PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Referred to the House Committee on the Judiciary.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in House · Feb 6, 2025
Supreme Court Term Limits and Regular Appointments Act of 2025
This bill establishes staggered, 18-year terms for Supreme Court Justices and limits the Senate's advice and consent authority in relation to the appointment of Justices.
Specifically, the bill requires the President to appoint a Supreme Court Justice every two years. If the appointment of a Justice would result in more than nine Justices on the Court, then the nine most junior Justices shall make up the panel of Justices exercising judicial power in cases and controversies. Further, any Justice who has served a total of 18 years is deemed retired from regular service and may continue to serve as a Senior Justice. Senior Justices may continue to perform judicial duties assigned to them by the Chief Justice. However, no Justice appointed before the date of enactment shall be counted towards such panel, nor shall they be required to retire from regular active service.
Showing the opening paragraphs of the official summary.
In the event of a vacancy on the Court, the Chief Justice must assign the Justice most recently designated as a Senior Justice to serve on the Court until the appointment of a new Justice.
Additionally, the Senate's advice and consent authority is waived if the Senate does not act within 120 days of a Justice's nomination.
People & committees
Rep. Khanna, Ro [D-CA-17] · D–CA
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Referred to the House Committee on the Judiciary.
Introduced in House
Introduced in House
Primary sources
Text links open the official source. We currently store references to these documents.
Source last updated: Nov 6, 2026. Consult Congress.gov for the current record.
AI Conversation Starters
Choose a perspective, copy a prompt, and paste it into your preferred AI. Each prompt includes the bill version and available official source links, and asks for counterarguments as well as supporting evidence.
Analyze H.R.1074 as objectively as possible. Explain its main provisions, who would be affected, possible benefits and harms, implementation, exceptions, and uncertainties. Present the strongest arguments for and against it, and identify evidence needed to assess its public impact.
Examine H.R.1074 through a progressive lens, focusing on fairness, access, economic inequality, and effects on vulnerable communities. Explain potential benefits, costs, and unintended consequences. Consider the strongest counterarguments and distinguish stated goals from demonstrated outcomes.
Examine H.R.1074 through a conservative lens, focusing on fiscal responsibility, institutional stability, federalism, and the scope of government. Explain potential benefits, costs, and unintended consequences. Consider the strongest counterarguments and any provisions that challenge this perspective.
Examine H.R.1074 through a civil-liberties and limited-government lens. Consider individual rights, privacy, voluntary choice, accountability, and government power. Explain tradeoffs, possible safeguards, and the strongest counterarguments without assuming the proposal is beneficial or harmful.