UPDATED 04/07/17 – I have updated this page to reflect the confirmation of Neil McGill Gorsuch to succeed the late Antonin Scalia. The starting date of his service is shown as 04/10/2017 because he is supposed to be sworn in on that day, even though he was confirmed on 04/07/2017.
Though there are now only nine seats on the U.S. Supreme Court, the table below lists eleven lines of succession. There is one for the chief justiceship and ten for the associate justiceships that Congress has created at one time and another, as it has changed the size of the Court. In other words, two associate justiceships have “died out” in the course of the Court’s history. The present members of the Court, in addition to the chief justice, hold the first, second, third, fourth, sixth, eighth, ninth, and tenth associate justiceships created by Congress.
The horizontal dimension of the table lists each the eleven seats: the chief justiceship and ten associate justiceships. Justices are listed for each seat in chronological order, beginning with the justices nominated by Washington and ending with the justices nominated by Obama.
There are two horizontal divisions. The first, indicated by a double red line, delineates presidencies. The beginning of every justice’s term is associated with the president who nominated that person to a seat on the Court. The end of each justice’s term is associated with the president who was in office when the justice’s term ended by resignation or death.
The second horizontal division, indicated by alternating bands of gray and white, delineates chief justiceships. Thus the reader can see which justices served with a particular chief justice. The “Roberts Court,” for example, has thus far included Roberts, Souter, Sotomayor, Breyer, Kennedy, Stevens, Kagan, Ginsburg, O’Connor, Alito, Scalia, and Thomas.
Because there is a separate line of succession for the chief justiceship, persons who were already on the Court and then elevated to the chief justiceship are listed in two different places. Also, the names of a few other justices appear in more than one place because they served non-consecutive terms on the Court.
The table is divided into three parts, for ease of reading. (Zoom in if the type is too small for you.) The first part covers the chief justiceship and associate justice positions 1-3; the second part, associate justice positions 4-7; the third part, associate justice positions 8-10.
As a bonus, here are statistics about the frequency with which justices have disagreed with one another in non-unanimous cases, for October Term 2005 through October Term 2015:
Note that the fairly harmonious 2014 term was succeeded by a more typical (i.e., more divided) 2015 term.
I used the statistics which underlie the preceding graph to construct the following index of defection (D) for each justice, by term:
D = percentage disagreement with members of own wing/percentage disagreement with members of opposite wing,
where the wings are the “conservative” wing (Alito, Kennedy, Scalia, Thomas, and Roberts) and the “liberal” wing (Breyer, Ginsburg, Kagan, Sotomayor, Souter, and Stevens),
and where Kennedy’s status as a member of the “conservative” wing is in considerable doubt.
The lower the index, the more prone is a justice to vote with the other members of his or her wing; the higher the index, the more prone is a justice to vote with members of the opposing wing. Here’s a graph of the indices, by term:
The unsurprising result is Kennedy’s long-standing proneness to defect more often than his colleagues, a proneness which has grown markedly in the past two terms. In fact, it seems as if Kennedy should now be counted as a member of the Court’s “liberal” wing. The trend for Roberts is worrisome as well.