United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit is a federal court with appellate jurisdiction over the district courts in the following districts:

Ninth Circuit split proposals

The following are the most prominent of the several existing or former proposals that have been considered by congressional leaders, legislative commissions, and interest groups.

~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~

• Commission on Structural Alternatives for the Federal Courts of Appeals, Final Report, Dec. 18, 1998. The Commission found that splitting the Ninth Circuit would be "impractical and . . . unnecessary." However, it recommended that the circuit be divided into three "adjudicative divisions" each of which would hear appeals from specific regions. A fourth at-large "circuit division" would be invoked solely to resolve conflicts of law arising within a particular division. This proposal would also abolish circuit-wide en banc or limited en banc circuit panels, instead creating en banc panels from each of the three regions as necessary.
• Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals of Reorganization Act of 2003, S. 562. This proposal would split the Ninth Circuit into two, with California and Nevada being retained by the new Ninth Circuit and the remaining Ninth Circuit jurisdictions being assigned to a new Twelfth Circuit. The bill would create ten new judgeships, with 25 being retained by the Ninth Circuit and 13 being assigned to the Twelfth Circuit. Each current Ninth Circuit judge would be assigned to a new circuit based on the location of his or her duty station. This proposal was co-sponsored by Republican Senators from Alaska, Montana, Idaho, and Oregon. After a hearing by the Senate Judiciary Subcommittee on Administrative Oversight and the Courts on April 7, 2004, no vote was held.
• Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals Judgeship and Reorganization Act of 2003, H.R. 2723. This proposal would split the Ninth Circuit into two, with Arizona, California and Nevada being retained by the new Ninth Circuit and the remaining Ninth Circuit jurisdictions being assigned to a new Twelfth Circuit. The bill would create five permanent and two temporary judgeships, all to be retained by the new Ninth Circuit. The temporary judgeships would terminate upon the existence of a vacancy ten years or more after passage of the act. Each current Ninth Circuit judge would be assigned to a new circuit based on the location of his or her duty station. This proposal was co-sponsored by Republican congressmen from Washington, Idaho, Oregon, and Washington. After a hearing by the House Judiciary Subcommittee on on Courts, the Internet, and Intellectual Property on October 21, 2003, no vote was held.
• Ninth Circuit Judgeship and Reorganization Act of 2004, S. 878. This proposal would create two new circuits, the Twelfth and Thirteenth. The Ninth Circuit would retain California, Hawaii, Guam, and the CNMI. The Twelfth Circuit would contain Arizona, Nevada, Idaho, and Montana. The Thirteenth Circuit would contain Alaska, Oregon, and Washington. The Act would provide that existing judges be assigned to new circuits based on the location of their duty stations, after which the number of active judgeships in the new Ninth Circuit would be increased to nineteen. This bill was reintroduced in the 109th Congress as the Ninth Circuit Judgeship and Reorganization Act of 2005, H.R. 211, co-sponsored by House Majority Leader Tom DeLay and the same Republican Congressmen who had sponsored the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals Judgeship and Reorganization Act of 2003. This proposal would substantially align the states within each new circuit along political lines. Each state proposed as part of the new Ninth and Thirteenth Circuits (except for Alaska) cast its electoral votes for Democrat John F. Kerry in 2004, while each state proposed as part of the new Twelfth Circuit cast its electoral votes for Republican George W. Bush in 2004.