[Sub-Driver]

The ninth circus.........

[Dacula]

They are saving it for the Obamacare rejection.

Don’t trust the fools in black.

[Jacquerie]

The next time we control Congress, the Ninth Circus’ jurisdiction should be reduced to the City of San Francisco. Let ‘em bugger each other into social justice Nirvana.

[hinckley buzzard]

Congress has the authority and duty to establish courts. The House should make it a priority to break up the ninth circus into at least two circuits, maybe three, and put paid to this obscene caricature of justice.

[GOPJ]

"That's an indication this court is way out of the mainstream,"

Waaaaaaay outside of the mainstream...

[Lysandru]

So, will someone explain why Judge Vinson is somehow "out of the mainstream?"

How often are his rulings reversed????

[sima_yi]

As the nation's biggest circuit, misrepresenting most of the western United States...

There. Fixed it.

[allmendream]

First...

Just how liberal whackjob ya gotta be before even Ginsberg tells you your view of the law is out in left field?

Second...

The most disturbing part of the article was this. Despite a reputation for having “the most rejected cases”, the 9th circus also hears the most cases; on a proportional basis...

“Judicial statistics kept by SCOTUSblog show that 9th Circuit decisions actually have a better-than-average showing before the Supreme Court. In the last session, 27 percent of its rulings were affirmed, while 60 percent were reversed. For all circuits, the reversal rate was 71 percent.”

[allmendream]

..... still thinking about this.

I think there must be extreme selection bias for cases that are to be rejected. 60% and 71%? Sounds like they take the cases they think there is a good chance they are going to reject.

As such I think “most reversed” is the more relevant statistic than “% rejected”. Perhaps most reversed normalized for the entire case load, not just those cases taken up by a higher court.

If the SCOTUS keeps having to hear your decisions, even if you DO have (only) a 61% rejection rate compared to 70%, it is because your views of the law raise eyebrows and they say “We will have to review this one”.

The most relevant measure would be how many cases the SCOTUS rejects normalized, not for how many are heard by a higher court and thus represented as a % rejected that they hear, but normalized for how many cases in total.

For example if the 9th took 100 cases, the SCOTUS reviewed 20 of them and rejected 61%, they still rejected some 12 to 13 decisions out of 100 cases.

If the 1st circuit took 100 cases, the SCOTUS reviewed only 10 of them and rejected 70%, well they only rejected 7 out of 100.

I think the 9th, by that criteria, would still count as “the most reversed”.

But at first I did find the 61% to 70% statistic disturbing.

Lies, damn lies, and statistics. As Twain would say.

[Daralundy]

My fear is that something will happen to one of the conservative judges on the Supreme Court before the 2012.

[mockingbyrd]

All nine smacked down the 9th circus. How insane do you have to be to have Ginsburg disagree with you?

[kittymyrib]

These Leftist clowns should be impeached for their unamerican rulings. Why pay them fat salaries to come up with all these unconstitutional rulings?

[Bigun]

My question is why isn’t the MSM reporting this news?