Senate adopts Law Day resolution after extended floor debate over partisanship

The California State Senate adopted Senate Concurrent Resolution 66, designating Law Day and affirming the rule of law, after a lengthy floor debate that divided members along partisan lines on May 28, 2025.

The resolution’s author, Senator Scott Unberg, told the chamber the measure ‘‘recognizes the importance of the rule of law’’ and argued the resolution was meant to defend the independence of courts and lawyers who represent clients against the executive branch. ‘‘The rule of law underpins what we do as a democracy,’’ Unberg said while urging colleagues for an aye vote.

Why it matters: The measure drew unusually heated remarks and extended discussion because several senators said its language singled out actions by the current president and certain law‑firms, turning what would normally be a ceremonial recognition into a partisan statement. Supporters said the floor debate highlighted a broader, longstanding concern about threats to judicial independence; opponents said the resolution was unbalanced and politicized a nonpartisan observance.

Supporters’ arguments

Senator Unberg, the resolution’s sponsor, framed the measure as a defense of long‑standing legal institutions and said that attacks on law firms and courts threatened Americans’ liberties. ‘‘The rule of law makes it so that we can buy eggs,’’ Unberg said in a metaphor he used to emphasize how legal order supports everyday life. Several Democratic senators with legal backgrounds told the chamber they could not remain silent about recent actions they said threatened the independence of the judiciary and of law firms who represent controversial clients.

Senator Scott Wiener, who spoke in support, said the resolution is about the principle that ‘‘no one is above the law’’ and urged colleagues to back the measure.

Opponents’ arguments

A number of Republican senators said they supported the idea of Law Day but opposed the resolution’s text as partisan. Senator Nilo said he ‘‘support[ed] the idea behind this resolution of Law Day’’ but could not support ‘‘this particular proposal because it’s imbalanced’’ and does not address similar actions taken by the current administration’s political opponents. Senator Strickland called the text one‑sided and urged colleagues to be consistent in criticizing abuses by any administration.

‘‘If the authors of this resolution are truly concerned about executive overreach,’’ Nilo said, ‘‘they should include other cases as well.’’ Other speakers on the floor echoed that view and urged the authors to revise the text to avoid singling out one president.

Outcome and vote

After more than two hours of debate, the Senate adopted SCR 66. The clerk reported the final tally as Ayes 27, Nos 8; the resolution was adopted.

Discussion vs. decision

Discussion: The floor debate included extended policy and historical arguments about the rule of law, the role of law firms in defending clients, and what constitutes appropriate public censure of a sitting president. Many senators recounted experiences representing marginalized clients and warned about chilling effects if law firms are targeted.

Decision: The Senate’s formal action was adoption of SCR 66 as read on the floor. The roll call resulted in adoption (Ayes 27, Nos 8).

Speakers (selected)

- Senator Scott Unberg — Author of SCR 66; state senator (first on record at 1139.955 in the transcript) - Senator Nilo — Opponent; state senator (first on record at 1437.345) - Senator Wiener — Supporter; state senator (first on record at 1519.035) - Senator Becker — Supporter; state senator (first on record at 1712.45) - Senator Jones — Opponent; state senator (first on record at 1828.515) - Senator Strickland — Opponent; state senator (first on record at 2037.845) - Senator Blake Spear — Supporter; state senator (first on record at 2166.7852) - Senator Ashby — Supporter; state senator (first on record at 2280.2349) - Senator Padilla — Supporter; state senator (first on record at 2424.135) - Senator Perez — Supporter; state senator (first on record at 2665.585)

Authorities referenced

- Law Day / presidential proclamation (referenced in debate as established by President Dwight D. Eisenhower) — referenced_by: ["SCR 66 debate"]

Clarifying details

- Resolution: SCR 66 — designates Law Day and affirms the rule of law; text was debated on the Senate floor before adoption. - Vote result: Ayes 27, Nos 8 (reported on the record)

Proper names mentioned (examples cited in floor debate)

- Perkins Coie (organization) - Jenner & Block (organization) - WilmerHale (organization) - Morrison & Foerster (organization) - Chief Justice John Roberts (person)

Meeting context

- Engagement level: High — SCR 66 drew an extended, multihour debate with more than a dozen senators taking the floor. - History: Members placed the resolution in the third‑reading calendar and debated amendments and the underlying language on the floor.

Searchable tags

["SCR66","Law Day","rule of law","judicial independence","California State Senate","floor debate"]

Ending

The resolution passed on a recorded roll call after extended debate. Supporters described the measure as a defense of judicial independence and the legal profession; opponents described the resolution as an inappropriate partisan statement that should be revised to address perceived inconsistencies in how the rule of law is defended across administrations.