Many believe today’s Supreme Court is not only highly political, it’s also polarized along partisan lines, much like our other political institutions. In 2017, the Senate Leader changed the “60-vote rule” needed to confirm a Supreme Court justice, to a mere majority of 51 votes. Advocates claim that without the need to make any concessions to the opposing party, the Senate now confirms the most extreme, ideological nominees that can be found by the party in power. Many say this has resulted in a Supreme Court whose values do not reflect those of the majority of Americans. Term limits for justices has been suggested as one way to rebalance the current shortcomings of the Court.

The Constitution does not expressly grant “life tenure” to Supreme Court justices. Rather, this idea has been derived from the actual language that says judges and justices “shall hold their offices during good behavior.” Advocates suggest a single 18-year term at the high court would restore limits to this most powerful, least accountable branch of American government. Senior justices could then sit on lower federal courts, as many retired justices have done, or fill in if there’s an unexpected vacancy in our highest court. Such an option would not contradict our Constitution.

Pending Legislation: H.R.4423 - Supreme Court Term Limits and Regular Appointments Act of 2023
Sponsor: Rep. Ro Khanna (CA)
Status: House Committee on the Judiciary
Chair: Rep. Jim Jordan (OH)