Mr Booker Goes to Washington

On April 1, 2025, Democratic Senator Cory Booker of New Jersey made history by delivering the longest floor speech ever in the United States Senate. Clocking in at 25 hours and five minutes, his marathon address surpassed the previous record set by Strom Thurmond in 1957. But Booker’s speech did more than break a record, it rewrote its legacy. Unlike Thurmond, who infamously used his time to protest civil rights legislation, Booker stood to defend them. As an African American senator, he called out the irony of that legacy during his speech.

“Strom Thurmond’s record always irked me. The longest speech on our great Senate floor was someone who was trying to stop people like me from being in the Senate.”

Senator Cory Booker, during his speech to the Senate.

Booker’s speech aligned with the historical American tradition of the art of the filibuster, defined as  “a prolonged speech that obstructs progress in a legislative assembly while not technically contravening the required procedures”. Although not technically a filibuster since there was no specific legislation he was attempting to block, Booker’s speech was still a monumental act of political resistance, calling out the anticonstitutional practices of the Trump administration. 

Such as the New York Times columnist Ezra Klein exposed in his opinion piece ‘Don’t Believe Him’: The Trump administration often uses a strategy called “flooding the zone”; pushing out so many actions, overwhelming the media and the people and posting so many short, arrogant, social media posts that it became hard for people to keep up, let alone think things through. Everything comes so fast, it scatters attention and makes it tough to respond properly. Booker’s 25 hours speech felt different, it slowed things down. It asked people to really listen, take a pause, and actually think, the exact opposite of flooding the zone. 

Booker stood with his convictions. With over 1,000 pages of material prepared by his aides, he spent time reading letters from over 200 Americans expressing their opposition to policies enacted by the Trump administration. This decision can also be read as a carefully orchestrated performance of resistance. By using their voices, he also aimed to remind the nation of the Constitution’s opening words: “We, the people”. can also be read as a carefully orchestrated performance of resistance.

“My voice is inadequate. My efforts today are inadequate to stop what they are trying to do, but we the people are powerful, and we are strong.”

Senator Cory Booker, during his speech to the Senate.

A Call for Morals

Throughout the speech, Booker kept his focus squarely on the Trump administration. He accused it of undermining Congress’s constitutionally mandated budgetary authority by making sweeping spending cuts, reducing federal staff, and canceling grants without congressional approval. He also called out Elon Musk’s efforts to lay off thousands of Social Security employees and dismantle the DEI programs.  In doing so, he painted a portrait of what he called “an ongoing crisis in American democracy.”

“This is not right or left. Don’t let them say this is partisanship. It is not. It is not left or right. It is right or wrong. America, this is a moral moment. Does the Constitution live in your heart?”

Senator Cory Booker, during his speech to the Senate.

He spoke with fervor, but also with clarity and purpose. Unlike many historic filibusters, often derailed by rambling, talking about the weather or personal tangents, Booker’s speech remained tightly focused. Every story, every quote, and every point was designed to reinforce the same core argument: that Trump’s actions represented a threat to the constitutional order and the moral fabric of the country.

Symbol Over Strategy?

Booker’s performance naturally raises a question: do such speeches still matter? Can they make a difference beyond the spectacle?

There is precedent. In 1986, Senator Alfonse D’Amato of New York filibustered for nearly 24 hours to protest a budget amendment that would have killed funding for a jet trainer plane manufactured in his state. His actions secured a concession that prolonged the project’s life. But most filibusters, and long speeches more broadly, rarely influence legislative outcomes. Instead, they serve more as powerful symbols. Still, symbolism has power. Booker fasted for days in preparation. He stood, without rest, evoking the spirit of Frank Capra’s classic 1939 film Mr. Smith Goes to Washington. The image of a lone senator speaking against power, driven by principle, was as cinematic as it was constitutional. And even in his most serious moments, Booker found space for lightness.

“I want to go a little bit past this and then I'm going to deal with some of the biological urgencies I'm feeling.”

Senator Cory Booker, during his speech to the Senate.

In the end, his 25-hour stand may not change policy, but it does challenge narratives. It reclaims space. It sends a message: that resistance can take many forms, and that in a time of political fatigue, standing for something, literally, can still matter.

If anything, Booker’s 25 hour speech showed just how much there is to criticize about Trump’s policies. You could talk for over a day, not even scratch the surface, and still have more to say. That, in itself, should be deeply alarming. When a single speech isn’t enough to cover the full extent of the damage, it says a lot about how serious the situation in the U.S. has become.