New Proposal Seeks to Change Supreme Court Justice Term Limits

US Senate emblem with microphones in background.

Senators Joe Manchin and Peter Welch propose a constitutional amendment to impose term limits on Supreme Court justices, challenging the longstanding tradition of lifetime appointments.

At a Glance

Senators Manchin and Welch introduce a joint resolution for 18-year term limits on Supreme Court Justices
The proposal aims to address concerns over the Court’s politicization and restore public confidence
The amendment maintains a nine-Justice limit and includes a grandfather clause for current Justices
Public support for Supreme Court term limits is high, with 68% of Americans in favor

Senators Call for Supreme Court Reform

In a bold move to reshape the highest court in the land, Senators Joe Manchin (D-W.Va.) and Peter Welch (D-Vt.) have introduced a joint resolution proposing a constitutional amendment to establish term limits for Supreme Court Justices. The resolution suggests nonrenewable, 18-year terms for new Justices, with a new term beginning every two years.

The proposed amendment aims to address growing concerns over the Court’s politicization and restore public confidence in its impartiality. It maintains the current nine-Justice limit and includes a grandfather clause for current Justices, ensuring a smooth transition without disrupting the existing court composition.

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

Public Support and Bipartisan Backing

The proposal comes at a time when public confidence in the Supreme Court is at a low point. Only 16% of Americans express strong confidence in the institution, highlighting the need for reform. However, the amendment has broad bipartisan support, with 49 of 50 states already having term limits for their highest courts.

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.”

A recent survey found that 68% of Americans support term limits for justices, and 71% support mandatory retirement ages. This widespread support suggests a growing consensus on the need for judicial reform to ensure a fair and impartial legal authority.

Challenges and Alternative Proposals

While the proposed amendment has garnered support, it faces significant hurdles. Amending the Constitution requires a two-thirds majority in Congress and ratification by three-fourths of the states, making it a challenging process. Some lawmakers, like Senator Elizabeth Warren, believe 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, with some presidents appointing multiple justices in a single term while others have fewer opportunities.

Looking Ahead

As the proposal moves forward, it will likely face intense scrutiny and debate. However, with strong public support and bipartisan backing, the push for Supreme Court term limits represents a significant moment in the ongoing discussion about judicial reform in the United States. Whether through constitutional amendment or legislative action, the call for change in the nation’s highest court is gaining momentum, reflecting a broader desire to ensure the judiciary remains fair, impartial, and responsive to the needs of a changing society.