House Committee to Take Up Measure to Reconfigure the Ninth Circuit
The House Judiciary Committee is set to consider Rep. Darrell Issa's proposal to divide the nation's largest circuit court into three regional divisions and one circuit-wide division at a markup hearing Thursday morning.
September 12, 2018 at 05:35 PM
3 minute read
The original version of this story was published on The Recorder
A new proposal to reshape the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, the nation's largest and busiest federal appellate court, is set for a markup hearing before the House Judiciary Committee on Thursday morning.
The bill, introduced Monday by Rep. Darrell Issa, proposes dividing the Ninth Circuit into three regionally based divisions—a Northern Division composed of the district courts in Alaska, Idaho, Montana, Oregon and Washington's Eastern and Western districts of Washington; a Middle Division made up of the courts in Guam, Hawaii, Nevada and the Northern Mariana Islands, as well as California's Eastern and Northern districts; and a Southern Division including Arizona and the Southern and Central districts of California.
The bill, dubbed the ''Court Imbalance Restructure Concerning Updates to Impacted Tribunals Act of 2018″ or CIRCUIT Act, also proposes an additional circuit-wide division made up of the chief judge and four judges from each of the regional divisions chosen at random that would hear tax cases, appeals of final agency actions, and cases where two of the regional divisions had split on an issue. Issa's bill would also add five additional active judgeships to the circuit, raising the total to 34.
University of Pittsburgh School of Law Professor Emeritus Arthur Hellman, a longtime Ninth Circuit watcher, said that Issa's bill pulls many of its elements from recommendations put forward nearly 20 years ago by a committee chaired by then-retired Supreme Court Justice Byron White, who has since died. Hellman, who has been critical of the idea of a circuit division in the past, said that the latest proposal was “an attempt to find what I'm sure Issa will call 'a middle ground' between splitting the circuit and leaving it intact.”
“In the end [the White Commission recommendations] didn't really satisfy anyone,” Hellman said.
Hellman noted that about 3,000 of the Ninth Circuit's cases for the most recent year for which data is available were appeals from the Board of Immigration Appeals—about a quarter of the court's caseload.
“if those 3,000 cases have to be decided by the Circuit Division, they're not going to have much time for anything else,” he said.
Although Issa's bill is on the schedule for Thursday's markup hearing, the committee is also set up to take up a wide variety of proposals covering everything from making live audio from Supreme Court arguments available in the next two years to barring district courts from issuing nationwide injunctions.
Brian Fitzpatrick of Vanderbilt University Law School, who advocated splitting the Ninth Circuit at a subcommittee hearing chaired by Issa last year, said by email Wednesday that he wasn't sure that the representative's proposal would address his central concern—that the size of the circuit leads to three-judge panels that are more likely to be made up of ideological outliers.
“I think we would expect fewer outliers within each of the three regional divisions relative to the makeup of the divisions because each division will have only 11 judges,” he said. “I am not sure if that conclusion carries over to the 'circuit' division, however,” said Fitzpatrick, noting that the ratio of judges on the circuit division compared to the court's total—13 of 24—closely mirrors the makeup of current Ninth Circuit en banc panels—11 of the court's 29 current active judges.
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2024 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllBen & Jerry’s Accuses Corporate Parent of ‘Silencing’ Support for Palestinian Rights
3 minute readBaltimore City Govt., After Winning Opioid Jury Trial, Preparing to Demand an Additional $11B for Abatement Costs
3 minute read5th Circuit Judge Jones Slams Proposal for Greater Amicus Brief Funding Disclosure
'Health Care Behemoth'?: DOJ Seeks Injunction Blocking $3.3B UnitedHealth Merger Proposal
3 minute readTrending Stories
- 1Elon Musk Names Microsoft, Calif. AG to Amended OpenAI Suit
- 2Trump’s Plan to Purge Democracy
- 3Baltimore City Govt., After Winning Opioid Jury Trial, Preparing to Demand an Additional $11B for Abatement Costs
- 4X Joins Legal Attack on California's New Deepfakes Law
- 5Monsanto Wins Latest Philadelphia Roundup Trial
Who Got The Work
Michael G. Bongiorno, Andrew Scott Dulberg and Elizabeth E. Driscoll from Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr have stepped in to represent Symbotic Inc., an A.I.-enabled technology platform that focuses on increasing supply chain efficiency, and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The case, filed Oct. 2 in Massachusetts District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of Stephen Austen, accuses certain officers and directors of misleading investors in regard to Symbotic's potential for margin growth by failing to disclose that the company was not equipped to timely deploy its systems or manage expenses through project delays. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton, is 1:24-cv-12522, Austen v. Cohen et al.
Who Got The Work
Edmund Polubinski and Marie Killmond of Davis Polk & Wardwell have entered appearances for data platform software development company MongoDB and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The action, filed Oct. 7 in New York Southern District Court by the Brown Law Firm, accuses the company's directors and/or officers of falsely expressing confidence in the company’s restructuring of its sales incentive plan and downplaying the severity of decreases in its upfront commitments. The case is 1:24-cv-07594, Roy v. Ittycheria et al.
Who Got The Work
Amy O. Bruchs and Kurt F. Ellison of Michael Best & Friedrich have entered appearances for Epic Systems Corp. in a pending employment discrimination lawsuit. The suit was filed Sept. 7 in Wisconsin Western District Court by Levine Eisberner LLC and Siri & Glimstad on behalf of a project manager who claims that he was wrongfully terminated after applying for a religious exemption to the defendant's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The case, assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor, is 3:24-cv-00630, Secker, Nathan v. Epic Systems Corporation.
Who Got The Work
David X. Sullivan, Thomas J. Finn and Gregory A. Hall from McCarter & English have entered appearances for Sunrun Installation Services in a pending civil rights lawsuit. The complaint was filed Sept. 4 in Connecticut District Court by attorney Robert M. Berke on behalf of former employee George Edward Steins, who was arrested and charged with employing an unregistered home improvement salesperson. The complaint alleges that had Sunrun informed the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection that the plaintiff's employment had ended in 2017 and that he no longer held Sunrun's home improvement contractor license, he would not have been hit with charges, which were dismissed in May 2024. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer, is 3:24-cv-01423, Steins v. Sunrun, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Greenberg Traurig shareholder Joshua L. Raskin has entered an appearance for boohoo.com UK Ltd. in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The suit, filed Sept. 3 in Texas Eastern District Court by Rozier Hardt McDonough on behalf of Alto Dynamics, asserts five patents related to an online shopping platform. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, is 2:24-cv-00719, Alto Dynamics, LLC v. boohoo.com UK Limited.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250