There's been a flurry of bipartisan legislative activity surrounding Ukraine ever since Trump softened his rhetoric towards Ukraine. This is going to be a long politics post.
There's the legislation
@Relic mentioned, introduced by Sen Wicker, who chairs of the Senate Armed Services Committee, and Sen Risch, who chairs the Senate Foreign Relations Committee. They're both staunchly pro-Ukrainian, influential, and experienced. Having Committee Chairs support legislation practically guarantees it will pass through committee. It doesn't necessarily have to go to a floor vote from there, but can instead be attached to must-pass legislation, such as the annual defense budget. Having Committee chairs support the legislation makes all of this easier.
The other thing worth noting is that the bill appears to enable the US to send weaponry from existing US stocks. In other words, we're not talking about waiting until weaponry is manufactured by defense companies, but instead providing weaponry that the US military already has, while the money paid into the fund is used to place orders for replacing the weaponry sent to Ukraine. This is basically the equivalent of Presidential Drawdown Authority (PDA), and is the most useful kind of aid the US has provided.
Today Senators Shaheen and Murkowski introduced the Supporting Ukraine Act of 2025, which is essentially a Supplemental. It appropriates about $40 billion in various forms of Ukraine aid, while allowing assistance to count as contributions to the Ukraine Reconstruction Investment Fund (which Trump's "mineral deal" created) and requires the President to take steps to seize frozen Russian assets in the US. This has a very low probability of passing, however if it gets a lot of support it would move the negotiating position of the pro-Ukraine side of Congress, acting as a messaging bill.
Finally there is Nunn's PEACE act, which has the highest likelihood of passing of the three new bills. The bill sanctions foreign financial institutions that do business with sanctioned Russian entities (including potentially Gazprom, Rosneft, and Lukoil) but also use the US financial system. The strategy of this legislation is to be maximally focused, targeted and realistic to pass. For this it was written in a way that it would only have to pass a single committee and with clauses that satisfy Republicans.
(legislation is introduced > gets cosponsors to indicate level of support > passes through all relevant committees > floor vote > signed by president)
Despite the bill being introduced at the beginning of this month, it's now the first Ukraine/Russia legislation of the current Congress to pass the Committee stage, and it did so by 53-1 in the Financial Services Committee. What's also interesting is that in the committee stage it had a part added to it that 90 days after passage of the bill, the Treasury Secretary shall execute the REPO Act (confiscation of frozen Russian assets in the US). It shifts this responsibility from the President to the Treasury Secretary.
, Britain 
, Canada 
, The Netherlands 
, Denmark 
, Norway 
, Australia 
, etc.
