Congress proposes forcing sitting Supreme Court justices into retirement
H.J.Res. 174 — Proposing an amendment to the Constitution of the United States to provide for term limits for justices of the Supreme Court. · Filed by Johnny Olszewski (D-MD) · 6 cosponsors · Introduced May 4, 2026 · Referred to committee
Your members of Congress
Enter a ZIP to see where your representative and both senators stood on this bill.
Looked up on this device — your ZIP is never stored on our servers.
What it does
This joint resolution proposes a constitutional amendment limiting Supreme Court justices to 18-year terms. If ratified, sitting justices with 18+ years of service would be immediately removed from office. The amendment would fundamentally restructure the Court from lifetime tenure to fixed terms, potentially forcing the retirement or removal of multiple current justices.
Why we flagged it
This is a straightforward constitutional amendment proposal with no hidden mechanisms or riders. It plainly states its single purpose: to amend the Constitution to impose 18-year term limits on Supreme Court justices and retroactively apply those limits to sitting justices.
What the text implies
- Retroactive application to sitting justices may trigger immediate vacancies and constitutional crisis if multiple justices exceed 18 years of service, forcing rapid succession of appointments.
- An 18-year term with staggered appointments (roughly two per presidential term) would align Court composition more closely with electoral cycles, potentially increasing politicization of judicial selection.
The full analysis lists 4 implications of this text.
Who it affects
The amendment presents a genuine constitutional trade-off. Supporters argue term limits increase democratic accountability and prevent judicial entrenchment; opponents argue they undermine judicial independence and expose judges to political pressure.