| Outcome | Probability | Yes Bid | Yes Ask | 24h Change | Volume | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 6 Conservatives and 3 Liberals | 0% | 0¢ | 0¢ | — | $0 | Trade → |
| 7 Conservatives and 2 Liberals | 0% | 0¢ | 0¢ | — | $0 | Trade → |
| 8 Conservatives and 1 Liberals | 0% | 0¢ | 0¢ | — | $0 | Trade → |
| 9 Conservatives and 0 Liberals | 0% | 0¢ | 0¢ | — | $0 | Trade → |
| Not nine justices | 0% | 0¢ | 0¢ | — | $0 | Trade → |
This market asks what the U.S. Supreme Court’s membership will be at the end of President Trump’s term; it matters because Court composition shapes legal outcomes on major issues for decades. Traders express views about likely retirements, confirmations, and structural changes to the Court.
Supreme Court composition depends on vacancies that arise through retirements, deaths, or other departures and on which nominees a president selects and the Senate confirms. Historically, nominations are shaped by the age and health of sitting justices, Senate control and procedures, and political incentives around election timing. Proposals to change Court size or confirmation rules add an additional layer of uncertainty.
Market prices aggregate participants’ expectations and update as new information (vacancies, nominations, Senate actions, legislation) arrives; they are a real-time indicator of how traders interpret those factors rather than a guarantee of a particular outcome.
Each listed outcome corresponds to a specific Court composition or configuration defined in the contract text on the event page; those outcomes describe alternative end-of-term scenarios (for example, different ideological balances or numbers of justices) and traders choose the outcome they believe will be true at resolution.
Resolution occurs according to the contract’s resolution criteria—typically the composition of the Supreme Court at the official end date of the president’s term or another date specified on the event page; check the event page for the precise closing/resolution language since the platform sets the authoritative timeline.
Primary drivers are presidential nominations, Senate confirmation votes, and any retirements or departures by sitting justices; Congress can also influence outcomes if it passes laws changing Court structure or confirmation procedures prior to resolution.
If a vacancy arises, the outcome depends on whether and how it is filled by the resolution date according to the contract rules; filled seats count toward the composition at resolution, while unfilled vacancies will be treated as specified by the event’s resolution criteria.
Enacted, legally effective changes that alter the Court’s size or confirmation process could materially change which outcomes are possible; the market will reflect those changes and the event will resolve based on the legal and factual state of the Court at the contract’s resolution date.