The Economist explains

Why America’s Supreme Court is not living up to its name

By S.M. | NEW YORK

AMERICA’S Supreme Court has not always had an odd number of justices. For its first 18 years, the high court’s bench was set at just six seats and it saw a brief stint with ten members during the civil war. But since 1869, Congress has determined that the number of justices should stand at a tie-defying nine. Partisan rancour over the Supreme Court has coloured confirmation hearings in recent decades, but only one nominee since the Eisenhower administration has waited longer than 100 days for a Senate vote, and since 1789 an average of just 25 days have elapsed from the date of the nomination to Senate confirmation or rejection (or, in about a dozen instances, the administration’s decision to withdraw the name). The current wait for a new judge is unprecedented in recent times, and bad for both the court and America—why?

More from The Economist explains

The vocabulary of disinformation

From AI-generated news to verification

What are the rules governing protests on American campuses?

They vary, and are hard to enforce


Who is jamming airliners’ GPS in the Baltic?

Russia seems to be the culprit, but it may be inadvertent