Supreme Court justices serve for life

State supreme court justices almost never serve for life

Unlike US Supreme Court justices, 99% of state supreme court justices face term limits, reselection, or mandatory retirement ages. Since 1970, they've averaged 13 years on the bench—half the tenure of their federal counterparts.

Watch scholars debate Supreme Court term limits

In a debate from 2017, legal scholars from across the political spectrum spar over whether justices should serve fixed terms. The discussion highlights bipartisan concerns about judicial independence, accountability, and the risks of lifetime tenure.

Most Americans support age limits for justices, elected officials

As members of Congress and Supreme Court justices continue to serve at an average age far older than in the past, polls show a majority of Americans favor setting an age limit for these roles. Roughly 79% support caps for federal elected officials, and 74% favor such limits for Supreme Court justices. A constitutional amendment would be required.

See who appointed the Supreme Court's 116 throughout its history.

Meet the 9 justices currently serving on the US Supreme Court.

Explore biographies of every justice who has served on the Supreme Court

This archive traces the whole history of the Supreme Court of the United States through detailed biographies of every justice, outlining their backgrounds, appointments, and the legal eras and decisions they helped shape.

A court designed to be the least powerful branch of government became one of the most influential institutions in America.

See how a US Supreme Court justice is nominated and confirmed

A president nominates a Supreme Court justice, the Senate Judiciary Committee conducts public hearings and background vetting, and the full Senate debates and votes on confirmation—a process explained step by step in this video.

Watch 2 Supreme Court justices debate how the Constitution should be interpreted

In a 2009 conversation, former Justices Antonin Scalia and Stephen G. Breyer lay out competing approaches to constitutional interpretation: Scalia's textualist, strict constructionism versus Breyer's evolutionary view of the Constitution in practice.

The 2025-26 Supreme Court docket is poised to reshape presidential power

As the Supreme Court begins a new term, several major cases could define the scope of presidential authority. The court may rule on President Trump's efforts to control state National Guard units, fire independent officials, impose tariffs, and cut congressionally mandated federal spending.

John Marshall inherited a marginal and largely inactive Supreme Court

By 1801, the court had little institutional authority or public standing. Its first three chief justices served only 11 years combined, and in its first decade, the court decided only 63 cases—none of which struck down a federal or state law.

The Supreme Court limited federal judges' power to issue nationwide injunctions in 2025

In a 2025 decision arising from litigation over a presidential order on birthright citizenship, the Supreme Court held that individual federal judges may not nationwide block executive policies—curbing the use of sweeping injunctions and reshaping how constitutional challenges proceed through the courts.

The powers of the judicial branch have expanded since the nation's founding

Initially, the Supreme Court was seen as the weakest branch, lacking "the power of the sword or the purse," as Alexander Hamilton noted in *Federalist No. 78*. This podcast explores the political conflicts and pivotal decisions that transformed the court into the powerful constitutional authority it is today.

Why Congress doesn't have term limits

Eighty-seven percent of Americans want term limits for Congress. So why don't they exist? The Founders debated this in 1787 and chose not to include them, believing elections would be enough. In the 1990s, 23 states tried to make it happen—until the Supreme Court struck them all down in a 5-4 decision.

Term limits for Congress face a steep constitutional hurdle

Although polls show overwhelming support for congressional term limits, this would require a constitutional amendment. Since 1995, the Supreme Court has barred states from imposing their own limits, leaving only the difficult Article V amendment process as a path forward.

16 states impose term limits on their legislatures

As of 2025, 16 states limit how long lawmakers can serve, usually capping tenure at eight to 12 years in one chamber or across both chambers combined. Most of these limits stem from a 1990s reform wave aimed at curbing career politicians.

Court-packing is the attempt to change the number of Supreme Court justices to shift the balance

Because the Constitution leaves the court's size to Congress, presidents have periodically sought to expand or reshape it. This explainer examines past efforts—including Franklin D. Roosevelt's failed 1937 plan—and why court-packing remains so controversial.

