Term Limits For Senators: What The Constitution Says

The Constitution of the United States does not impose term limits on senators, who may serve unlimited six-year terms. However, the topic of term limits for Congress has been a subject of debate since 1789, when Representative Thomas Tucker of South Carolina proposed one-year Senate terms with a limit of five years in any six-year period. Since then, there have been numerous proposals for term limits, including by Jefferson and George Mason, who advised limits on re-election to the Senate and the Presidency. In recent years, the idea has gained popularity, with 87% of respondents in a 2023 survey supporting term limits for members of Congress. While Congress is unlikely to impose term limits on itself, states have the power to call for an amendment proposal convention specific to term limits.

Explore related products

Term Limits Now - Congress House and Senate Term Limits T-Shirt

$19.99

Congressional And Senate Term Limits: Term Limits The Only Way To Clean Up Congress

$9.99

Term Limits: the 'brilliant and timely' political thriller

$0.99 $15.99

Term Limits for Members of the U.S. Senate and House of Representatives: Hearings Before the Subcommittee on Civil and Constitutional Rights of the ... Third Congress, First and Second Session

$36.95

Term Limits and Legislative Representation

$31.08 $37

Term Limits and the Dismantling of State Legislative Professionalism

$32.63 $37

History of term limits in the US

The concept of term limits has a long history in the United States, dating back to the American Revolution and even earlier, to the democracies and republics of antiquity. The idea of "rotation in office", often associated with Thomas Jefferson, has its roots in ancient Athens, where the Council of 500 rotated its entire membership annually, and the ancient Roman Republic, which featured a system of elected magistrates serving single one-year terms.

Prior to American independence, several colonies experimented with term limits. The Fundamental Orders of Connecticut of 1639, for example, prohibited the colonial governor from serving consecutive terms, and the Pennsylvania Constitution of 1776, influenced by Benjamin Franklin, set maximum service in the Pennsylvania General Assembly at "four years in seven".

During the drafting of the US Constitution, several leading statesmen, including Richard Henry Lee, Jefferson, and George Mason, regarded the lack of mandatory limits on tenure as a dangerous defect, especially regarding the presidency and the Senate. Despite this, the Constitution, ratified in 1787-1788, did not include term limits for these offices.

In the years following independence, several US presidents sought a third term, breaking with the unofficial two-term precedent set by George Washington in 1796. However, it was Franklin D. Roosevelt's four consecutive terms during the 1930s and 1940s that ultimately led to the formalisation of the two-term limit for presidents. In 1951, the Twenty-Second Amendment was ratified, limiting presidents to two terms.

In recent decades, there have been efforts to impose term limits on members of Congress and the Supreme Court. In the 1990s, 22 states, including Arkansas, attempted to place term limits on their members of Congress, but this was shut down by a Supreme Court decision in U.S. Term Limits v. Thornton. Currently, states have the power to call for an amendment proposal convention to impose term limits on Congress, but this has not yet happened. While some state legislatures have expressed support for congressional term limits, it remains to be seen whether enough states will adopt resolutions to trigger a convention.

State-level term limits for senators

The US Constitution does not impose term limits on senators. However, there have been discussions and efforts at the state level to implement term limits for senators and other officials.

Some states, such as Arkansas, Idaho, Maine, and Wyoming, are statute-only states, where voters cannot pass constitutional amendments. In these states, any changes to term limits would need to be made through the state legislature. Other states, like Oregon, have had their term limits challenged and overturned in state courts.

State lawmakers in Alabama, Tennessee, and Louisiana have expressed their desire for a federal constitutional amendment to limit the terms of Supreme Court justices and federal judges. Additionally, states like South Dakota, Hawaii, and Florida have approved resolutions calling for a federal constitutional amendment to limit the number of terms for members of Congress.

While there is support for term limits at the state level, implementing them for members of Congress faces challenges. The US Constitution is rarely amended, and any changes would require a significant effort from multiple states to propose and ratify amendments. Despite these challenges, public opinion polls show strong support for congressional term limits, indicating that the topic will likely remain a subject of discussion and political advocacy.

