Twenty-five hours and five minutes. Senator Cory Booker spoke on the Senate floor — without any breaks, including for the restroom — for 25 hours and 5 minutes. He began at 7 p.m. on Monday and went until 8:05 p.m. on Tuesday. This is now the longest recorded speech in the Senate’s history, breaking former Senator Strom Thurmond’s 24 hour and 18 minute speech in 1957 where he filibustered large portions of civil rights legislation. What Senator Booker did is not a mere publicity stunt, but an act of protest. He called Americans to action, specifically to “get in some good trouble,” quoting the late civil rights activist and former Congressman John Lewis, and to make an impact on the trajectory of American politics. There is no time limit, only some rules pertaining to a senator’s physical stamina on the floor: senators may not sit down, lean on anything besides the podium, eat food from outside the floor, or use the bathroom at any point. The American public, regardless of partisanship, should care about what Senator Booker did this week as a historic moment in legislative protest while also overshadowing Thurmond’s hateful use of a floor speech.

For some background, what Senator Booker did was similar to, but not quite, a filibuster. Filibustering, unique to the Senate, is a tactic that senators use to delay votes on bills that they or their party disagree with during their debate period. The speech must be continuous, only allowing interruptions in the form of questions from colleagues. So, while Senator Booker’s speech did not occur during the debate period of a bill, it was a filibuster in all but technicality.

Throughout the speech, as night turned into day and senators made their way to the floor, Senator Booker aimed to call attention to the unprecedented actions of the Trump administration, calling for his colleagues in the Senate and Americans more broadly to realize what is happening is “not normal” and “should not be treated as such in the United States Senate.” He warned very explicitly of a looming constitutional crisis and took the time to read letters from his constituents about their concerns. He called for Americans to meet these times with kindness and, ending his speech where he started, “getting in good trouble.” This was a stark contrast to Thurmond’s speech, where he used this same power to advocate for the restriction of rights. Senator Booker reframed that power with this speech. This is an incredible moment in American politics for instilling hope for the future and it should be treated as such.

Both parties across both chambers filtered in for Senator Booker’s marathon. “I yield for a question while retaining the floor,” Senator Booker would read as his colleagues, in solidarity, posed questions, which typically ended up being long speeches in their own right. At one point, as Senate President pro tempore Chuck Grassley made his way across the floor, Senator Booker embraced him in a hug, most likely to have a moment to rest his feet. Throughout this entire time, Senator Booker did not eat and barely drank anything; he fasted since Friday and dehydrated himself since Sunday to avoid needing any restroom breaks. He put his body on the line to criticize the Trump administration, remind the public of the success of the civil rights movement despite its immense challenges, and call for optimism.

I feel inspired by Senator Booker’s actions. He has taken the 68-year record from one of the staunchest pro-segregation, anti-civil rights party leaders and made it his own in a time of uncertainty to spread the need for kindness, generosity, and compassion toward one another. He has made this his own not because of Thurmond, but in spite of him. Senator Booker has overshadowed the legislator who opposed the very idea of Senator Booker — a Black member of Congress — even voting.

This is a rare instance of federal legislators using their platform for positivity and calling for kindness. Politics has become so extremely polarized on both sides and is perpetuated by affective polarization, the politics of destruction that create an “us versus them” mentality and drive divisions between people based merely on animosity. There has been am uptick in deadlines dominated by negativity, partisan-motivated violence, with both political parties attack one another using derogatory terms. While Senator Booker’s speech does target President Trump’s partisan policies, his overall message of meeting these times differently is an extremely important one, not just for his party but for the American people.

So, before you chalk Senator Booker’s speech up to a publicity stunt, consider this moment in history and the trajectory of his party. I am aware of the recent frustration with the Democratic Party’s approach to resisting — and in instances, capitulating to — President Trump’s policies, but so is Senator Booker. He did what he could to speak up about his and his party’s frustrations. I understand it is hard to remain optimistic when so many people across America and the world are being negatively affected by President Trump’s policies, but this is why Senator Booker’s speech is so important. He used a typically negatively associated action not to debate legislation, but rather to speak directly to his colleagues and the American public and, hopefully, revitalize the Democratic Party.

The sheer length of time that elapsed brought publicity to his speech that it otherwise would not have had, had it been, say, two hours in length. I wouldn’t have written this opinion if not. His speech highlighted the negativity in America, but he drew it to a close with optimism. He engaged in that “good trouble,” he protested using his senatorial powers and platform, he reframed history, and he asked Americans to move forward with positivity in a world full of negativity. He provided a small light of leadership in a time when everything feels shuttered in the dark.