The Supreme Court has greatly expanded executive power in recent years

In Trump v. United States, the court ruled that a former president enjoys absolute immunity for "official acts" in his constitutional core powers. In Trump v. CASA, Inc., the court limited federal courts' ability to block executive enforcement through nationwide injunctions—decisions that shifted power toward the executive branch.

The Supreme Court term runs from October to June

The Supreme Court of the United States begins each term on the first Monday in October, alternating two-week sittings and recesses, hearing arguments mainly on Mondays through Wednesdays, and deciding which of thousands of petitions will receive full review.

John Marshall presided over more than 1,100 Supreme Court decisions

During his 34-year tenure, the Marshall court issued 1,129 decisions, including 1,042 unanimous rulings. Marshall authored more than 500 majority opinions—over half of the court's total output during his tenure as chief justice.

The Founders were split on term limits during the Constitutional Convention

At the Constitutional Convention, delegates debated whether to mandate term limits. In letters, Jefferson warned that indefinite service could entrench power, while Madison argued that regular elections—not forced turnover—were the best safeguard against abuse.

The Supreme Court blocked states from setting term limits for Congress

In US Term Limits v. Thornton (1995), the Supreme Court struck down state laws that tried to impose term limits on their congressional delegations. The court ruled such restrictions unconstitutional unless added through a federal amendment.

Explore the most impactful Supreme Court cases in US history

Browse by constitutional topic to explore key rulings, their historical impact, and the legal principles they established. Each case includes a summary of the decision, along with notable excerpts from majority and dissenting opinions.

Early state constitutions often limited governors to short terms

In the years after independence, many states drafted constitutions to limit executive power. Most governors served only one- or two-year terms, sometimes with breaks before reelection.

The central bank was designed to operate free of short-term political influence to prevent the Fed from making disastrous policy decisions

Although the Fed Chair and the six other Governors of the Board are appointed by the US president and approved by Congress, the Fed is not funded by congressional appropriation, and its board members are appointed to lengthy 14-year terms.

Senate confirmations for presidential nominees have become increasingly partisan and delayed

The Senate now takes longer than ever to confirm presidential nominees, with partisan gridlock stalling even routine appointments. The average confirmation time has nearly tripled since the 1980s, leaving key government roles vacant for months.

The Senate must approve top presidential appointments

Under Article II of the Constitution, the United States Senate provides "advice and consent" on presidential nominees. This resource displays the outcome of every Cabinet nomination since Jimmy Carter's presidency and every Supreme Court nomination in US history.

37 states today limit how long governors can serve

Most states cap governors to two consecutive four-year terms, though rules vary—Virginia is unique in allowing only one term at a time. These limits reflect a long tradition of restricting executive power at the state level.

In recent decades, Supreme Court nominations have grown increasingly contentious and partisan

This video examines the historical shift from bipartisan, civil confirmation hearings to the deeply divisive process seen today. It focuses on the 1987 nomination of Robert Bork, the most recent nominee to be rejected, as an important moment in this transformation.

In 45 states, governors are allowed to appoint a senator in the event of a vacancy.

Why the structure of the National Science Board contributes to the NSF's nonpartisan design

After Congressional debates over the merits of having an independent agency versus one accountable to the president and the public, it was decided that the director and Board members would be presidentially appointed but serve staggered six-year terms. By replacing one-third of the Board's members every two years, each could outlast any single administration.

Supporters say term limits prevent entrenched power

Advocates argue that term limits stop politicians from becoming career insiders, make government more accountable, and ensure fresh ideas circulate. They believe regular turnover keeps officials closer to the public and less beholden to special interests.

Congressional turnover was far more common in the early republic

Many early lawmakers served just one or two terms before stepping aside, reflecting the ideal of the citizen legislator and the discomforts of living in Washington, DC. Longer careers in Congress became typical only later in the 19th century.

John Marshall strengthened the Supreme Court and national authority

As chief justice, John Marshall established the principle of judicial review. He reinforced federal supremacy in key cases, defining the Supreme Court as a powerful arbiter between states and the national government under the US federal system.

