Here’s what AOC had to say.
Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-N.Y.) is drawing fresh criticism after describing parts of the U.S. Senate as having roots in racism while refusing to disavow a Democratic Socialists of America (DSA) proposal that calls for eliminating the upper chamber of Congress.
Speaking outside the U.S. Capitol with Newsmax’s Kilmeny Duchardt, Ocasio-Cortez repeatedly sidestepped questions about whether she opposed the DSA’s proposal. Her response drew swift criticism from lawmakers in both parties and reignited a broader discussion about the Senate’s role in the nation’s constitutional system.
AOC Declines to Reject DSA Proposal
When asked whether she disagreed with the DSA’s platform calling for the elimination of the Senate, Ocasio-Cortez declined to take a clear position.
“I’m not running for any larger office presently,” she said when pressed on the issue.
The New York Democrat added that abolishing the Senate would ultimately be “a constitutional question,” noting that such a dramatic change would require a lengthy constitutional amendment process involving the states.
Although she stopped short of endorsing the proposal, she also did not explicitly reject it.
Ocasio-Cortez Criticizes the Senate’s History
Instead of directly addressing the DSA proposal, Ocasio-Cortez shifted her focus to criticism of the Senate itself, arguing that certain aspects of the institution have troubling historical origins.
She said that while many people have concerns about the Senate, she specifically opposes the filibuster and believes certain parts of the institution have historical ties to Jim Crow-era policies.
She also acknowledged that eliminating the Senate would require a constitutional convention and approval by two-thirds of the states, making such a proposal extremely difficult to achieve.
The interview aired Friday on Newsmax’s National Report, where Duchardt reported that Ocasio-Cortez repeatedly declined opportunities to distance herself from one of the DSA’s most controversial policy positions.
Lawmakers Respond
The remarks drew swift reactions from members of both political parties.
Sen. Peter Welch (D-Vt.) refused the idea that eliminating the Senate would solve the nation’s political problems.
Welch said he does not believe the nation’s challenges can be fixed simply by eliminating the U.S. Senate.
Republican Sen. Eric Schmitt (R-Mo.) offered a far more pointed response, criticizing the argument as historically inaccurate.
“I think that a lot of people who are spouting off on this have no concept of American history,” Schmitt said. “They have no concept of what it means to protect individual liberty. And it’s a pretty scary turn, I think, for the Democrats.”
2028 Presidential Speculation
The controversy comes as reports continue to circulate that the Democratic Socialists of America has discussed the possibility of endorsing Ocasio-Cortez should she seek the Democratic presidential nomination in 2028.
Asked whether she was interested in securing the group’s backing, Ocasio-Cortez dismissed the question as premature. She said she was not pursuing endorsements for any office beyond the position she currently holds and joked that she might someday run for dog catcher.
Her comments did little to quiet speculation about her political future, though she maintained she is focused on her current role in Congress.
Why the Senate Matters
The U.S. Senate was established in 1789 under Article I of the Constitution as one of the two chambers of Congress. The Founding Fathers designed it to provide equal representation for every state regardless of population and to serve as a check on the House of Representatives.
Supporters say the Senate serves as an important safeguard against abrupt policy changes, ensures smaller states have an equal voice in Congress, and reinforces the Constitution’s system of checks and balances. The chamber also carries several exclusive constitutional responsibilities, including confirming federal judges and executive nominees, approving international treaties, and conducting impeachment trials.
Critics, however, argue that the Senate gives disproportionate influence to less-populated states and has slowed passage of legislation on numerous issues.
Debate Over the Filibuster Continues
Ocasio-Cortez has long opposed the Senate filibuster, a procedural rule that generally requires 60 votes to advance most legislation. Progressive Democrats have argued the rule allows a Senate minority to block measures supported by a majority.
Republicans and many constitutional conservatives counter that the filibuster encourages compromise, protects minority viewpoints, and prevents one-party control from dramatically reshaping federal law whenever political power changes hands.
The debate over the filibuster has become one of the most significant institutional battles in Washington in recent years.
Conservatives Warn Against Constitutional Changes
Many conservatives argue that calls to abolish the Senate or weaken long-standing constitutional safeguards reflect a broader push to reshape America’s governing system after repeated legislative setbacks.
Supporters of the Senate contend that the nation’s founders intentionally created two legislative chambers to balance competing interests, limit concentrated political power, and protect the rights of both large and small states.
Whether Ocasio-Cortez intended to endorse the DSA’s proposal or simply criticize the Senate’s history, her remarks have once again placed the future of America’s constitutional institutions at the center of the political conversation. As debate continues over the Senate, the filibuster, and the balance of power in Washington, the controversy is likely to remain a flashpoint heading into the 2028 election cycle.