Senator Joe Manchin proposes a constitutional amendment for 18-year Supreme Court justice terms, sparking debate on judicial reform.
At a Glance
- Manchin and Welch propose 18-year terms for future Supreme Court justices
- Current justices would not be affected and can serve for life
- Amendment aims to create regular vacancies and maintain nine justices
- Proposal seeks to restore public confidence in the Supreme Court
- 68% of Americans support term limits for justices, according to a recent poll
Manchin’s Constitutional Amendment Proposal
Senators Joe Manchin and Peter Welch have introduced a constitutional amendment proposing term limits for Supreme Court justices. The amendment suggests 18-year terms for future justices, with new terms starting every two years. This proposal comes as Manchin, an independent from West Virginia, prepares to leave office, having not sought reelection in 2024.
The proposed amendment would not affect current justices, who would retain their lifetime appointments. It aims to create regular vacancies on the court while maintaining the current number of nine justices, as established by the Judiciary Act of 1869. Manchin and Welch argue that this change would help reduce political gamesmanship and restore public trust in the judicial system.
“I’m proud to introduce this legislation with Senator Welch that would establish 18-year term limits for Justices of the United States Supreme Court. 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,” said Senator Manchin.
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
Rationale Behind the Proposal
Manchin contends that the current lifetime appointment system is broken and fuels polarizing confirmation battles. The proposal is presented as a bipartisan effort to reduce political gamesmanship and restore trust in the judicial system. It addresses concerns that have arisen from recent contentious confirmation processes, such as that of Justice Brett Kavanaugh and the controversy surrounding the nomination of Merrick Garland during President Obama’s tenure.
Public confidence in the Supreme Court has been declining, with a poll indicating that 7 out of 10 Americans believe justices are influenced by ideology. The Annenberg Public Policy Center reported a 22-point drop in confidence in the court from 2019 to 2022, with 68% supporting term limits for justices.
Potential Impact and Challenges
The proposed amendment faces significant hurdles, as constitutional amendments require approval from two-thirds of both chambers of Congress and ratification by three-fourths of state legislatures. However, if passed, it could significantly alter the dynamics of the Supreme Court and the judicial nomination process.
“Taking action to restore public trust in our nation’s most powerful Court is as urgent as it is necessary. Setting term limits for Supreme Court Justices will cut down on political gamesmanship, and is commonsense reform supported by a majority of Americans,” said Welch.
Proponents argue that regular turnover would ensure the court’s composition better reflects evolving societal norms and could potentially reduce the intense politicization of the nomination process. Critics, however, may argue that term limits could undermine the court’s independence and lead to justices making decisions with an eye toward their post-court careers.
