| Outcome | Probability | Yes Bid | Yes Ask | 24h Change | Volume | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Amul Thapar | 0% | 0¢ | 0¢ | — | $0 | Trade → |
| Neomi Rao | 0% | 0¢ | 0¢ | — | $0 | Trade → |
| James Ho | 0% | 0¢ | 0¢ | — | $0 | Trade → |
| Andrew Oldham | 0% | 0¢ | 0¢ | — | $0 | Trade → |
| Stuart Kyle Duncan | 0% | 0¢ | 0¢ | — | $0 | Trade → |
| Lawrence VanDyke | 0% | 0¢ | 0¢ | — | $0 | Trade → |
| Matthew Kacsmaryk | 0% | 0¢ | 0¢ | — | $0 | Trade → |
| Aileen Cannon | 0% | 0¢ | 0¢ | — | $0 | Trade → |
| Kathryn Mizelle | 0% | 0¢ | 0¢ | — | $0 | Trade → |
| Trevor McFadden | 0% | 0¢ | 0¢ | — | $0 | Trade → |
| Evan Young | 0% | 0¢ | 0¢ | — | $0 | Trade → |
| Clint Bolick | 0% | 0¢ | 0¢ | — | $0 | Trade → |
| Kevin Brobson | 0% | 0¢ | 0¢ | — | $0 | Trade → |
| Joan Larsen | 0% | 0¢ | 0¢ | — | $0 | Trade → |
| Gregory G. Katsas | 0% | 0¢ | 0¢ | — | $0 | Trade → |
| Patrick Bumatay | 0% | 0¢ | 0¢ | — | $0 | Trade → |
| Kenneth Lee | 0% | 0¢ | 0¢ | — | $0 | Trade → |
| Barbara Lagoa | 0% | 0¢ | 0¢ | — | $0 | Trade → |
| Britt Grant | 0% | 0¢ | 0¢ | — | $0 | Trade → |
| Kevin Newsom | 0% | 0¢ | 0¢ | — | $0 | Trade → |
| Michael Park | 0% | 0¢ | 0¢ | — | $0 | Trade → |
| David Stras | 0% | 0¢ | 0¢ | — | $0 | Trade → |
| Allison Jones Rushing | 0% | 0¢ | 0¢ | — | $0 | Trade → |
| Kate Comerford Todd | 0% | 0¢ | 0¢ | — | $0 | Trade → |
| Patrick Wyrick | 0% | 0¢ | 0¢ | — | $0 | Trade → |
| Kristen Waggoner | 0% | 0¢ | 0¢ | — | $0 | Trade → |
| Tom Cotton | 0% | 0¢ | 0¢ | — | $0 | Trade → |
| Mike Lee | 0% | 0¢ | 0¢ | — | $0 | Trade → |
| Morse Tan | 0% | 0¢ | 0¢ | — | $0 | Trade → |
| Mark Martin | 0% | 0¢ | 0¢ | — | $0 | Trade → |
| Allison Eid | 0% | 0¢ | 0¢ | — | $0 | Trade → |
| Ted Cruz | 0% | 0¢ | 0¢ | — | $0 | Trade → |
| Stephanos Bibas | 0% | 0¢ | 0¢ | — | $0 | Trade → |
| Emil Bove | 0% | 0¢ | 0¢ | — | $0 | Trade → |
This market asks which named individual will become the next Justice of the U.S. Supreme Court; it matters because a new justice can reshape the Court's decisions for decades and has major legal and political consequences.
A Supreme Court vacancy arises when a sitting justice retires, resigns, dies, or is removed; the President nominates a replacement who must be confirmed by the Senate and be sworn in before becoming a justice. Historically, nominations and confirmations have been influenced by partisan control of the White House and Senate, the Senate's procedures, nominee records and hearings, and public and interest-group pressure.
Market prices reflect the collective assessment of who is likely to become the next justice and update continuously as news and political developments occur; they are a real-time signal of expectations, not a guarantee of the final outcome.
This market is resolved to the individual who is formally appointed and takes the judicial oath as a Justice of the U.S. Supreme Court; nominations alone do not resolve the market—confirmation and swearing-in are required for final resolution under typical exchange rules.
Named outcomes correspond to specific individuals; an announced nominee will normally see immediate market response but only yields a final payout if they are ultimately confirmed and sworn in. Markets often also include an 'Other' or similar outcome to cover someone not listed among the named options.
A formal nomination usually causes market prices for that individual to move quickly as traders update expectations, but the outcome is not final until the Senate confirms and the individual is sworn in—so nomination increases the market signal but does not resolve the market.
Event operators set the list of outcomes; they may add or remove named individuals before resolution according to their rules. Traders should check the market's rules and announcements for any updates to the list of eligible outcomes for this event.
Changes in Senate control or confirmation procedures alter the practical difficulty of obtaining confirmation and therefore influence market assessments of each nominee’s prospects; such structural changes typically shift prices across multiple named outcomes rather than only affecting a single candidate.