WeVote
Log In

Bill

Bill

SCR 9

Urging Congress to propose and submit to the states for ratification the "Keep Nine" amendment to the U.S. Constitution.

89th Legislature (2025) Introduced by Brandon Creighton and 3 co-sponsors

Texas urges Congress to propose a constitutional amendment permanently limiting the Supreme Court to nine justices, responding to court-expansion debates.

Signed by the Governor
#keepnineamendment(nu1b2) #resolutions--legislativepolicy(i0685) #resolutions--memorializingcongress(i0675) #resolutions--unitedstatesconstitution(i0670)
0
WeVote Research Nonpartisan
Bill Summary · SCR 9

Legislative bill overview

SCR 9 is a concurrent resolution passed by the Texas legislature that formally urges the U.S. Congress to propose a constitutional amendment (called the "Keep Nine" amendment) that would fix the number of Supreme Court justices at nine. The resolution has been signed by the Texas Governor and represents Texas's official position on this matter.

Why is this important

The Supreme Court's size has been a subject of intense political debate, particularly after discussions about expanding the Court to 13 justices. A constitutional amendment to lock in nine justices would permanently prevent either party from changing the Court's composition through expansion—a power that Congress technically possesses. This reflects broader concerns about institutional stability and partisan court-packing.

Potential points of contention

  • Constitutional amendment difficulty: Proposing a constitutional amendment requires two-thirds majorities in both chambers of Congress and ratification by 38 states—an extremely high bar that makes passage unlikely regardless of the amendment's merits
  • Partisan motivation: The timing and sponsorship suggest this is driven by Republican concerns about Democratic court-expansion proposals, raising questions about whether this protects institutional integrity or simply locks in current partisan advantages
  • Limits on democratic flexibility: Permanently fixing the Court's size removes future generations' ability to adjust the institution if circumstances change, even if there were broad consensus to do so

Compiled from official sources — confirm details with the bill’s official record.

Sign in to ask a question.