The Justices of the U.S. Supreme Court

The U.S. Supreme Court consists of nine justices, who serve lifetime appointments. They are nominated by the President and confirmed by the Senate. Among them is one Chief Justice and eight Associate Justices. The Court renders decisions based on a majority vote of five justices; consequently, political parties strive to increase the number of justices sympathetic to their respective ideologies—making each nomination, retirement, or death of a justice a source of political turbulence in the United States. Currently, the nine sitting justices of the U.S. Supreme Court include three women. All current justices graduated from elite universities such as Harvard, Yale, Stanford, and Princeton, and possess extensive experience working in government agencies, related public institutions, or civic organizations; several have also served as university professors—demonstrating rich academic and practical backgrounds. 01 John G. Roberts, Jr., Chief Justice of the United States Chief Justice Roberts Born in New York in 1955, he is now 63 years old and has served as a justice for 13 years. Nominated by President George W. Bush to serve as Chief Justice of the United States, he assumed office on September 29, 2005. President George W. Bush nominated him as Chief Justice of the United States, and he took his seat September 29, 2005. He has authored numerous landmark opinions and is widely regarded as holding a conservative judicial philosophy. Chief Justice Roberts received his entire education at private institutions: he earned an A.B. from Harvard College in 1976 and a J.D. from Harvard Law School in 1979. After graduation, he clerked for Judge Henry J. Friendly of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit (1979–1980) and subsequently for then-Associate Justice William H. Rehnquist of the U.S. Supreme Court during the 1980 Term. He also served as Deputy Solicitor General in the U.S. Department of Justice under President Reagan and later practiced law in Washington, D.C., before being appointed in 2003 to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit.

The U.S. Federal Supreme Court: Powerful, Yet Increasingly Unpopular

Yet the judicial process of the Supreme Court is actually far simpler than the legislative process of Congress. First, a case must be appealed from a lower court to the U.S. Supreme Court and accepted for review. Then, a decision is rendered by a majority vote of five out of the nine justices. Crucially, the outcome is determined entirely internally by those nine justices—neither the President nor Congress holds any authority to intervene. Finally, the majority drafts and issues its opinion, which carries the force of law: it may overturn executive or legislative actions and interpret the Constitution expansively or restrictively. For instance, in the 1973 case Roe v. Wade, although ‘abortion’ is never mentioned in the Constitution, the Court interpreted the right to abortion as falling within the constitutional ‘right to privacy,’ holding that personal privacy encompasses decisions about abortion—and thus, banning abortion would violate a pregnant person’s privacy rights. This ruling secured the legality of abortion nationwide, since state laws cannot contravene the federal Constitution. Under the U.S. Constitution, Supreme Court justices are nominated by the President and confirmed by the Senate via majority vote—ensuring the Court remains inevitably entangled in partisan politics and ideological conflict. Yet even setting aside partisan strife, the U.S. Supreme Court suffers from two clear problems—or flaws—fundamentally explaining why proposals to reform the Court recur so frequently. First, insufficient transparency. In the 2022 Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization case, a draft majority opinion overturning Roe v. Wade was leaked to the media over a month before its official release—sparking national outrage. Chief Justice Roberts condemned the leak and launched an internal investigation, but ultimately failed to identify the source. Notably, the public showed little disapproval of the leak; instead, it ignited an intense nationwide debate over abortion rights. By contrast, congressional legislation unfolds under public and media scrutiny, accompanied by vigorous debate and repeated revisions—rendering it comparatively transparent. Yet rulings by the Supreme Court—especially those concerning fundamental constitutional liberties and carrying profound social and political consequences—are conducted entirely behind closed doors. In this sense, the process is inherently unfair. Second, justices face virtually no oversight. In practice, Supreme Court justices operate without meaningful legal constraints or binding codes of conduct. For example, Justices Alito and Thomas have been accused by Democrats of accepting lavish hospitality and substantial gifts from Republican donors without proper disclosure—and of refusing to recuse themselves despite their spouses having publicly expressed positions on pending cases. Moreover, citing the need to safeguard the Court’s ‘independence’ and justices’ personal security, the justices remain shielded from media and public accountability. It is therefore unsurprising that public trust in the U.S. Supreme Court has steadily declined—from 66% in the late 1980s to just 36% in 2024. Last month, President Biden proposed reforms to the Court—including limiting justices’ terms to 18 years and establishing a formal code of judicial conduct. However, these proposals are widely viewed as politically crude—essentially serving as campaign tactics designed to keep the Court’s controversies in the spotlight and mobilize Democratic voters angered by the 2022 reversal of Roe v. Wade.

US Supreme Court Justice Alito Recuses from Climate Case Involving Oil Companies

16 hours ago

US Supreme Court Justice Samuel Alito recused himself from a climate liability case involving oil majors Exxon Mobil and Suncor Energy due to stock holdings. The ruling could determine the fate of numerous state and local lawsuits against fossil fuel companies.

reuters

2026-09-28

US Supreme Court Justice Alito Recuses from Climate Case Involving Oil Companies

US Supreme Court Justice Alito Recuses from Climate Case Involving Oil Companies

FAQ