Do we Americans have to let everything linger? (9th Circuit Court Delays Recall)

[Mordoch]

Originally posted by Oerdin
The 9th circuit gets over turned on appeal all the time. The San Fransisco leftists just love to make rulings basded upon politics and not the law so they get smeared in the appeals courts all the time.

While your statement may not be technically incorrect, it is highly misleading. Conservatives love to hype how often the 9th Circuit Court decisions are overturned, but they are actually overturned less often on a percentage basis than some of the more conservative district courts. Here's a letter to the New York Times in which Judge John T. Noonan JR. responds to a similar allegation by citing statistics on the issue.

Court Statistics

To the Editor:

Re ''Court That Ruled on Pledge Often Runs Afoul of Justices'' (front page, June 30), about the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit:

If a fallible human being has a 1 percent error rate and does 100 problems, he will get 1 problem wrong. If he does 500 problems, he will get 5 wrong. If a second person does only 100 problems, he will make four fewer mistakes than a person who does 500 problems. This does not make him more accurate.

In the calendar year 2001, the Ninth Circuit terminated 10,372 cases, and was reversed in 14, with a correction rate of 1.35 per thousand. The Fourth Circuit, reputedly the most conservative circuit and the circuit with the second-largest number of cases reviewed by the Supreme Court, terminated 5,078 cases and was reversed in 7, making a correction rate of 1.38 per thousand.

JOHN T. NOONAN JR.
U.S. Circuit Judge, 9th Circuit
San Francisco, July 1, 2002

Published: 07 - 06 - 2002 , Late Edition - Final , Section A , Column 6 , Page 12

http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9400EEDE1131F935A35754C0A9649C8B63

[Dinner]

Hmmm, and what about the last five or ten years? I'd wager that if we look at more then just the last year then we'll find the 9th circuit will have a much higher "error rate". You're picking the 9ths best year and ignoring their track record of incompetence from all the previous years.

[Mordoch]

Originally posted by Oerdin
Hmmm, and what about the last five or ten years? I'd wager that if we look at more then just the last year then we'll find the 9th circuit will have a much higher "error rate". You're picking the 9ths best year and ignoring their track record of incompetence from all the previous years.

Could you show stats then? The Court Justice was citing the most recently completed year at the time in his letter.

[Dinner]

HERE is an interesting site.

Notably, the 9th Circuit accounted for both 30 percent of the cases (24 of 80) and 30 percent of the reversals (18 of 59) the Supreme Court decided by full written opinions this term. In addition, the 9th Circuit was responsible for more than a third (35%, or 8 of 23) of the High Court’s unanimous reversals that were issued by published opinions. Thus, on the whole, the 9th Circuit’s rulings accounted for more reversals this past term than all the state courts across the country combined and represented nearly half of the overturned judgments (45%) of the federal appellate courts.

Dealing directly with the issue you brought up:

Many legal experts attribute the High Court’s frequent review of 9th Circuit decisions to that court’s staggering size — with a full complement of 28 judges, the 9th Circuit has more judges than any other federal appellate court and exercises jurisdiction over California, Oregon, Washington, Arizona, Montana, Idaho, Nevada, Alaska, Hawaii, Guam and the Northern Mariana Islands. But if the 9th Circuit’s gigantic caseload is to explain away its record in the U.S. Supreme Court, then the frequency of review and reversal should at least correspond to its size and the percentage of federal appellate cases it hears. Unfortunately, this is not the case.

Although the 9th Circuit’s caseload comprised approximately 17% of the federal appellate cases terminated in the year ending March 31, 2002, its decisions accounted for close to half (43%) of all the federal appellate decisions reviewed by the Supreme Court this past term. Comparatively, the 5th Circuit decided nearly 14% of federal appeals cases, but accounted for only 5.4% of the Supreme Court’s docket. The third largest federal appeals court, the 11th Circuit, accounted for nearly 13% of federal appellate caseload, but only 7.1% of the cases decided by the Supreme Court originated there.

