# Plain Language Summary: Supreme Court Size Amendment

This bill proposes to lock the number of Supreme Court justices at nine through a constitutional amendment. Right now, Congress has the power to change how many justices sit on the Supreme Court—it's been nine since 1869, but there's nothing in the Constitution that requires it to stay that way. This proposal would change that by making nine justices a permanent constitutional requirement that couldn't be changed without going through the amendment process again.

To become law, this amendment would need to be approved by two-thirds of both the House and Senate, then ratified by three-fourths of all state legislatures within seven years. It's a high bar intentionally—constitutional amendments are meant to be difficult to pass because they're supposed to represent fundamental, lasting changes that most of the country agrees on.

The practical effect is straightforward: if this passes, no future Congress could expand the Supreme Court to nine justices plus additional ones, and no Congress could shrink it below nine either. This matters because the Supreme Court makes decisions that affect everyone—from voting rights to healthcare to criminal justice. The size of the court can influence what kinds of cases get heard and how decisions get made. Those who support this amendment argue it protects the court from being manipulated for political gain by either party. Those who oppose it argue that Congress should retain the flexibility to adjust the court's size if circumstances change, and that locking it in place through a constitutional amendment removes that option permanently.

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.

Rep. Biggs, Andy [R-AZ-5]

 <p>This joint resolution proposes an amendment to the Constitution requiring the Supreme Court to be composed of nine Justices consisting of one Chief Justice and eight Associate Justices.</p>