Supreme Court rulings on term limits

The US Constitution does not set term limits for senators. However, several amendments have been proposed over the years, with some gaining popularity among the population.

In the 1990s, a key Supreme Court decision shut down one proposed path to term limits on Congress. In the case of U.S. Term Limits, Inc. v. Thornton, the Supreme Court ruled that states could not add qualifications for office for members of Congress beyond those explicitly stated in the Constitution. This decision invalidated the efforts of Arkansas and 21 other states to impose term limits on their members of Congress.

The Supreme Court's ruling in U.S. Term Limits, Inc. v. Thornton affirmed that the qualifications for Congress are defined exclusively by the Constitution and that any changes to these qualifications must be made through the amendment process. This ruling upheld the "'fundamental principle of representative democracy' that "the people should choose whom they please to govern them."

Despite this ruling, efforts to impose term limits on Congress have continued. Some state lawmakers have expressed their support for a federal constitutional amendment to limit the terms of Supreme Court justices and federal judges. Additionally, there have been calls for an Article V convention, which would allow states to bypass Congress and propose amendments directly. However, convening an Article V convention has never been achieved, and it faces several challenges and uncertainties.

While there is significant public support for congressional term limits, it remains a challenging task to turn this sentiment into a constitutional amendment.

Explore related products

Term Limits and Their Consequences: The Aftermath of Legislative Reform

$34.95

Restoration: Congress, Term Limits and the Recovery of Deliberative Democracy

$9.8 $19.95

Bad Deal for America

$19.95 $14.95

Term Limits

$106.29

Elizabeth: Senator Warren's Fight To The Finish

$1.99

The Constitution of the United States and The Declaration of Independence

$1.99

Public opinion on term limits

However, there is also opposition to the idea of term limits, with some arguing that term limits would remove both good and bad lawmakers and that those elected to replace them might focus on immediate issues rather than long-term solutions. Additionally, some voters have expressed their preference for incumbents by re-electing representatives and senators for more than 12 years.

While public opinion on term limits for senators specifically may vary, the broader discussion around term limits for members of Congress has garnered significant attention and support from Americans across party lines.

The process of amending the Constitution

The Constitution of the United States is rarely changed, and the process of amending it is difficult and time-consuming. The authority to amend the Constitution comes from Article V of the Constitution. There are two ways to propose an amendment:

• The first way is for two-thirds of both houses of Congress to pass a proposed amendment. Since the President does not have a constitutional role in the amendment process, the joint resolution does not go to the White House for signature or approval. Instead, the original document is sent directly to the National Archives and Records Administration (NARA) Office of the Federal Register (OFR) for processing and publication. The OFR then assembles an information package for the states, which includes formal "red-line" copies of the joint resolution, copies of the joint resolution in slip law format, and other relevant information.
• The second way is for two-thirds of state legislatures (34 states) to request that Congress call a constitutional convention to propose an amendment. This has never happened before, and there are challenges to this method, such as getting all 34 state legislatures to pass proposals with identical language.

Once an amendment has been proposed, it must be ratified. For an amendment to be ratified, three-fourths of state legislatures (38 states) must approve it. The OFR drafts a formal proclamation for the Archivist to certify that the amendment is valid and has become part of the Constitution. This certification is published in the Federal Register and U.S. Statutes at Large, serving as official notice to Congress and the nation that the amendment process is complete.

While there is no term limit for senators at the federal level, 17 state legislatures have implemented term limits for their state senators. Additionally, several groups and individuals have advocated for term limits for members of Congress, including senators. Some states have attempted to impose term limits on their members of Congress, but the Supreme Court ruled in U.S. Term Limits v. Thornton that states cannot add qualifications for office for members of Congress beyond what is stated in the Constitution. However, states can propose amendments through a convention, and if 34 states propose an amendment on the same subject, Congress cannot stop or modify the convention agenda. While there has never been a constitutional convention, the threat of one could incentivize Congress to act.

Frequently asked questions