Who is in the mood for a little judicial administration history? Everyone? Just as I suspected.

In light of the new bill to expand SCOTUS, a *big* thread on the relationship between the # of Supreme Court seats and the # of circuits. (⚖️🧵) (1/x)
Once upon a time, in 1789, Congress said "let there be courts." And so it came to be that we had 6 Supreme Court Justices and 3 Circuits – the Eastern, Middle, and Southern. (And then Congress rested. 💤) (2/x)
Now you might be thinking to yourself, 6 does not equal 3. 🙅‍♀️ To you I say, patience, my pet.

As you know, back in the bad old days of the federal courts, the Justices had to ride Circuit – and so 2 justices were assigned to each Circuit. But that math soon changed.... (3/x)
In 1801, Congress enacted the infamous Judiciary Act of 1801. (👻) Among other things, the Act expanded the 3 circuits to 6. (It also renamed the circuits from their geographical designations, e.g., the Eastern Circuit, to numerical designations, e.g., the First Circuit.) (4)
Now I know, I know - the 1801 Act was repealed in March 1802. 🫂 BUT an act passed the next month that preserved the increase in the number of circuits from 3 to 6. And so, the # of Supreme Court seats = the # of Circuits.

And we're just getting started. (5/x)
Now I know what you’re thinking – the Sweet 6 didn’t last long because the Supreme Court was expanded to 7 in 1807. And you’re right! (Gold star for you 🌟) But guess what – so did the number of Circuits! (6/x)
In 1807 we get a little something called the 7th Circuit, which comprised the two districts of Tennessee, and the districts of Kentucky and Ohio.

So for those of us keeping track at home (everyone), we’re up to 7 Justices and 7 Circuits. (7/x)
But the fun doesn’t stop there! In 1837, the Supreme Court was taken up to 9 seats . . . and the number of Circuits was increased to 9 as well! The 8th Circuit was created out of the two districts of Tennessee and the districts of Kentucky and Missouri . . . (8/x)
And not wanting to be left out of the fun, the 9th Circuit was created out of the two districts of Alabama, Arkansas, the Eastern District of Louisiana, and the two districts of Mississippi. (Seriously, the *9th* Circuit y'all.) (9/x)
Now you may be thinking, this run has to come to an end at some point! Oh but we haven’t reached it yet . . . Congress gives SCOTUS a 10th seat in 1863 at the same time it gives us the 10th Circuit! (Made up of the 2 districts of California and the District of Oregon.) (10/x)
But don't get too attached - in 1866 the 10th Circuit lost the 2 districts of California and Oregon (all transferred to the 9th Circuit), and ceased to be a circuit . . . just when one seat was removed from the Supreme Court! (11/x)
The Judiciary Act of 1869 (aka the Circuit Judges Act of 1869) formally returned the number of SCOTUS seats to 9 – and that is where it has remained.

But the number of Circuits? Not so much . . . (12/x)
We stayed at 9 Circuits for a few decades. And then in 1891, when the Evarts Act created the new circuit courts of appeals (😇), we got 9 of them - one for each of the then-existing Circuits.

But the perfect relationship between Seats & Circuits didn’t survive much longer...
Only 2 years after the Evarts Act, Congress added what would eventually be called the D.C. Circuit. The (new) 10th and 11th Circuits were later created in 1929 and 1980, respectively. And let's not forget the Federal Circuit, which followed in 1982. (Seats 9 / Circuits 13)
So holding aside the merits of the bill to expand the Court, one rheotircal device will surely be that we are bringing the # of Seats and # of Circuits back in line once again. (And poor John Roberts won’t have to be the Circuit Justice of the DC *and* Fed Circuits any longer.)
But let’s engage in a little foreshadowing. The 9th Circuit has 29 authorized judgeships and there is talk again of splitting it. Holding aside the merits of that proposal, we may not remain at 13 Circuits forever . . . Stay tuned! (Fin)

#appellatetwitter #JudicialHistory❤️

• • •

Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to force a refresh
 

Keep Current with Marin K Levy

Marin K Levy Profile picture

Stay in touch and get notified when new unrolls are available from this author!

Read all threads

This Thread may be Removed Anytime!

PDF

Twitter may remove this content at anytime! Save it as PDF for later use!