The Supreme Court has never definitively settled federal war powers

Despite more than two centuries of conflict over war powers, the Supreme Court has consistently avoided defining the precise boundary between congressional and executive authority, leaving that boundary to be contested by the political branches.

Hear about the individuals who have reshaped the Constitution throughout American history

This multi-episode podcast series from The Washington Post explores how debates, court decisions, and influential individuals have shaped the Constitution as Americans pushed the nation to live up to its founding ideals.

Hear a narrative account of Justice John Marshall's 'simple' upbringing and his major impact on the American republic.

Photography and video are prohibited in the Supreme Court—but artists are not

Because cameras are banned inside the Supreme Court of the United States, courtroom artists document proceedings through sketches. This exhibition features works from 1964 to today, capturing the human drama of landmark cases and shaping how Americans visualize justice.

In the US, any court can rule on constitutionality—unlike in most other countries

In the American system, known as diffuse judicial review, federal and state courts at every level may assess whether laws comply with the Constitution, and their decisions are ultimately reviewable by the Supreme Court. Many other democracies, by contrast, reserve constitutional review to specialized constitutional courts.

Take a deep dive into the constitutional foundations of judicial review

In this episode of "This Constitution," the hosts take a law-focused approach to judicial review—examining its roots in Article III and the supremacy clause, its development through Marbury v. Madison, and the ongoing constitutional debates about whether the court's power strengthens or strains American democracy.

Read SCOTUSblog for daily, nonpartisan coverage of the US Supreme Court

Founded in 2002, SCOTUSblog offers expert analysis from lawyers, professors, and journalists. The blog provides transparent, unbiased explanations of significant cases, real-time updates on decisions, and insights into court nominations and trends.

Experts believe a Supreme Court ruling on birthright citizenship is likely in 2026

In September 2025, the Trump administration asked the Supreme Court to review lower court rulings striking down its executive order on birthright citizenship. If the court takes the case, a decision is expected by mid-2026.

Courts have blocked the Trump administration's 2025 executive order limiting birthright citizenship

In June 2025, the Supreme Court declined to rule on the constitutionality of the order. Since then, two federal appellate courts have found the order unconstitutional, halting its enforcement nationwide.

The separation of powers is a pivotal component of the US Constitution

Explore how the three branches interact through the Supreme Court case of US v. Alvarez. The Supreme Court first struck down a law, then Congress and the president later revised it—illustrating how judicial review can reshape legislation and executive action.

A single 1803 Supreme Court case, Marbury v. Madison, gave courts the power to strike down acts of Congress.

John Marshall advanced federal supremacy and judicial review

Marshall's jurisprudence emphasized that the Constitution is the supreme law of the land, enforceable by an independent judiciary. Through his court's decisions, he affirmed judicial review, broad implied powers for Congress, and federal authority to override conflicting state laws.

The 22nd Amendment set a 2-term limit on the presidency

Ratified in 1951, the amendment states that no person may be elected president more than twice. It also specifies that a vice president who assumes office midterm may serve up to 10 years in total.

Marshall used deft political maneuvering to increase the court's power in Marbury v. Madison

This podcast explores how Chief Justice John Marshall avoided a direct clash with President Jefferson by denying William Marbury his commission—while simultaneously declaring that courts can strike down unconstitutional laws—cementing judicial review, and expanding the Supreme Court's authority.

Critics argue that term limits weaken democracy and legislative effectiveness

Opponents contend that term limits deprive voters of choice, remove experienced lawmakers, and shift power to lobbyists and unelected staff. They believe frequent turnover reduces institutional knowledge and undermines the effectiveness of legislatures.

Explore the nearly 1,000 laws, regulations, and provisions the court has held unconstitutional since Marbury v. Madison

Over more than two centuries, the Supreme Court has struck down nearly 1,000 federal, state, and local measures—exercising its authority to invalidate laws that conflict with the Constitution and shaping civil rights, the separation of powers, and the scope of government authority.