Posted on 11/14/2005 8:29:10 AM PST by NormsRevenge
WASHINGTON – Back in the 1940s, it was the train schedules that caused folks to gripe about the big headache of assembling the judges of the San Francisco-based 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals from their far-flung states.
Sixty-five years ago, as today, there was talk of splitting the vast 9th Circuit into two courts, which might make judges' travel easier and their caseloads lighter.
A judicial giant
But for the first time in a long while, the idea has gained momentum as House Republicans attempt to push through a plan that would split California and the other Western states in the 9th Circuit.
Backers say the plan would make the court more speedy and efficient, and perhaps less inclined to produce rulings that are often overturned by the U.S. Supreme Court. The move is dismissed by opponents as a Republican ruse to break up a court that has the reputation of being the nation's most liberal circuit.
"There are some very powerful people who are pushing this," said Arthur Hellman, a University of Pittsburgh law professor and a leading expert on the 9th Circuit. "And they are doing it in a way that makes it more difficult for opponents to fight it."
Many bills over the past decades failed to make it through Congress. This year, GOP House leaders have included a court-splitting plan in a $54 billion spending-cut package, making it harder for Democrats to vote against it without opposing the entire budget bill.
"It is a lose-lose proposition, one with clear financial costs to the administration of justice and with human costs to those with cases before the court," said Sen. Dianne Feinstein, D-Calif. She argues that under the split, the 9th Circuit would keep 72 percent of the caseload, but only 60 percent of the judges.
Republicans complain that the court is stacked with liberals.
They say that the U.S. Supreme Court has overturned more 9th Circuit rulings than any other circuit, including its controversial 2002 declaration that the Pledge of Allegiance – with its phrase "under God" – was unconstitutional when recited in public schools.
The 9th Circuit has 28 judgeships. The next busiest court, the New Orleans-based 5th Circuit, has 17.
The 9th Circuit covers Alaska, Arizona, California, Hawaii, Idaho, Montana, Nevada, Oregon, Washington, and the U.S. territories of Guam and the Northern Mariana Islands. It handles nearly 16,000 cases a year – about triple the average for other circuits.
It represents 58 million people – almost 27 million more than the next most populous circuit, the Cincinnati-based 6th Circuit. Experts agree it takes a case longer to get before 9th Circuit judges than in any other circuit's.
"The 9th Circuit dwarfs any of the other circuits – in size, in number of cases, in population," said Jeff Lungren, a spokesman for Rep. James Sensenbrenner, the Wisconsin Republican and House Judiciary Committee chairman who wrote one of seven court-splitting proposals in Congress this year. "It's become bloated and inefficient."
Diarmuid O'Scannlain, one of the few 9th Circuit judges who endorses a split, notes that the court's jurisdiction spans the Rocky Mountains to the rain forests of Kauai and the U.S.-Mexico border to the Arctic Ocean.
"The sheer magnitude of our court and its responsibilities negatively affects all aspects of our business, including our . . . consistency, our clarity and even our collegiality," O'Scannlain said during testimony before the Senate Judiciary Committee.
The plan calls for a new 12th Circuit that would include Alaska, Arizona, Idaho, Montana, Nevada, Oregon and Washington. The 9th Circuit would include California, Guam, Hawaii and the Northern Mariana Islands.
The Congressional Budget Office said it would cost $71 million during the next five years to add new judges to the 9th and 12th circuits, and that each new judge would add about $560,000 in administrative costs each year.
Of the 9th Circuit judges active in April 2004, 15 opposed a split, four favored it and the others abstained.
Then there is the logistical issue of assembling more than two dozen judges in one city.
Years ago, the complaint was that train schedules made this difficult; today, the complaint is plane schedules.
"I have a case that's been sitting up there for its third year," said Gary Kreep, executive director of the United States Justice Foundation, which supports a split. "We've been involved with other circuits, and I've never seen a case take three years."
The University of Pittsburgh's Hellman said that once the cases are before judges, the 9th Circuit is one of the speediest at making rulings.
He also pointed out that the 9th Circuit allows lawyers to argue orally in almost one-third of cases, while the 5th Circuit allows such arguments in fewer than one-fifth.
"Other (courts) can handle more cases, but they do it by not giving the lawyers a chance to argue," Hellman said.
Seems doing something quickly and doing something well do not go together.
They had a liberal lawyer arguing against this on Fox the other day. His argument started:
Bush is a liar.
Cheney is corrupt.
We are in an illegal war under false pretenses.
That should be welcome news for folks living in these states.
Lucky us in California :P
Evergreen State ping
FReepmail sionnsar if you want on or off this ping list.
Ping sionnsar if you see a Washington state related thread.
ping
As long as the new court isn't based in Seattle or Portland, it should be fine.
Here's hoping something can be done with the ninth circuit soon! Nudow is filing suit to get rid of "in God we trust" on our coins and the ninth will side with him.
As long as the new court isn't based in Seattle or Portland, it should be fine.
In olden days it worked OK. It is time to split it like an acorn.
No offense to our loyal fellow trapped in Washington State (which is quite beautiful when the legislator is out of session), but Washington, Hawaii and Oregon need to go with California. The rest of the SW and Mountain states need to be independent for once since these are the states which are actually growing in size and they will balance out in population over time. Plus, the judges from WA and OR are barely any better than the ones from SF. It would still be subjecting the rest of the states to the same judicial hell they are trapped in now.
Yeah I also here drilling in ANSR is gaining momentum too.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.