Justice Alito Confirms Intent to Remain on Supreme Court, Citing Lifetime Tenure

Why it matters locally: Alabama, along with eleven other states, has filed an emergency request with the Supreme Court to implement the Trump administration's executive order on mail-in voting. A ruling on this matter, which could impact election procedures in the state, is expected soon.

---

Washington D.C. – Supreme Court Justice Samuel Alito announced he will remain on the court for the upcoming term. In an interview with The Wall Street Journal, Alito addressed speculation regarding his potential retirement, stating, "Obviously I’m here for another term." He acknowledged the public discussion surrounding his position, describing it as a "reminder of mortality," but affirmed the principle of lifetime tenure for judges. Alito also commented on criticisms of his judicial decisions, asserting he votes based on his assessment of each case, independent of political outcomes. Separately, the Supreme Court is currently reviewing an emergency request from the Trump administration concerning President Donald Trump’s executive order on mail-in voting. The administration filed its application on July 27, seeking to implement the order. Twelve states, led by Alabama, filed a similar request. A group of 23 states and the District of Columbia challenging the order have urged the court to deny these applications. The matter is fully briefed, and a ruling could come at any time. In related judicial news, a panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit ruled 2-1 on Friday to uphold a block on construction of a planned ballroom at the White House. The decision affirmed a lower court’s finding that the president requires congressional approval for such projects. The court paused its ruling for 14 days to allow for an appeal. President Trump also signed an executive order on Thursday aimed at narrowing birthright citizenship, approximately one month after the Supreme Court blocked an earlier order on the matter. Conservative groups have indicated intentions to continue advocating against the Supreme Court’s birthright citizenship ruling. Mike Davis, founder of the Article III Project, stated at a late-July event that the goal is to make birthright citizenship a long-term issue comparable to *Roe v. Wade*. Further legal developments involve the scope of presidential power. A June 29 Supreme Court decision in *Trump v. Slaughter* expanded presidential authority by removing protection against termination for members of the Federal Trade Commission. This ruling allows the president to dismiss members of certain independent boards and commissions without cause. Courts will continue to examine the limits of presidential power as disputes over the termination of "inferior officers" in the executive branch, such as immigration judges, proceed. These cases could affect civil service protections established in the late 1970s. Regarding court staff, a demographic analysis of Supreme Court law clerks for October Term 2026 revealed that 25 of the 38 clerks are men and 13 are women. This group represents the least gender-balanced cohort since October Term 2022. The clerks originate from 14 different law schools, with Harvard contributing 11 and the University of Chicago contributing five. Legislative proposals concerning the Supreme Court continue to be discussed in Congress. In July, Justices Amy Coney Barrett and Elena Kagan testified before House and Senate Appropriations subcommittees to request an increased security budget for the court. During these hearings, members of Congress raised other topics, including ethics codes, the emergency docket, and the use of scientific evidence in judicial proceedings. Four Democratic senators reintroduced the Supreme Court Biennial Appointments and Term Limits Act on July 22. The bill proposes that the president nominate a new justice within the first 120 days of the first and third years of their term. It specifies that the nine most recently appointed justices would handle appellate jurisdiction cases. The bill text does not explicitly mention 18-year terms. Article III of the Constitution states that judges "shall hold their Offices during good Behaviour," a phrase historically interpreted as granting lifetime tenure. Advocates of term limits contend their proposals align with this clause by maintaining lifetime appointments while adjusting judicial responsibilities. Democratic Representative Jamie Raskin of Maryland introduced three separate bills in May. The SHADOW Act would require the Supreme Court to provide reasons for its emergency docket decisions, the SCOTUS Act would transfer the power to grant review of cases to a panel of 13 randomly selected appeals court judges, and the Federal Funding Protection Act would clarify that federal district courts can hear claims to overturn the termination of federal grants under specific conditions. Additionally, the Supreme Court Ethics, Recusal, and Transparency Act, introduced by Democratic lawmakers in 2025, remains under consideration. This bill mandates the court to establish a public code of conduct, adopt gift disclosure standards similar to those for Congress, and strengthen requirements for justices to recuse themselves due to conflicts of interest. Republican legislative efforts related to the Supreme Court have focused on proposing a constitutional amendment to limit the number of justices to nine. The Constitution does not specify the number of justices on the court; the number has not exceeded nine since 1866.