Document Type

Article

Publication Date

Summer 2026

Abstract

It should be a shared premise across the ideological spectrum that Supreme Court justices hold too much power. That is not to suggest any consensus that the Supreme Court as an institution holds too much power — some think it does, while others don’t. It is to say, rather, that we should all be able to agree that each individual justice on the Supreme Court exercises significantly more power than any one person in a democracy should.

The case for this proposition is overwhelming. There are just nine Supreme Court justices at any given time. These nine people intervene decisively in a startling array of momentous political issues, from abortion to gun safety, climate policy to health care, immigration law to criminal justice, university admissions to elections, and much else. They alone choose which cases they will decide. They face no voters and serve for as long as they please. Justices may be removed against their will only through death or impeachment and conviction, and no justice has ever been removed through the latter avenue. Because of the enormous power justices wield, a norm has developed of nominating justices who are in their forties or early fifties, allowing them to serve potentially for thirty or forty years. And by timing their retirements strategically to align with the terms of presidents with whom they are ideologically sympathetic, justices have the ability to extend their influence significantly into the future. The only other public officials in the world with this degree of power and influence over the affairs of their country for this much time are dictators and monarchs.

Disciplines

Constitutional Law | Law | Supreme Court of the United States

Download

Share

COinS