New Amendment Suggests Major Change in Supreme Court Judge Tenures

US Senate emblem with microphones in background.

Two U.S. senators propose a constitutional amendment to limit Supreme Court justices’ terms, sparking debate on judicial reform.

At a Glance

Senators Joe Manchin and Peter Welch introduce a joint resolution for 18-year Supreme Court justice terms
The proposal aims to address concerns over the Court’s politicization and restore public confidence
The amendment would maintain a nine-justice limit and include a grandfather clause for current justices
Public confidence in the Supreme Court is low, with only 16% of Americans expressing strong confidence
Amending the Constitution requires a two-thirds majority in Congress and ratification by three-fourths of states

Senators Propose Term Limits for Supreme Court Justices

In a move that could reshape the highest court in the land, Senators Joe Manchin (D-W.Va.) and Peter Welch (D-Vt.) have introduced a joint resolution advocating for a constitutional amendment to establish term limits for Supreme Court justices. The proposal suggests nonrenewable, 18-year terms for new justices, with a new term beginning every two years. This initiative aims to address growing concerns over the Court’s politicization and restore public confidence in its impartiality.

The proposed amendment maintains the current nine-justice limit and includes a grandfather clause for sitting justices. This approach seeks to ensure a gradual transition and regular appointment process, potentially reducing partisan tensions surrounding Supreme Court nominations. The resolution comes at a time when public confidence in the Supreme Court is at a historic low, with only 16% of Americans expressing strong confidence in the institution.

I’m proud to introduce legislation with @SenPeterWelch that would establish 18-year term limits for Justices of the United States Supreme Court. MORE: https://t.co/fSzh606l4a

— Senator Joe Manchin (@Sen_JoeManchin) December 9, 2024

Bipartisan Support and Public Opinion

The proposal has garnered broad bipartisan support, reflecting a growing consensus on the need for judicial reform. Notably, 49 out of 50 states already have term limits for their highest courts, suggesting a precedent for such measures at the state level. Public opinion also appears to align with the senators’ proposal, with a survey indicating that 68% of Americans support term limits for justices, and 71% support mandatory retirement ages.

Senator Manchin emphasized, “The current lifetime appointment structure is broken and fuels polarizing confirmation battles and political posturing that has eroded public confidence in the highest court in our land. Our amendment maintains that there shall never be more than nine Justices and would gradually create regular vacancies on the Court, allowing the President to appoint a new Justice every two years with the advice and consent of the United States Senate. I encourage my colleagues on both sides of the aisle to join our legislation to help restore faith in our judicial system.”

Challenges and Alternative Proposals

While the proposal has gained traction, amending the Constitution remains a formidable challenge. The process requires a two-thirds majority in Congress and ratification by three-fourths of the states, setting a high bar for implementation. Some lawmakers, like Senator Elizabeth Warren, believe that term limits and court expansion could be achieved through legislative action without a constitutional amendment. Alternative proposals, such as the Judiciary Act, suggest expanding the court to thirteen justices.

The debate over court reform has intensified due to controversial rulings and uneven appointments across presidential administrations. The current system has resulted in disparities, with former President Trump appointing three justices in one term, while former President Obama appointed two in two terms, and President Biden has appointed one so far. As discussions continue, the Manchin-Welch proposal represents a significant step towards addressing these concerns and potentially reshaping the future of the Supreme Court.