House Rejects GOP 9-Justice Supreme Court Amendment Despite Majority Support
Updated
Updated · Fox News · Sep 2
House Rejects GOP 9-Justice Supreme Court Amendment Despite Majority Support
3 articles · Updated · Fox News · Sep 2
Summary
A Republican-backed constitutional amendment fixing the Supreme Court at nine justices failed in the House on Wednesday because it fell short of the two-thirds threshold required under a fast-track procedure.
Speaker Mike Johnson used suspension of the rules to bypass normal hurdles, raising the bar from a simple majority even though most lawmakers voted for the measure.
Republicans, led by Rep. Andy Biggs, said the amendment would block any future Democratic effort to expand the court, a risk Donald Trump has warned about for months.
Democrats countered that Congress has changed the court's size before and argued locking in nine would entrench the current conservative majority; some progressives have pushed for 13 justices, one for each federal circuit.
Why has the Supreme Court size remained at nine since 1869 despite the Constitution allowing Congress to change it?
Could permanently fixing the number of justices in the Constitution actually harm the adaptability of the federal judiciary over time?
If capping the Court's size fails, what alternative structural reforms could ensure judicial independence without requiring a constitutional amendment?