Senate Republicans Chuck Grassley of Iowa and Ted Cruz of Texas introduced a constitutional amendment in February 2025 to mandate a total of nine Supreme Court justices on the bench. The proposed "Keep Nine Amendment" seeks to prevent future expansions of the Court by requiring ratification from the states after passing through Congress.
Legislative Intent and Goals
The amendment, introduced by Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Grassley and Judiciary Committee member Cruz, aims to insulate the Supreme Court from political pressure. Senator Cruz, who also serves as Chairman of the Subcommittee on Federal Courts, Oversight, Agency Action, and Federal Rights, argued that the legislation is a necessary check against Democratic efforts to use the Court to advance policy goals that cannot be achieved through the electoral process.
Senator Grassley stated that the proposed amendment is designed to ensure the Court remains a co-equal branch of government and protects its legitimacy. He characterized Democratic proposals to expand the bench as a "radical court packing scheme" that would destroy historic precedent and erase the judicial branch's independence.
Republican Support for the Amendment
The move comes amid long-standing tensions regarding the composition of the nation's highest court. Senator Mike Lee of Utah, a cosponsor of the amendment, stated that the legislation is vital to protecting the integrity of the Supreme Court. Lee argued that Democrats will not stop attempting to rig judicial decisions through court packing and that this amendment would permanently remove that option from the political landscape.
Other Republican cosponsors include Senators John Cornyn of Texas, Mike Crapo of Idaho, Shelley Moore Capito of West Virginia, Marsha Blackburn of Tennessee, Bill Cassidy of Louisiana, Todd Young of Indiana, Cindy Hyde-Smith of Mississippi, Jim Banks of Indiana, Jim Risch of Idaho, Thom Tillis of North Carolina, Bill Hagerty of Tennessee, Katie Britt of Alabama, Tim Sheehy of Montana, Roger Wicker of Mississippi, and Deb Fischer of Nebraska.
Arguments for Historical Precedent
Supporters of the amendment emphasized the historical stability of the Court's size. Senator Shelley Moore Capito noted that a nine-justice court has served the country for more than 150 years. She warned that increasing the number of justices for partisan reasons would threaten the checks and balances of the constitutional order and cause respect for the Supreme Court to plummet.
Senator Bill Cassidy also referenced the historical precedent, noting that nine justices has been the standard for 156 years. Senator Marsha Blackburn further criticized the efforts of the political left, claiming the desire to pack the Court is an attempt to implement a "socialist agenda."
Democratic Perspectives on Reform
The push for a constitutional amendment follows years of rhetoric from Democratic leaders regarding judicial reform. Former Vice President Kamala Harris has previously stated that the nation is on the "verge of a crisis of confidence in the Supreme Court" and that all options are on the table to address the challenge.
Other Democratic figures have expressed support for expanding the Court. Senator Ed Markey has suggested that if Republican leadership violates precedents regarding Supreme Court vacancies during election years, Democrats should abolish the filibuster and expand the Court. Senator Mazie Hirono has also referred to court-packing as "long-overdue court reform," while Senator Elizabeth Warren has indicated openness to the idea, noting that the number of justices is not constitutionally constricted.
Definitions and Political Disputes
The debate over court-packing has been marked by intense disagreement over the definition of the term. Senator Cruz has argued that Democrats have falsely used the term "court-packing" to describe the process of nominating a justice to fill a vacancy. He noted that true court-packing involves expanding the total number of justices on the bench.
Cruz also pointed to past comments from Joe Biden, noting that in 1983, Biden referred to court-packing as a "bone-headed idea," whereas Cruz claims it has now become a primary agenda item for Democrats.
Path to Ratification
If the amendment is approved by both chambers of Congress, it must then undergo ratification by a majority of the states to become part of the U.S. Constitution. This legislative effort by Cruz and Grassley represents a direct attempt to codify the size of the Supreme Court to prevent future shifts in the court's ideological balance.
