Bill Explainer
Home  /  Recent Bills  /  A joint resolution proposing an amendment to the Constitution of the United States to require that the Supreme Court of the United States be composed of nine justices.
SENATE · SJRES 16 119 CONGRESS

A joint resolution proposing an amendment to the Constitution of the United States to require that the Supreme Court of the United States be composed of nine justices.

INTRODUCED
February 06, 2025
POLICY AREA
Law
STATUS
Read twice and referred to the Committee on the Judiciary.
SOURCE
Congress.gov ↗
This is a joint resolution, not an ordinary bill

A joint resolution goes through the same process as a bill and carries the same legal force once signed. One exception: a joint resolution proposing a constitutional amendment is not presented to the President — it needs a two-thirds vote in both chambers and then ratification by three-quarters of the states. Bill vs. resolution, explained →

Summary

S.J. Res. 16 is a joint resolution proposing an amendment to the United States Constitution to require that the Supreme Court of the United States be composed of exactly nine justices. Currently, the Constitution does not specify the number of justices; Congress has set the size of the Court by statute, most recently fixing it at nine justices since 1869. This joint resolution seeks to entrench that number in the Constitution itself, making it more difficult to alter the size of the Supreme Court through ordinary legislative action. As a constitutional amendment, the resolution does not go to the President for signature but instead requires a two-thirds vote in both the Senate and the House of Representatives, followed by ratification by three-fourths of the state legislatures (or state ratifying conventions) within seven years of its submission. The resolution was introduced in the Senate on February 6, 2025, by Senator Ted Cruz and co-sponsored by a group of Republican senators. It was referred to the Senate Judiciary Committee. The proposal comes amidst ongoing debates about the independence and structure of the federal judiciary, including past discussions about 'court-packing'—the idea of increasing the number of justices to achieve a desired ideological balance. Proponents argue that fixing the number of justices at nine in the Constitution would protect the Court from politicization and ensure stability, while opponents contend that it unnecessarily rigidifies an institution that may need flexibility to adapt to changing circumstances and that it addresses a non-existent problem, as the nine-justice Court has been stable for over 150 years. The amendment would have significant implications for the balance of power among the branches of government and the long-term composition of the highest court in the land.

Ask This Bill

Ask a specific question about this bill’s actual text — answers cite the section they come from.

Read the full analysis on Congress.gov →

Where Each Party Stands

Democrats

MIGHT SUPPORT
+Promotes stability and predictability in the structure of the Supreme Court, which could enhance public confidence in the institution.
+Prevents potential future abuses by either party to alter the Court's size for short-term political gain, supporting long-term institutional integrity.
+Codifies a historical precedent that has been in place since the aftermath of the Civil War, reinforcing constitutional continuity.
+May reduce partisan battles over Court composition by removing the size of the Court as a political bargaining chip.
+Aligns with democratic principles of checks and balances by making it more difficult for one branch to unilaterally reshape another.
MIGHT OPPOSE
−Is a solution in search of a problem, as there is no active proposal to change the number of justices and the current size has been uncontroversial for generations.
−Could be interpreted as an attempt to entrench the current conservative majority on the Court, raising concerns about judicial legitimacy and fairness.
−Diverts legislative energy and political capital from urgent social and economic issues facing the country.
−May restrict future Congresses from responding to legitimate institutional needs, such as managing an increased workload if the Court's docket grows significantly.
−The high threshold for amendment (two-thirds of Congress and three-fourths of states) makes this proposal unlikely to succeed, potentially creating false expectations.

Republicans

MIGHT SUPPORT
+Ensures the independence and stability of the Supreme Court by preventing future Congresses from easily altering its size for partisan advantage.
+Protects the judiciary from 'court-packing' schemes that could undermine public confidence in the Court as an impartial institution.
+Codifies a long-standing tradition (nine justices since 1869) into the Constitution, reinforcing legal continuity and predictability.
+Limits the potential for executive and legislative overreach into judicial affairs, maintaining the separation of powers.
+Addresses concerns among conservatives about liberal efforts to expand the Court to counteract a conservative-leaning bench.
MIGHT OPPOSE
−May be seen as an unnecessary amendment since the nine-justice Court has been stable for over 150 years and there is no imminent threat to change it.
−Could be perceived as a partisan move to lock in the current ideological balance of the Court, which currently has a conservative majority.
−Diverts attention and resources from more pressing national issues such as the economy, immigration, or national security.
−May create unnecessary rigidity in the Constitution, making it harder to adapt the Court's size to future legitimate needs (e.g., increased caseload).
−The amendment process is lengthy and uncertain, requiring supermajorities in Congress and ratification by 38 states, which may not be achievable.

History

Feb 06, 2025
Read twice and referred to the Committee on the Judiciary.
Feb 06, 2025
Introduced in Senate
SPONSOR
Sen. Cruz, Ted [R-TX]
RELATED BILLS
HJRES 28 — Proposing an amendment to the Constitution of the United States to require that the Supreme Court of the United States be composed of nine justices. HJRES 1 — Proposing an amendment to the Constitution of the United States to require that the Supreme Court of the United States be composed of nine justices.
SUBJECTS
Constitution and constitutional amendments Judges Supreme Court