Courts: The 9th Circuit Court of Appeals should be split into multiple courts

Compleat Advocate ^ | Sen. Dan Sullivan (R-AK)

[Steve Schulin]

One in five Americans do not get equal justice under the law ... because the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit is simply too large, its scope is too wide, and it has long passed its ability to provide equal justice and to contribute as a functional court system... [T]here are 65 million people living within the boundaries of the Ninth Circuit. That represents 20 percent of the total population of the United States -- one in five Americans. That is almost two times as many people as there are in the next biggest circuit in the U.S. court of appeals system, and it is almost three times the average population of all the other circuits combined... Because of the size and inefficiency of the court, the court has started to come up with creative shortcuts -- questionable procedural shortcuts which I believe are shortchanging justice for tens of thousands of Americans every year...

[Steve Schulin]

The full article is a worthwhile read. Thousands of cases in this circuit are being decided by judges who are NOT Article III life-tenured judges

[Gaffer]

From my perspective, the 9th Circus area of jurisdiction should be shrunk down to the size of a postage stamp and it’s court sessions be mandated to convene in the mens’ room of the central city bus station.

[Regulator]

Should have been done long ago.

The hard Left attitudes in the formerly Right wing West is very much due to 9th Cicuit tyranny and Bolshevik activism.

[Steve Schulin]

Sen. Sullivan mentions that some folks who want to keep the 9th Circuit’s current geographical jurisdiction decry any split as a radical solution. He explains that Congress has historically split such districts, since the first three-district system was in place. Leaving it alone is the real radical action, he writes. Gaffer, your approach is certainly different than leaving the 9th circuit alone, but it’s just as radical as the status quo in abandoning equal justice for all. If we can’t do better, by far, then we’re past the time for trying to save our precious experiment in self-government. And if you believe that, why are you here?

[Gaffer]

I guess I could ask you why you are here also.

My comment was more along the lines of the historical and equitable utility of the 9th in their rulings. Given so vast an area with very widely differing populations throughout its large realm and all the political, social and freedom concerns cannot be the same, nor can one expect a radical court (my opinion) from SF be expected to give equitable service (although its 7 states are being inundated with transplants and illegals bringing the same kind of issues with them).

To my mind it’s an extra impediment to rulings that actually need decision by the USSC. I know it cannot be disestablished in reality; to that end I guess I’d settle for splitting it up.

So large an area encompassing

[tanknetter]

Everyone just keep in mind the consequences of breaking up the 9th Circuit under a Democrat President, who would appoint judges who would just make all the new Circuit Courts into smaller versions of the 9th.

[NonValueAdded]

Not enough elephants in the 9th circus; it is full of jackasses.

[Gaffer]

Oh, I certainly understand that.

[marktwain]

The Republicans have significant majorities in both houses of Congress. Elect a Republican president, then split the 9th into three districts.

I want Arizona, Nevada, Idaho, and Alaska to be one of the Districts. Washington,Oregon and Hawaii to be the other; California by itself.

[Steve Schulin]

I see we both have been here since Clinton impeachment days. Those were the days when I could read every article (and comment) here and still have time for work and play! I'm still here because I haven't given up hope in our nation being restored to embrace what I've come to call America's Principles. The best statement of those principles is the platform at self-government.us.

[sasquatch]

Create Jefferson first. Include it with OR, etc.

[yefragetuwrabrumuy]

This is only part of a wholesale judicial reform that needs to be undertaken by a Republican POTUS. A lot of it is structural. For example, the US district courts:

http://i.imgur.com/RoK9B2p.png

Which need to be readjusted according to population density:

http://i.imgur.com/IIN7vh0.jpg

Otherwise, there are some problems that are caused by requiring some cases, such as lawsuits between the states and the federal government, to have to go “up the chain” of the federal courts, even though they cannot be resolved at a level lower than the SCOTUS.

Even so, there is a huge bottleneck of cases between the US district courts and the SCOTUS, ending up with some 8,000 cases a year being appealed to a court that can only hear a few dozen.

Both of these can be resolved by creating a new court, just below the SCOTUS, that would have initial jurisdiction over lawsuits when the states sue the federal government or visa versa. Much larger than the SCOTUS, it would also help resolve cases *before* the reached the SCOTUS, by deciding:

1) Is this a federal case worthy of being heard by the SCOTUS, or is it best resolved at the state level.

2) Has this issue already been effectively decided in case law.

3) Do the issues within the case pass constitutional muster? This overrides precedent.

Otherwise, the reorganization could be used to retire the worst of the federal judges, much easier and faster than impeachment.