| Submit your comments on this article |
| Home Front: Politix |
| Under the radar: Judiciary Committee Votes to Split 9th Circuit |
| 2005-10-30 |
| The House Judiciary Committee on Thursday approved dividing the San Francisco-based 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in two, arguing the split would result in two more effective circuit courts. "The 9th circuit is too large, too cumbersome," Rep. Dan Lungren, R-Gold River, a former California attorney general, said after the 22-12 vote. But opponents said the move was based partly on GOP opposition to some of the court's rulings, among them the 2002 opinion that declared the Pledge of Allegiance unconstitutional when recited in public schools. Conservative critics say the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals often goes beyond its Constitutional mandate of interpreting the law, by creating new law based upon the personal opinions of judges. "There are all kinds of bogus arguments about judicial efficiency," said Rep. Howard Berman, D-Van Nuys. "It masks the real reason, which is the right wing doesn't like some of the 9th circuit's decisions." The 9th Circuit covers nine states with about 54 million people, and has 28 judgeships. The circuit with the next-largest number of judges is the New Orleans-based 5th Circuit, with 17. The legislation by Judiciary Committee Chairman James Sensenbrenner, R-Wis., would create a 9th Circuit covering California, Hawaii and the Pacific Islands, and a new 12th Circuit covering Alaska, Washington, Oregon, Idaho, Montana, Nevada and Arizona. A bill making the same division has been introduced in the Senate by Sens. Lisa Murkowski, R-Alaska, and John Ensign, R-Nev. It got a hearing Wednesday before a Senate Judiciary subcommittee. Unlike the Senate bill, the House bill would create dozens of new judgeships throughout the country, something with wide support in Congress. Democrats contended supporters were jeopardizing the new judgeships by attaching them to the controversial 9th circuit split that would be unlikely to make it through the Senate. The GOP-led House passed a 9th circuit split measure last year, also adding it to a bill creating more judgeships, but it didn't get a Senate vote. This time around, the House Judiciary Committee is trying to make the bill part of a budget-reduction package that would not be subject to Senate filibuster. Although the bill creates new costs by adding judges, in combination with another House Judiciary measure to raise fees on visas, it meets the committee's $300 million spending-reduction goal. Prospects for that move were uncertain. The Senate Judiciary Committee's budget-reduction bill does not include the 9th circuit and judgeship provisions, and the differences would have to be resolved. |
| Posted by:Anonymoose |
| #15 This is not the first time a circuit has been split: the Fifth Circuit used to also take in the Eleventh. It's a matter of efficient judicial administration and nothing more. The Ninth Circuit is just too bloody big. |
| Posted by: Mike 2005-10-30 21:52 |
| #14 vertically and horizontally - Orange County and San Diego along with all interior counties (Kern, Imp., SB, etc) have common sense and decent judges (with the exceptions noted) |
| Posted by: Frank G 2005-10-30 19:41 |
| #13 vertically or horizontally? |
| Posted by: Ebbolet Thravitle4262 2005-10-30 19:29 |
| #12 Cut California in half, please. |
| Posted by: Sock Puppet O´ Doom 2005-10-30 18:52 |
| #11 split the old justices in both courts so they are an elderly minority... |
| Posted by: Frank G 2005-10-30 18:10 |
| #10 The House Judiciary Committee on Thursday approved dividing the San Francisco-based 9th U.S. Circuit Court This will be very big..IF we can |
| Posted by: Red Dog 2005-10-30 17:38 |
| #9 This is truly sweet. The House Pubs really do have stones. Mebbe they can share with the Senate. |
| Posted by: .com 2005-10-30 16:28 |
| #8 The old 9th Circuit should be limited to Berkeley and no where else. |
| Posted by: Ulins Uleremble5747 2005-10-30 16:06 |
| #7 Thank G-d!! Finally, some chance for sharpening the "tools" in the old shed; or, better yet, let's float the damn thing out to sea, somewhere near that watery vortex that leads straight to the Center of the Earth and all of those other cool dinosaurs, just like in the movies. Mmm...death by obsidian-tipped spear...(lip-smacking with drool)...mmm.... |
| Posted by: ArmChair in sin 2005-10-30 15:55 |
| #6 "No-fat latte, dogs and cats living together..." |
| Posted by: Phil 2005-10-30 15:36 |
| #5 let the old court oversee Hawaii, San Fran, Oregon, No. Cal and the rest goes to the new court. Pack it with true westerners, not the non-fat latte and same-sex marriage crowd |
| Posted by: Frank G 2005-10-30 15:15 |
| #4 I like this also. And creating the new judgeships makes it nearly irresistible for the Congress. And Bush gets a two-fer: the 9th Circuit's impact becomes more limited, and he gets to fill those new judgeships. Heh. |
| Posted by: Steve White 2005-10-30 14:29 |
| #3 No DMFD, I live in Washington. Let LALA Land and Berkeley have the existing (old) judges. Cut us loose with halfway decent (conservative) judges who intrepet the consitution and not legislate from the bench. |
| Posted by: CrazyFool 2005-10-30 14:27 |
| #2 this is good news! |
| Posted by: Frank G 2005-10-30 13:23 |
| #1 Might I humbly suggest that the NEW 9th circuit continue to be based in San Francisco, and the OLD 9th circuit and all of it's staff be situated somewhere on Alaska's North Slope. |
| Posted by: DMFD 2005-10-30 13:02 |