POLISCOPE
Back to bills
Part ofCourts →

The civic record

Read. Follow. Verify.
Recently Updated

Pennsylvania Senate urges Congress to establish 18-year term limits for U.S. Supreme Court justices

Original title: A Resolution urging the Congress of the United States to establish terms of 18 years of regular active service for justices of the Supreme Court of the United States.

Last action · October 27, 2026: Referred to JUDICIARY, Oct. 27, 2026Sponsors: Maria Collett and 2 others

Introduced
Committee
Floor Vote
Passed
Law

Track this bill to get notified when it advances a stage. One tap to stop, anytime.

Public stanceCommunity reactions are separate from the official record and reporting.

What This Bill Would Do

The Pennsylvania Senate urges the United States Congress to enact legislation setting 18-year regular active service terms for U.S. Supreme Court justices, with staggered vacancies every two years and provisions. The resolution also asks Pennsylvania's congressional delegation to support and advance such term-limit measures.

Why it matters

The measure addresses the structure and accountability of the nation's highest federal court, seeking to alter how long individual justices wield judicial authority and how presidential appointments are scheduled, affecting federal judicial governance without imposing binding state-level mandates.

Who It Would Affect

Groups the bill's text would affect if enacted, as described in the record. Being affected is not a position for or against it.

Directly affected

Justices of the Supreme Court of the United States

Their tenure would be limited to 18 years of regular active service with subsequent senior status under the proposed federal legislation urged by the resolution.

Directly affected

Residents of Pennsylvania

They are affected by the legal interpretations and rulings issued by the U.S. Supreme Court on matters such as voting rights, campaign finance, and constitutional law.

Directly affected

Members of Congress from Pennsylvania

They are urged by the state Senate to support, cosponsor, and advance federal term-limit legislation for Supreme Court justices.

Key Facts

You don't have to trust us. Each fact below is taken straight from the official document - click any one to see the exact passage, highlighted in the original.

Frequently Asked Questions

What does Senate Resolution 400 ask Congress to do?
It urges Congress to enact legislation establishing 18-year terms of regular active service for Supreme Court justices, with staggered two-year vacancies and for justices upon completion of their active terms.
Does this resolution change the tenure of Pennsylvania state judges?
No. Pennsylvania state supreme court justices already serve ten-year terms subject to voter retention and a mandatory retirement age of 75; this resolution addresses the federal U.S. Supreme Court.

What else do you want to know?

News Coverage

Coverage by outlet perspective1 article
Unrated 1
Blind spot - only covered by center outlets

Bias ratings based on AllSides / Media Bias/Fact Check

Where This Stands

Currently in committee. The next step in the legislative lifecycle is Floor Vote.

Procedural history

1 action
  1. Oct 27, 2026SenateCommittee
    Referred to JUDICIARY, Oct. 27, 2026

Version history

Only one version on file - nothing to compare yet. As later stages (committee substitute, engrossed, enrolled) are captured, the redline appears here.

View official text →

Lobbying Activity

No state lobbying filings in our records match this bill. Federal lobbying reports (LDA) cover Congress, so they are not listed on state bills.

Full breakdown

Who this bill affects and the strongest case for and against it, written only from the bill’s own text.

Sponsors

Connected Entities

Congress of the United States, Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission, Rucho v. Common Cause and 9 more
OrganizationCongress of the United States“The legislative body urged to enact Supreme Court term limits.”Map →
otherCitizens United v. Federal Election Commission“A 2010 Supreme Court decision referenced in the preamble regarding campaign fina”Map →
otherRucho v. Common Cause“A 2019 Supreme Court decision referenced in the preamble regarding redistricting”Map →
otherCity of Mobile v. Bolden“A 1980 Supreme Court decision preceding the 1982 amendments to the Voting Rights”Map →
otherTrump v. United States“A 2024 Supreme Court decision referenced in the preamble regarding presidential ”Map →
OrganizationSupreme Court of Pennsylvania“The highest state court in Pennsylvania, which operates under ten-year retention”Map →
otherLouisiana v. Callais“A 2026 Supreme Court decision holding a voting rights district unconstitutional.”Map →
otherNew York State Rifle & Pistol Association, Inc. v. Bruen“A 2022 Supreme Court decision referenced in the preamble regarding firearms regu”Map →
otherVoting Rights Act of 1965“Federal statute amended in 1982, referenced in relation to section 2 standards.”Map →
OrganizationSupreme Court of the United States“The highest federal court whose tenure rules are the subject of the resolution.”Map →
otherDobbs v. Jackson Women's Health Organization“A 2022 Supreme Court decision referenced in the preamble regarding reproductive ”Map →
otherShelby County v. Holder“A 2013 Supreme Court decision referenced in the preamble regarding voting rights”Map →

Sources

Open source document

www.palegis.us

Analysis Score

0–100
  • Significance35
    How much this matters to a regular citizen
  • Controversy75
    Intensity of disagreement among stakeholders
  • Entertainment15
    Compellingness for a non-policy-wonk reader
  • Buzz40
    Current news / social attention level

Publisher tools

Share or embed this record

POLISCOPE publisher tools

Share or embed this record