The U.S. Can be fried Court adjusted size 7 times in its first 80 years, indigenous as few as 5 justices to as many as 10. Now, part argue that time come revisit the issue.

You are watching: How many justices currently serve on the supreme court?

Nine justices consist of the U.S. Supreme Court: one chief justice and also eight associate justices. However it hasn’t constantly been this way. Because that the first 80 year of that is existence, the supreme Court fluctuated in dimension from as couple of as five to as many as 10 before settling in ~ the current number in 1869. Here’s how the court finished up through nine justices—and exactly how that might change.

Constitutional foundations

When the starting Fathers collection out to establish the U.S. Supreme Court at the constitutional Convention in 1787, they retained the details vague. There room no constitutional needs for age, experience, or citizenship of can be fried Court justices, no one did the Constitution establish how many justices would comprise the court. Instead, the left countless of the details up to Congress and the president. (Here"s why filling a supreme Court vacancy in an choice year is therefore complicated.)

The first chief justice of the supreme Court, john Jay, to be joined by only five collegues throughout his tenure indigenous 1789 to 1795.
Kean Collection, Getty

Two year later, the very first Congress happen the Judiciary plot of 1789—signed into law by George Washington ~ above September 24, 1789—which created a court of six justices responsible because that ensuring the constitutionality of legislations enacted by the executive and legislative branches.

The law put the supreme Court in ~ the peak of a three-tier federal court system. In ~ the lowest level, every state would have a commonwealth judge presiding over district courts hearing minor situations related to commonwealth laws as well as maritime cases. Those districts were climate organized right into three geographical regions with circuit court that would certainly both serve as attempt courts and hear appeals.

Rather than create judgeships for each circuit court, though, conference stipulated that 2 Supreme Court justices and one regional district court judge would sit top top circuit court panels. Every of the 6 justices was assigned a geography circuit and required come preside over their circuit courts double a year, an interpretation they to be on the road for lot of the year.

Partisan squabbles

It didn’t take lengthy for the make-up the the courts to come to be a partisan issue. In 1801, Federalist party members in conference sought to broaden federal jurisdiction end the says by reorganizing the court system. Congress passed the Judiciary action of 1801, creating new judgeships to serve 6 judicial circuits and also reducing the can be fried Court from six seats to five. In for this reason doing, the law likewise eliminated the exercise of “riding circuit,” the cross-country travel which the can be fried Court justices detested.

Federalist john Adams, the second president the the joined States, signed the bill right into law top top February 13, 1801. But the signing came just after he had actually lost his reelection project to political rival thomas Jefferson, and the relocate was watched as an effort to border his successor’s appointments to the court. Jefferson quickly repealed the bill once he took office before any type of changes come the court’s composition might take effect. Because Supreme Court seats are lifetime appointments, the law had not removed any kind of justices from the court but simply stipulated the the following vacant seat would not it is in replaced.

With the repeal, the 6 Supreme Court judge resumed their circuit speak duties. This time, rather than entrust the justices to circuits, Jeffersonian republicans instructed the 6 Supreme Court justices to allot themselves to the circuits “as they shall think fit.”

Westward expansion

During the following 70 years, the link between the supreme Court justices and the circuit courts came to be the justification because that the court’s fluctuating numbers. Together the U.S. Expanded westward—creating new judicial districts and circuits along the way—it needed more Supreme Court judge to preside over these circuit courts.

In 1807, the western districts the Ohio, Kentucky, and Tennessee lay external of the created federal court mechanism as they were challenging to reach across the Appalachian Mountains. Ar courts took on lot of the circuit court’s duties instead. Yet as the volume of their situations increased, lock pleaded v Congress to be reorganized into the existing federal judicial structure.

In response, Congress created the saturday Circuit in 1807 and added a chair on the supreme Court come match. The law likewise required that the new justice reside in ~ the ar to make the travel much less arduous—a residency necessity that to be never used to another Supreme Court seat.

Thirty years later, in 1837, the join of eight brand-new western says to the union prompted Congress and President Andrew Jackson to include two an ext circuit courts—and two more justices, because that a new total that nine, that would currently be required to make even longer trips over difficult terrain come preside over the circuits.

Civil War

For the next couple of decades, the supreme Court remained fairly stable. But then the Civil battle arrived. In the early on 1860s, Abraham Lincoln—who had sharply disagreed v the can be fried Court’s judgment in Dred Scott v. Sandford that Black civilization were not and could not come to be U.S. Citizens—sought to reshape the court together his fellow Republicans in Congress. In 1863, an influx of settlers in California provided them an excuse to include a 10th circuit court and therefore a 10th supreme Court justice.

