Posted on 01/14/2005 9:53:02 AM PST by newgeezer
In the last several years, the 9th has led other courts in the number of decisions overturned by the U.S. Supreme Court. In the most recent session, the nation's highest court ruled on 80 cases. Twenty-five of those were from the 9th. The remaining 55 cases came from the other 12 circuits - including the Federal and D.C. circuits and state supreme courts. The ninth gets more than its fair share of high court scrutiny.
19 of the 25 cases from the 9th were overturned, twelve of them unanimously. Think of it. Decisions by the 9th Court of Appeals were so flawed that all of the justices on the Supreme Court, conservatives and liberals alike, voted unanimously twelve times to overturn them.
Just a few years ago, from 1996 to 1997, the Supreme Court reversed 27 of the 28 cases it considered from the 9th.
The problem with the 9th is that its judges instead of following the Constitution and applying judicial precedent - have been intent on legislating from the bench; that is, making up their own laws.
The 9th is largest of the appellate courts, representing about 20 percent of the nation's population, twice that of the other courts. Federal judges are appointed for life, so one way to rein in this rogue court is to split it into two smaller and more manageable courts, thereby evening its population representation and restricting its senseless and sometimes harmful decisions to smaller regions. Of course, appointing competent judges as vacancies occur would help mitigate the damage to the people living under the shadow of the 9th.
Two other circuits also distinguished themselves last year and not in a good way. Six of the eight decisions from the 6th circuit were overturned, four unanimously. And all four decisions from the 11th reviewed by the Supreme Court last session were overturned by all nine justices.
This is why judicial appointments are so important.
And that's The Point.
I'm Mark Hyman.
Fill out the form below and tell me what you think.
This aired yesterday on my local Sinclair affiliate. I thought others might enjoy these startling facts about the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals.
Ninth circus course of apples. Fire at will! But not at me please.
btt
Impeachment may be in order for some of them. They must really be bad to be overturned so often.
Ninth Circus Court of Schliemels. Filled to the rim with democrat party corrupt, oops I meant "activist" lawyers with IQs of 50.
Looks like SCOTUS will probably take another 9th Circuit case: US vs. Stewart. We want SCOTUS to uphold this one, not reverse it, as it has wide-ranging "interstate commerce" and RKBA repercussions.
??????
Great commentary.
Very concise and to the point.
Judicial activism IS real...no matter how the liberals want to spin it.
The 9th Circuit Court of Appeals is clear evidence of judicial activism gone awry.
Bob Stewart built several homemade machineguns. He's not just some schmoe converting a semi, he designed the Maadi-Griffin series of .50BMG rifles and the MGs he built were what the BATFE called "unique design".
He was convicted of violating US Code 922(o), prohibition of citizens possessing MGs built after 1986. The Constitutionality of 922(o) is based on the "interstate commerce" clause. (There are other interesting factors in the case, but they are not relevant.)
The 9th Circuit, in a remarkably conservative move, overturned Stewart's conviction. They observed that what Stewart built only existed in his state and never moved in interstate commerce, therefore 922(o) - being based on the "interstate commerce" clause - did not apply to Stewart in this case. Some parts he used were completely legal (barrel, grip, trigger), but the part which made the assembly a machinegun - the receiver - was entirely of his own unique design and made by him out of raw steel sock in his machine shop, and the completed product never left the state.
The ruling practically overturns 922(o) in the 9th Circuit's jurisdiction, making it legal to build your own machinegun there (CA, WA, and a few other states) - but not anywhere else. This creates a situation intolerable to the feds: if a new machinegun is built within the 9th Circuit's jurisdiction and never leaves the state, it must be acknowledged as legal (which is confusing the heck out of the BATFE, which doesn't know what to do with a sudden pile of hundreds of "please may I make a MG" applications) ... but such activity is not yet legal elsewhere. The feds don't want machinguns legal anywhere, and they can't have federal laws apply in one area but not another.
To prevent this ruling from spreading to the rest of the USA, under the equal protection clause, the feds have asked SCOTUS to overturn the 9th Circuit ruling on the grounds that, to paraphrase their argument, "the US gov't has the right to ban anything anywhere for any reason". Stewart, happy with the 9th Circuit's decision, has asked SCOTUS to dismiss the gov't's appeal.
If SCOTUS takes the case, they will effectively be asked to rule that anything, made of legal raw materials on private property and not sold or transferred, affects interstate commerce and thus may be banned by the feds. Such a ruling would make the "interstate commerce" clause so broad as to be unlimited - such a ruling is anathama to the Constitution. Ruling the opposite would bring down the house of cards built upon the unlimited "interstate commerce" interpretation upon which a huge number of federal prohibitions are based on. As a direct side effect, it would be legal for anyone to build a machinegun (and quite possibly sell it in-state, if permitted by state law).
SCOTUS has been ruling against overbroad "interstate commerce" laws lately. This would bring down most of the rest, and cause a huge shakeup in federal law - and is the right thing to do. This is a rare instance where the 9th Circuit got something right.
Isn't there a move on to change the name from the 9th Circuit to Short Circuit?
Thanks for the detailed clarification...really useful.
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.