Go to HHH home page.
Smart Politics
 


Are Supreme Court Justices Living Longer?

Bookmark and Share

Yesterday Smart Politics challenged the popular notion that Presidents have been eying younger Supreme Court nominees in recent years, presumably to deepen their impact and legacy on the Supreme Court as the judicial branch has become seen as more partisan. But an analysis of U.S. Senate confirmation data found the average age of Supreme Court justices at the time of their confirmation has been fairly stable since the 1820s (about 54 years of age).

Although presidents are not getting notably younger justices seated on the Court, are those justices living longer and thus able to serve more years? If so, how much longer are they living?

To be sure, the life expectancy of Americans has increased dramatically during the past two centuries. As such, presidents nominating 54 year-old candidates for the bench today (such as Sonia Sodomayor) expect their nominee to live several more years than a justice who was confirmed in, say, the 1800s.

But is this so?

In Part 2 of an examination of the Court, Smart Politics finds that while the average life expectancy of Americans has doubled over the past 200+ years, from about 35 years to approximately 78 years, the difference in the life spans of Supreme Court justices over this period has been much narrower.

One hundred Supreme Court justices have served and died across the 220 years since the first justice was confirmed back in 1789, with the average life span of these 100 justices being 73.9 years.

Aggregated by decade of birth, the 29 justices who were born in the 1700s lived to an average ripe old age of 69.3 years – or about double the normal life expectancy of a white male of that era (approximately 35 years). All but five of these justices (James Wilson, James Iredell, Alfred Moore, Robert Trimble, Philip Barbour) lived at least to the age of 60.

The 60 justices born in the 1800s lived to an average age of 74.6 years old, with all but two (Joseph Lamar Rucker and Frank Murphy) reaching 60.

The 11 justices born in the 1900s who are now deceased lived to an average age of 81.8 years old – with every justice reaching 70.

Life Span of Deceased Supreme Court Justices by Century of Birth, 1700s-1900s

Century
# Justices
Age
1700s
29
69.3
1800s
60
74.6
1900s
11
81.8
Total
100
73.9
Note: Data from The Supreme Court Historical Society compiled by Smart Politics.

Perhaps due in large part to their privileged family background and lifestyle (generally and relatively speaking), members of the Supreme Court have always lived much longer lives than the public at large. Moreover, since presidents have not historically nominated many individuals that were less than 50 years old, such justices would, by definition, have already lived to a much older age than average Americans of their day.

Still, the difference is quite staggering.

Using Bureau of the Census life expectancy data, a Smart Politics analysis of the 42 deceased justices who were born after 1850 finds they lived an average of 34.1 years longer than the average American born in the year of their birth.

Three justices lived at least 50 years longer than average:

· FDR nominee Stanley Reed lived to the age of 95 years, which was 54 years longer than the life expectancy of a white male born in 1884 (41 years).
· FDR nominee James Byrnes lived to the age of 92 – 52 years longer than the average white male born in 1879.
· LBJ nominee Thurgood Marshall lived to the age of 84, which was 50 years longer than the average non-white male born in 1908.

Every Supreme Court justice born after 1850 lived at least 10 years longer than the average life expectancy of males in the year of their birth – and all but four at least 20 years longer.

Aggregated by decade, it is evident that justices of the Court have consistently lived long lives, even those born back in the 1700s and 1800s. In a stark example, the four justices born in the 1880s (Felix Frankfurter, Stanley Reed, Hugo Black, Harold Burton) lived to an average age of 84.5 years – more than double the life expectancy of the average white male born that decade (41 years).

Average Life Span of Deceased Supreme Court Justices by Decade of Birth, 1730s-1920s

Decade
# Justices
Age
1920s
2
84.5
1910s
3
75.0
1900s
7
85.0
1890s
9
69.6
1880s
4
84.5
1870s
4
78.3
1860s
7
78.4
1850s
7
73.0
1840s
5
79.0
1830s
7
75.6
1820s
5
68.0
1810s
7
75.4
1800s
6
72.3
1790s
3
78.0
1780s
6
68.2
1770s
4
66.3
1760s
3
68.3
1750s
5
67.6
1740s
4
67.0
1730s
5
70.4
Total
100
73.9
Note: Data from The Supreme Court Historical Society compiled by Smart Politics.