This means that, on average, a case from the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 9th Circuit was more than twice as likely to be reviewed and produce a written decision by the U.S. Supreme Court than was a case from the other federal appeals courts. By contrast, a case from the second busiest circuit, the 5th, was nearly a third less likely to be reviewed and decided by the High Court than the average federal appellate case.

[Dinner]

Another good quote.

It is true that the overall reversal rate of the 9th Circuit (75%) was lower than that of other federal appellate courts — most notably the 4th, 5th, 8th and 10th Circuits, which were all reversed 100% of the time this past term. Yet these “complete” reversal rates are likely due to much less frequent review of those circuits by the U.S. Supreme Court. Specifically, the High Court decided only eight cases from the 4th, 5th, 8th and 10th Circuits combined (three from the 4th, three from the 5th, one from the 8th, and one from the 10th), compared with the 24 cases the Supreme Court took up from the 9th. Thus, the 9th Circuit’s lower overall reversal rate does not demonstrate the justices’ greater agreement with the decisions of the 9th Circuit, but is likely attributable to that circuit’s much higher review rate. Such a conclusion is only reinforced by the fact that the more than half (57%, or 8 of 14) of the federal appellate decisions the Supreme Court unanimously overturned came from the 9th Circuit. This means that a full one-third (8 of 24) of the 9th Circuit cases decided by the High Court were unanimously overturned.

[Mordoch]

Notably, the 9th Circuit accounted for both 30 percent of the cases (24 of 80) and 30 percent of the reversals (18 of 59) Thus, on the whole, the 9th Circuit’s rulings accounted for more reversals this past term than all the state courts across the country combined and represented nearly half of the overturned judgments (45%) of the federal appellate courts.

This data strikes me as extremely odd given that its only 4 cases more being overturned than the previous year. At least in 2001, a similar number put the 9th Circuit below the average of other court systems in being overturned. In fact, given the 2001 statistics directly coverted into the 2002 figures, between the 9th Circuit and the Fourth circuit they would account for 66% of the total for the federal appellate courts! Either the number of overturned cases was reduced radically for 2002, these two courts have an amazingly high percentage of the total number of cases overturned as a rule, or the stats from the link you cited are bogus!

[Imran Siddiqui]

That makes it obvious that this is a right-wing circus.

Interesting how 'progressives' shy away from progressive initiatives when it seems the 'other guy' will win .

the stats from the link you cited are bogus!

Because there is no chance that stats cited by a NINTH CIRCUIT JUDGE couldn't be bogus? I'll trust the site's numbers over a judge for the circuit.

[Mordoch]

Originally posted by Imran Siddiqui
Because there is no chance that stats cited by a NINTH CIRCUIT JUDGE couldn't be bogus? I'll trust the site's numbers over a judge for the circuit.

You're telling me that there were incorrect stats on judicial matters presented in a letter to the New York Times by a NINTH CIRCUIT JUDGE and no Republicans noticed and decided to publicize this fact? This would be the perfect way to prove the dishonesty of the court and call for the impeachment of Judge JOHN T. NOONAN. The possibility that the Republicans would not notice when the stats should be publicly available to check and left him off the hook without comment seems less believe than the possiblity that Sharon, Arafat, and Jerry Faldwell are secretly involved in a three way homosexual love affair!

[MichaeltheGreat]

Originally posted by chegitz guevara


A clasic example of shooting off your mouth without knowing the facts.

The truth is that the ACLU did sue the State of California before the 2002 election. California settled with the ACLU, saying that it could not feasably upgrade the voting systems before the upcoming election, but would do so before the next election. Neither the ACLU nor California expected to have an election 11 months after the last one, but the consent decree still holds, and by holding this election without upgrading the machines, California is violating its consent decree, which has the force of law.

