Lifetime Active Bench Tenure for Supreme Court Justices

← Back to Category — Judicial Reform

Term Limits for Supreme Court Justices

AKA “Protect Constitutional Balance with Fixed Judicial Terms”


Which agency/agencies promulgated the regulation? *
Congress (via statute or constitutional amendment) No federal agency—judicial tenure is governed by Article III of the Constitution and interpreted through statute
Which title, parts, and/or sections of the Code of Federal Regulations (C.F.R.) should be rescinded? *
Not applicable — The Supreme Court’s tenure is not governed by regulation. This proposal targets the statutory interpretation of Article III and proposes a legislative framework to restructure service terms: 28 U.S.C. §1 — Currently governs the number of justices but does not specify term limits Proposed addition of new statute setting active term limits while preserving Article III lifetime judicial appointment
What is your name?
—OPTIONAL--
Is your proposed rescission a notice of proposed rulemaking, final rule, direct final rule, interim final rule, or interpretive rule? *
Notice of Proposed Rulemaking
What is the name of the regulation being rescinded, if applicable? *
Lifetime Active Bench Tenure for Supreme Court Justices
Please provide a short summary of the justifications for the rescission. *
The absence of term limits for Supreme Court Justices undermines public trust and creates outsized, decades-long influence from unelected individuals. This proposal would introduce fixed 18-year terms for active Supreme Court service, after which justices would rotate into senior or appellate roles—retaining lifetime appointment while restoring balance, generational fairness, and democratic legitimacy.
Please insert the address of the agency. [NPRM, DFR, and IFR only]
Not applicable – Congress sets judicial structure
Please insert the contact information for the agency. *
Clerk of the U.S. House of Representatives U.S. Capitol Washington, D.C. 20515 Clerk of the U.S. Senate U.S. Capitol Washington, D.C. 20510
What is the background for the regulation being rescinded? *
Article III of the Constitution provides for judicial service “during good Behaviour,” which has long been interpreted as a lifetime appointment. However, nothing prohibits Congress from defining term-limited active service for the Supreme Court bench and rotating justices to alternate Article III roles afterward. This approach balances constitutional fidelity with modern democratic needs—ensuring every president nominates justices on a regular schedule while avoiding power concentration.
Explain the reasons for the rescission. *
Lifetime bench power no longer reflects a functioning democracy. Justices today often serve 30 to 40 years, creating confirmation crises, generational imbalance, and long-term ideological entrenchment. This proposal maintains constitutional lifetime appointment while structuring service on the high court around 18-year staggered terms, enhancing stability and legitimacy.
Describe the text of the relevant C.F.R. provisions as it will exist after the rescission. *
Not applicable – the proposed statutory change would read: “Each Justice of the Supreme Court shall serve a term of 18 years of active service. Upon expiration, the Justice shall assume senior status and may be designated to serve on a lower federal court. One Supreme Court term shall expire every two years.”
Please insert the name of the current agency head. *
Not applicable
Please insert the title of the agency head. *
Not applicable

← Back to Category — Judicial Reform