[Congressional Record Volume 142, Number 15 (Monday, February 5, 1996)]
[Extensions of Remarks]
[Page E166]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




                   THE NINTH CIRCUIT COURT OF APPEALS

                                 ______


                             HON. JIM BUNN

                               of oregon

                    in the house of representatives

                       Thursday, February 1, 1996

  Mr. BUNN of Oregon. Mr. Speaker, today I am introducing a plan, 
already approved by the Judiciary Committee in the other body, to 
reorganize the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals. This proposal, which is 
long overdue, would divide a circuit that is twice as large as the 
national average in terms of geographical area, population, and 
caseload.
  The Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals was originally designed during the 
Civil War, when 6 of the 9 States in the circuit had not yet been 
admitted to the Union. Since then, the laws of the Nation, and the 
resources required to interpret those laws, have grown exponentially. 
Caseload growth is a concern in many circuits, but no circuit suffers 
the burden as does the ninth circuit.
  One large problem is the magnitude of cases that has led to lengthy 
delays. Even Chief Judge Wallace, the top judge in the ninth circuit, 
admitted that cases can be delayed for 4 months over the national 
average. While the judges have worked very hard to improve an 
unacceptable situation, I believe we can do better.
  The number of judges alone prevents consistency in the ninth circuit. 
There are 28 judges in the ninth, more than twice the national average 
of 12.6, leading to thousands of possible combinations of three judge 
panels to hear a case. Because there are so many sitting and visiting 
judges, there is little uniformity among decisions, leading to greater 
uncertainty of the law of the land. Furthermore, the Ninth Circuit 
Court of Appeals has a higher rate of cases being overturned by the 
U.S. Supreme Court than the national average.
  In addition, Chief Judge Wallace recently called for 10 additional 
judges to ease the burden on the current judges, while others have 
requested that the number of judges be doubled to 56. However, adding 
judges to the already unwieldy panel of 28 would only worsen the 
problem; reorganizing the ninth circuit into two more manageable 
circuits provides a much more efficient solution.
  There is recent precedent for the successful split of a Circuit Court 
of Appeals. The Hruska Commission recommended in 1973 that both the 
fifth and the ninth circuits be divided due to overwhelming size and 
caseload. The fifth circuit was split in 1980 with great success in 
improving efficiency. Chief Judge Tjoflat of the eleventh circuit 
testified before the other body's Judiciary Committee that while the 
new fifth and the eleventh circuits have approximately the same number 
of judges as does the ninth, the two new circuits are able to process 
50 percent more cases than the current ninth circuit.
  Judges, lawyers, and legislators have been calling for a 
reorganization of the ninth circuit since the formal recommendation in 
1973, and the attorneys general of nearly all of the States involved 
have endorsed the ninth circuit split. While many people agree that 
much greater reform of the Federal judicial system is needed, this bill 
is a crucial first step. I ask my colleagues to join me in support for 
this important legislation.

                          ____________________