Consent decree with whom? The ACLU is a private litigant, and if it's *****ed up about a purported settlement issue, then it can renew the original action.

The 9th Circuit is dead wrong, in ordering the delay of an election that has not yet taken place. I.e. before there is a justiciable controversy.

[Imran Siddiqui]

You're telling me that there were incorrect stats on judicial matters presented in a letter to the New York Times by a NINTH CIRCUIT JUDGE and no Republicans noticed and decided to publicize this fact? This would be the perfect way to prove the dishonesty of the court and call for the impeachment of Judge JOHN T. NOONAN

How do you know that no Republicans sent editorials to the NY Times? Seeing as they wouldn't be judges, I'm not sure they'd get great play on the op-ed page. Have you scanned all the NY Times op-ed pages to make sure no one disputed the facts?

And why would this be an impeachable offense? He isn't under oath when writing to a paper.

If you want to use your 'proof', then where is the sites shooting down the Center for Individual Freedom stats? Obviously someone would, because I see those stats on reversal a lot.

[Mordoch]

Originally posted by Imran Siddiqui

You're telling me that there were incorrect stats on judicial matters presented in a letter to the New York Times by a NINTH CIRCUIT JUDGE and no Republicans noticed and decided to publicize this fact? This would be the perfect way to prove the dishonesty of the court and call for the impeachment of Judge JOHN T. NOONAN

How do you know that no Republicans sent editorials to the NY Times? Seeing as they wouldn't be judges, I'm not sure they'd get great play on the op-ed page. Have you scanned all the NY Times op-ed pages to make sure no one disputed the facts?

And why would this be an impeachable offense? He isn't under oath when writing to a paper.

My point is that there are all sorts of convervative news sources out there, Drudge, Rush Limbaugh, Fox News, etc., but no-one seems to have publicized anything about this letter when I ran a google search. Convervatives have plenty of ways to point out the misdeeds of liberals.

On the impreachment issue, I didn't say it woud be justified, just that they would call for it. I've seen all sorts of convervative schemes to undermine the 9th Circuit Court of appeals. I.E. create a 12 circuit that would take over have the juristication and split the judges from the 9th circuit between the two and stack the rest of each court with dedicated conservatives.

[Imran Siddiqui]

My point is that there are all sorts of convervative news sources out there, Drudge, Rush Limbaugh, Fox News, etc., but no-one seems to have publicized anything about this letter when I ran a google search.

How many of these news sources have even heard of this letter? This is the first I'm hearing of it, and I follow the news pretty well. I mean, it took people on this site not to long to counter the Justice's stats with other stats. I'm sure if you showed it to Rush, you'd have similar response.

One would also think that the liberal news sources (CNN, ABCnews) would bring this up whenever someone talks about the 9th Cir being overturned so much.

I've seen all sorts of convervative schemes to undermine the 9th Circuit Court of appeals. I.E. create a 12 circuit that would take over have the juristication and split the judges from the 9th circuit between the two and stack the rest of each court with dedicated conservatives.

They probably should add another Circuit. The 9th encompases an incredibly amount of people and population. Compare that to the 3nd Circuit, which is basically just three Mid-Atlantic states (and Puerto Rico, interestingly enough).

[Tattila the Hun]

Does linger have anything to do with lingerie?

[Dinner]

BTW HERE is the lower court reversal rates for cases decide by the Supreme Court this past term. Please pay close attention to the 9th circuit's numbers vs the other circuits.

[Adam Smith]

Why is this case being heard in Federal court, since it involves a state election?

What did the 9th Circuit make of the 2002 New Jersey Senate decision, in which the court said that the right to timely and competitive elections outweighed the filing deadline explicitly stated in the state constitution?

US Supreme Court Justice Ginsburg, who dissented in Bush vs Gore, was quoted in this morning's Washington Post as saying Bush vs. Gore was a "one of a kind case ... I doubt it will ever be cited as precedent by the court on anything."