After the Civil battle ended, however, Congress once again readjusted the justice system. In 1866, after Lincoln was assassinated and his vice president Andrew Johnson, a southerly Democrat, take it over, republic in congress worried about Johnson’s potential to affect the supreme Court. At the time, Southern claims were attempting come restrict the for free of newly-freed slaves with a rashes of “Black codes” the prevented them indigenous voting and restricted the varieties of jobs they might hold. Johnson had also recently vetoed the Civil legal rights Act that 1866, i beg your pardon would have actually placed a examine on those states by providing citizenship and also full defense under the legislation to all human being born in the U.S.

Though conference Republicans were able come override Johnson’s veto, they wanted to avoid him from tipping the can be fried Court in donate of the southerly states. They passed the justice Circuits Act, to reduce the supreme Court back to 7 justices again.

But in 1869, the republicans were earlier in control when Ulysses S. Approve assumed the presidency. Lock passed a new judiciary action that collection the number of justices earlier to nine and required 6 justices existing to type a quorum on decisions. Subsequent laws reduced the load of circuit riding ~ above the justices and, in 1911, finished the practice completely, severing the direct tie between the circuit courts and the number of Supreme Court justices.

Court packing

Since then, the supreme Court has actually remained steady with nine justices offer on the bench. However that doesn’t mean politicians haven’t do the efforts to readjust things up. Many famously, in the late 1930s, Franklin D. Roosevelt thrived frustrated together the can be fried Court began striking under the brand-new Deal legislations he’d make to finish the great Depression. In February 1937, that floated the idea of enhancing the member of the supreme Court come 15 justices.

The idea was wildly unpopular—even among Roosevelt’s supporters. The was defined as “court packing,” an effort to sway the court in his donate by creating brand-new seats filled by justices he would have the ability to appoint and would hence likely be sympathetic to his policies. The Senate Judiciary Committee decried the president’s revolutionary bill as “an invasion of judicial power such as has actually never prior to been test in this country.” Ultimately, the Senate voted versus the setup 70-20.

Modern can be fried Court fights

The longstanding political legacy of reshaping the court has actually not died. In recent years, together President Donald Trump and a Republican-led Senate have actually overseen a transition in the U.S. Supreme Court’s politics balance from moderate to conservative, liberals have actually begun suggesting for a new expansion the the court.

This change started in 2016 through the death of conservative justice Antonin Scalia. In ~ the time, the court was separation ideologically and, hope to store their conservative seat and prevent a liberal tilt to the court, congressional Republicans refused to poll on president Barack Obama’s nomination that Merrick Garland to the court ~ above the grounds that it to be a presidential choice year. Scalia’s seat stayed vacant for almost a year until Trump winner the election and nominated Neil Gorsuch, who was seated in 2017. Despite this meeting technically kept the court’s ideological status quo, it laid the groundwork because that the transition that came in 2018 with the retirement of Anthony Kennedy, a middle who regularly had a swing vote on the court. Trump changed Kennedy with associate justice Brett Kavanagh, a reliable conservative, shifting the court’s ideology further to the right.

Liberals are afraid that a conservative court will reverse numerous landmark decisions, consisting of Roe v. Wade, which protects women’s ideal to abortion, and also Obergefell v. Hodges, which recognizes same-sex marriage. That could likewise dismantle the Affordable treatment Act, chairman Barack Obama’s signature health treatment legislation, as well as protections because that immigrants. In current years, the can be fried Court often separation 5-4, an interpretation that also a slight change in the court’s ideology could fundamentally shift the method it ideologies these cases.

In 2019, autonomous presidential candidate Pete Buttigieg, then mayor of southern Bend, Indiana, promoted for broadening the can be fried Court back to 15 justices through an aim to depoliticize it. According come his plan, 5 justices would certainly be affiliated v Democrats, 5 with Republicans, and five would be apolitical and chosen by your colleagues.

On September 18, the fatality of associate justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg, a liberal symbol who served on the court because that 27 years, included to Democrats’ fears, as shedding her seat would certainly make the court even more ideologically conservative. Some prominent Democrats—including Massachusetts senator Ed Markey—have declared that castle would seek to expand or reform the supreme Court if Ginsburg is changed with a trump card nominee.

Democrats have offered several proposals because that reshaping the can be fried Court. Some assistance Buttigieg’s plan to broaden the court come 15 ideologically well balanced judges, while others argue because that a much more partisan setup that would include two brand-new seats top top the court throughout the next democratic presidency to respond to the appointments the Gorsuch and Kavanaugh. Still others indicate imposing term boundaries on justices, saying that much more frequent turnover will minimize the strongness of the battles end each can be fried Court vacancy.

See more: Here'S How Much Calories To Burn 1 Pound ? I Want To Lose A Pound Of Weight

however the fate of these proposals remains unclear. Not only do they count on democracy winning majorities in Congress and retaking the White house in the vote this November, however as Roosevelt learned in the 1930s, sweeping alters to the court device require publicly support. In 2019, a Marquette University legislation School national survey found that 57 percent of americans oppose raising the variety of justices top top the court—although 72 percent are in donate of imposing ax limits. It stays to be checked out whether support will rise for these steps in the wake of Ginsburg’s death.