According to Bureau of the Census data, a non-white woman born in 1954 (the year Sonia Sotomayor was born) has a life expectancy of 64 years at birth.

Follow Smart Politics on Twitter.

Previous post: Are Supreme Court Nominees Getting Younger?
Next post: From T-Paw to J-Ram: Is Jim Ramstad the GOP's Answer in 2010?

2 Comments


  • Interesting analysis, though I think the proper comparison though would be not to average life expectancy at birth but at time of appointment. Life expectancy is heavily skewed by infant/child mortality. That effect has decreased with improved public health, vaccines and antibiotics in later decades.

  • Hi Kipling,I understand where your coming from but infant mortality wouldn't play any part considering the expectancy of ordinary people were in their 30's so it should be pretty accurate even if the infant mortality rate was used in the figures it would be accurate.
    Considering Justices whom made it to adulthood was just as much at risk as a child as any other facing such risks.
    Health availability would play a part.
    One other thing I'd like to note however considering the TB outbreak in the early 1900's I'm surprised that the results are as high as they are.
    Perhaps some of the irradication of illnesses have offset the millions lost during the TB epidemic.

  • Leave a comment


    Remains of the Data

    Is There a Presidential Drag On Gubernatorial Elections?

    Only five of the 20 presidents to serve since 1900 have seen their party win a majority of gubernatorial elections during their administrations, and only one since JFK.

    Political Crumbs

    Strike Three for Miller-Meeks

    Iowa Republicans had a banner day on November 4th, picking up both a U.S. Senate seat and one U.S. House seat, but Mariannette Miller-Meeks' defeat in her third attempt to oust Democrat Dave Loebsack in the 2nd CD means the GOP will not have a monopoly on the state's congressional delegation in the 114th Congress. The loss by Miller-Meeks (following up her defeats in 2008 and 2010) means major party nominees who lost their first two Iowa U.S. House races are now 0 for 10 the third time around in Iowa history. Miller-Meeks joins Democrat William Leffingwell (1858, 1868, 1870), Democrat Anthony Van Wagenen (1894, 1912 (special), 1912), Democrat James Murtagh (1906, 1914, 1916), Democrat Clair Williams (1944, 1946, 1952), Democrat Steven Carter (1948, 1950, 1956), Republican Don Mahon (1966, 1968, 1970), Republican Tom Riley (1968, 1974, 1976), Democrat Eric Tabor (1986, 1988, 1990), and Democrat Bill Gluba (1982, 1988, 2004) on the Hawkeye State's Three Strikes list.


    Larry Pressler Wins the Silver

    Larry Pressler may have fallen short in his long-shot, underfunded, and understaffed bid to return to the nation's upper legislative chamber, but he did end up notching the best showing for a non-major party South Dakota U.S. Senate candidate in more than 90 years. Pressler won 17.1 percent of the vote which is the best showing for an independent or third party U.S. Senate candidate in the state since 1920 when non-partisan candidate Tom Ayres won 24.1 percent in a race won by Republican Peter Norbeck. Overall, Pressler's 17.1 percent is good for the second best mark for a non-major party candidate across the 35 U.S. Senate contests in South Dakota history. Independent and third party candidates have appeared on the South Dakota U.S. Senate ballot just 25 times over the last century and only three have reached double digits: Pressler in 2014 and Ayres in 1920 and 1924 (12.1 percent). Pressler's defeat means he won't become the oldest candidate elected to the chamber in South Dakota history nor notch the record for the longest gap in service in the direct election era.


    more POLITICAL CRUMBS

    Humphrey School Sites
    CSPG
    Humphrey New Media Hub

    Issues />

<div id=
    Abortion
    Afghanistan
    Budget and taxes
    Campaign finances
    Crime and punishment
    Economy and jobs
    Education
    Energy
    Environment
    Foreign affairs
    Gender
    Health
    Housing
    Ideology
    Immigration
    Iraq
    Media
    Military
    Partisanship
    Race and ethnicity
    Reapportionment
    Redistricting
    Religion
    Sexuality
    Sports
    Terrorism
    Third parties
    Transportation
    Voting