive Office for Immigration Review relating to “Appellate Procedures for the Board of Immigration A

Introduced Timothy Kaine (D) SENATE_JOINT_RESOLUTION — 119th Congress
Plain English Summary

S.J.Res. 190 is a joint resolution aimed at disapproving a rule proposed by the Executive Office for Immigration Review that outlines the appellate procedures for the Board of Immigration Appeals. This resolution seeks to block the implementation of those procedures, which are likely intended to govern how immigration appeals are handled.

Positive Media Summary

Some media outlets have praised S.J.Res. 190 as a necessary step to ensure that immigration appeals are processed fairly and transparently. Supporters argue that the resolution will help protect the rights of individuals appealing immigration decisions and promote accountability within the immigration system.

Negative Media Summary

Critics of S.J.Res. 190 have expressed concern that disapproving the proposed appellate procedures could lead to a backlog in immigration cases and undermine the efficiency of the immigration appeals process. Some media commentary suggests that the resolution may hinder efforts to reform and improve the immigration system, potentially leaving vulnerable individuals without adequate recourse.

Conflict of Interest Analysis Deep Analysis
2/10
Risk Level
Low
Total Donations
$1,732,500,000
PAC Percentage
0%
Policy Area
Immigration

Based on the data provided, there appears to be a low risk of conflict of interest between Senator Timothy Kaine's donors and the subject matter of S.J.Res. 190. The bill pertains to immigration, and the only industry overlap detected is with retired individuals, who have donated $412,500,000 to Senator Kaine. However, it's important to note that retired individuals represent a broad demographic and their interests are diverse. The lobbying activity in this bill's policy area is substantial, but none of the lobbying entities are among Senator Kaine's top donors. The largest lobbying expenditure comes from BAE, Kim & Lee, LLC, which spent $370,000, but there is no direct financial connection to Senator Kaine.

Industry Overlap — Follow the Money

These industries are both affected by this bill and among the sponsor's top donors.

Industry Match Type Related Subject Donations
Retired (W06) Sector Immigration $412,500,000
Total from overlapping industries $412,500,000
Lobbying Activity — Who's Pushing?

Organizations that lobbied on issues related to this bill's policy area.

Client Lobbying Firm Amount
BAE, KIM & LEE, LLC THE MCKEON GROUP, INC. $370,000
MBK PARTNERS THE MCKEON GROUP, INC. $150,000
B. BRAUN MEDICAL INC. POLSINELLI PC $70,000
VECTOR THE MCKEON GROUP, INC. $40,000
SOLUTION PHILIPPINES, LLC THE MCKEON GROUP, INC. $40,000
AMERICAN PHARMACISTS ASSOCIATION AMERICAN PHARMACISTS ASSOCIATION $35,000
D-WAVE GOVERNMENT, INC THE MCKEON GROUP, INC. $10,000
NATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF RSVP PROGRAM DIRECTORS THE SUSQUEHANNA GROUP $5,000
STR8 CORPORATION BRODY GROUP L.L.C. PUBLIC AFFAIRS undisclosed
WEST GULF MARITIME ASSOCIATION WEST GULF MARITIME ASSOCIATION undisclosed
CENTRAL ADMIXTURE PHARMACY SERVICES, INC. POLSINELLI PC undisclosed
CARTRIDGE TECHNOLOGIES, LLC CHECKMATE GOVERNMENT RELATIONS undisclosed
BLUE DIAMOND ATOMICS NATURAL STATE CONSULTING AND STRATEGIES undisclosed
POPLICUS INCORPORATED DBA GOVINI CHECKMATE GOVERNMENT RELATIONS undisclosed
STRYDENT AUTONOMOUS TECHNOLOGIES POTOMAC STRATEGIC CONSULTING LLC undisclosed

Source: Senate Lobbying Disclosure Act (LDA) filings, 2026

Sponsor's Top Donor Industries

Top industries funding Timothy Kaine, ranked by total contributions.

Health Professionals $1,320,000,000
Individuals: $1,320,000,000 PACs: $0
Retired $412,500,000
Individuals: $412,500,000 PACs: $0

Source: OpenSecrets.org (Center for Responsive Politics)

TheBillRoom is free and independent. No ads, no subscriptions, no political funding. If this analysis was useful, reader support keeps it running.
Support Us