Panel of judges in Supreme Court - Odd number?

  • Thread starter Thread starter akerkarprashant
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Judge
AI Thread Summary
Supreme Court justices are typically an odd number—3, 5, or 7—to prevent tie votes in decisions. However, if a judge recuses themselves, it can lead to a tie, as seen in past cases. The U.S. Constitution does not specify the number of justices or their term lengths, allowing for potential changes through legislation. The concept of lifetime appointments is based on the "good behavior" clause, but this too is not constitutionally mandated. The discussion also humorously references a fictional method for resolving ties, highlighting the lighthearted nature of some comments.
akerkarprashant
Messages
74
Reaction score
10
In Supreme Court, the panel of judges will always be a odd number? 3,5,7 so the decision in terms of votes count verdict will always outcome a result and not a tie?
 

Attachments

  • images (3).jpeg
    images (3).jpeg
    6.2 KB · Views: 125
Physics news on Phys.org
akerkarprashant said:
3,5,7 so the decision in terms of votes count verdict will always outcome a result and not a tie?
That appears to be the intent. Of course, the situation may be complicated of one judge recuses themself based on a conflict; for example, in a potential 5:4 split, one of the 5 recuses themself.
 
  • Like
Likes akerkarprashant
akerkarprashant said:
will always outcome a result and not a tie?
Did you do any research on this? Any at all?

There was a tie as recently as 202-, and several in 2015.
 
  • Like
Likes akerkarprashant
akerkarprashant said:
In Supreme Court, the panel of judges will always be a odd number? 3,5,7 so the decision in terms of votes count verdict will always outcome a result and not a tie?

There's nothing in the US constitution which stipulates the number of Supreme Court Justices. Nor is there anything which stipulates their length of stay.

Yes, it seems that the number of justices has been an odd number to avert ties, but it doesn't have to be that way. Legislation can change that.

The lifetime appointments are in place, presumably to avoid partisan judges/justices. But that can also be changed without requiring a constitutional amendment, since the constitution doesn't stipulate anything about that.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Likes akerkarprashant
collinsmark said:
Nor is there anything which stipulates their length of stay.

People have argued that the "good behavior" clause is the basis of lifetie appointments.

In my previous message, I meant 2016.
 
  • Like
Likes akerkarprashant
It started out as an even number: 6. At a later time it was 10.
You could have looked that up in less than two minutes.

If there is a tie the Constitution stipulates that the Chief Justice and one of the members who voted opposite have either a pistol duel or a naked wrestling match to settle the issue.
 
  • Haha
  • Like
Likes akerkarprashant, Vanadium 50 and BillTre
JT Smith said:
naked wrestling match
My money is on William Howard Taft.
 
Last edited:
  • Haha
  • Like
Likes akerkarprashant and BillTre
Can I just say how much I absolutely LOVE Sonia Sotomayor!
SoniaSotomayorAutograph.jpg
 
  • Like
  • Love
Likes collinsmark, akerkarprashant and BillTre

Similar threads

Replies
21
Views
3K
Replies
70
Views
13K
Replies
100
Views
15K
Replies
46
Views
5K
Replies
177
Views
19K
Replies
57
Views
7K
Back
Top