Rumors Are Getting Louder That 77 Year Old Jerry Nadler Won't Run Again In 2026

If he does retire, it's essential he be replaced with another strong progressive, unlike Dan Goldman or Ritchie Torres

I’m hearing from a couple of unrelated pretty reliable sources that Jerry Nadler isn’t planning for run for reelection in 2026. His district (NY-12)— the smallest in area in the U.S. and the richest in per capital income— stretches from Chelsea, Gramercy and Kips Bay in the south, up both sides of Manhattan through Yorkville on the East Side and almost as far as Morningside Heights on the Upper West Side. It includes all of Central Park and he represents Trump Tower, Roosevelt Island and none of any other boroughs. Nadler (age 77) was just reelected with a tad over 80% of the vote, beating his Republican opponent by nearly 200,000 votes. He drew no primary opponents. And this very solid blue district's PVI is D+34. 

Last February, Nadler told Mark Chiusano that he is “absolutely running again... I still feel very energetic. I have a lot of things to do. When I decide that I can no longer do them, or that I have nothing left to do— which is ridiculous— then’ll be time to retire.” Last week he was pressured out of his position as the top Democrat on the House Judiciary Committee. Democrats wanted someone youngerand more proactively aggressive. They were lined-up behind Jamie Raskin (D-MD). So, many of the things on his agenda are no longer things he can probably get done.

Among those Democratic politicians already preparing to run once he announces he isn’t— and that’s a ways off— are Jack Kennedy Schlossberg (JFK’s only grandson), freshman Assemblyman Micah Lasher, state Sen Brad Hoylman-Sigal, Assemblywoman Rebecca Seawright, NYC planning commission chair Daniel Garodnick, City Councilwoman and former Manhattan Borough President Gale Brewer and former City Councilwoman Helen Rosenthal. There will certainly be more once Nadler makes it official.

On Tuesday, Charlie Sykes wrote about “the moral questions of America’s political gerontocracy… an especially sensitive subject, because so many of us have loved ones— parents, grandparents, siblings— who are in cognitive decline. They deserve our consideration, compassion, and honesty. That’s also true for members of Congress, Supreme Court justices, and presidents. But the stakes there are much higher, and in those cases, sometimes compassion means being truthful about when it’s time to move on… America’s politicians have an age problem, and the issue seems especially acute among congressional Democrats. The prevalence of older politicians can arguably make the elected class less relevant to younger voters and make it more difficult for new voices to rise in politics. But at its core, this is an issue of honesty: Didn’t the American people have a right to know that Biden was struggling? Didn’t Texans deserve to know about Granger? And if either of them was being lied to by those supporting them, didn’t they themselves deserve the truth too?”

In the story referenced above by Mark Chiusano in New York Magazine, the author noted that “Nadler’s plan to keep running and working even as his age rounds up to 80, provides a case study of the forces that encourage America’s politicians to continue seeking office into their ninth decade. The idea of him staying on the job until 86 would be extraordinarily unusual in most professions but less so in Congress, where Chuck Grassley remains the very senior senator from Iowa at age 90 and Mitch McConnell serves as Senate minority leader at 82. In the House, 83-year-old former Speaker Nancy Pelosi stepped aside from leadership in lieu of 53-year-old Hakeem Jeffries, but she’s still serving, along with Steny Hoyer (84), Jim Clyburn (83), and more 87-year-olds (2) than Gen-Z members (Maxwell Frost). The advanced age of Congress is ‘a historical anomaly,’ says Kevin Munger, a political scientist at Penn State and the author of Generation Gap: Why the Baby Boomers Still Dominate American Politics and Culture. That anomaly is partially boosted by the amount of money it takes to win elections, Munger argues, and America’s two-party system, since third parties jockeying for power can attract more youth participation. The House’s seniority system is also a strong push to stay in office and climb the ranks. Seniority plays a role in everything from office space to committee assignments and, of course, in the choice of powerful committee chairs, who essentially set the agenda for lawmakers. Nadler waited nearly three decades to reach the top of the Judiciary Committee in 2019, a role he’d be poised to retake if Democrats win the House this year.” And now that incentive for staying is gone… Some broader cultural issues may be at play in the formation of the nation’s political gerontocracy. Munger, says he often gets asked by European journalists why American politicians don’t retire: ‘And it seems like from the American perspective, the answer is always sort of like, “And then do what?”’ Nadler, in particular, appears little ready to enjoy the leisurely fruits of retirement. ‘I’ve given no thought to what I’m going to do when I retire God knows when,’ he says, which sounds plausible from a man who has only known politics in the half-century since his law-school days and who, when asked to name a favorite pizza spot in the district, declined. His typical order? ‘Plain.’”

Reactionary Democrat Jeanne Shaheen— now that Manchin and Sinema are gone, the worst of the Senate Dems— is up for reelection in 2026. As Chris Hayes noted on his show last week, she’ll be 79 then and says she’s undecided about running again. According to Pew Research, 79% of Americans support age limits for politicians in Washington. “That is an overwhelming majority in our polarized environment. Seventy-nine percent of Americans don’t typically agree on anything these days, but they agree on this. Democrats should listen.” They should listen and make sure Shaheen does as well— not so much because of her physical age per se, as because of her dug-in, discredited worldview.