Try unrolling a thread yourself!

how to unroll video
  1. Follow @ThreadReaderApp to mention us!

  2. From a Twitter thread mention us with a keyword "unroll"
@threadreaderapp unroll

Practice here first or read more on our help page!

More from @marinklevy

11 Apr
@TheAtlantic has a new article, suggesting we should worry about the courts of appeals in 20 years b/c many Trump appointees will be Chief Judges and might manipulate panel assignments (creating more 2R/1D panels). This piece is *deeply problematic* and misreads my scholarship.🧵
The article begins by noting that in 2040 / 2041, many of the Chief Judges of the courts of appeals will be judges who were appointed by President Trump. That is an observation I and others have made. And that is important in some respects. (2/x)
As I talk about in my forthcoming article, "The Office of the Circuit Chief Judge," the Chief Judge has a number of important responsibilities. And that includes approving the calendar. This does not mean we should expect a whole swath of judges to manipulate that calendar. (3/x)
Read 7 tweets
10 Apr
A few quick thoughts on this rainy Friday night about the Biden Supreme Court Commission . . . (and because the little ones are in the bath and my time is short, this will be *real quick*). (Mini ⚖️Commission 🧵, 1/8-ish)
I've said before that I think the idea of a Commission is a great one. I appreciate that there are those who want action now, but I think there is great sense in bringing together thoughtful and knowledgeable people to exchange ideas, come to their own conclusions & report out. 2
(And on this point – I would very gently ask the critics who are suggesting that this group was formed “in order to do X” or “not to do X” to take a (comfortable) seat. This is an independent group of scholars and practitioners and former judges. Kindly let them do their job.)
Read 8 tweets
2 Mar
Who wants to talk about the history of law clerking? Everybody? Good. Let’s pull up a chair for a little judicial administration history….⚖️🧵 (1/x)
According to the late (Second Circuit (❤️) Judge) J. Daniel Mahoney, the "institution of clerking" (don’t you love that phrase?) began over a century ago. It is largely undisputed that the first jurist to utilize legal assistants was one Horace Gray. (2/x)
Who was Horace Gray and why did he feel the need to employ a law clerk? Well, in 1873 he became the Chief Justice of the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court of Errors (which could be the subject of its own twitter thread…) and found that his workload had increased considerably.
Read 13 tweets
30 Nov 20
Following up on an insight from the great @joshchafetz (naturally), a quick thread on what I see as one of the blind spots of the legal academy, concerning methodologies… (🧵1/9)
I’ve always started from the position that the primary goal of the legal academy – as with the rest of the academy – is the production of knowledge. If that’s so, then it would seem we should value a number of different methodologies and approaches… (2/9)
It is important that we acquire more information about how the world works from empiricists – both quantitative and qualitative. It’s important to know how the world once worked from legal historians. (3/9)
Read 10 tweets
20 Nov 20
With the Court announcing new circuit allotments today, I know what you're thinking - huh, what is the story behind these allotments? Well have I got you covered! Here’s a little judicial administration history thread (with much of the underlying info c/o @FedJudicialHist).⚖️🧵1/
Let's cast our minds back to 1789...remember that the Justices initially had responsibilities on the circuit courts. Specifically, the First Judiciary Act created 3 geographical circuits (Eastern, Middle & Southern) to which the Justices were assigned for circuit riding. 2/
A few years later (in the Act of April 13, 1791) Congress mandated that the Court issue a written order at each session, indicating the circuits to which the Justices would be assigned. Seems totally fine, right? Well... 3/
Read 16 tweets
31 Oct 20
In the mood for a distraction? Yearning to learn more about en banc courts? Do I have the mini judicial administration thread for you…⚖️🧵🎃 (1 / 11-ish)
First, a word about terminology (c/o the incomparable Judge Jon O. Newman) – “en banc” can be traced back to the Latin “in banco” – the ablative of “bancus” or “bench.” JON notes that a well-regarded etymologist indefnties a use of in banco in English writing in 1645, and...(2)
...a first use of the Anglicized “in bank” in 1768 in Blackstone’s Commentaries. “In banc” apparently came into fashion in England in the 1800s. But, being the Francophile that I am, I prefer “en banc.” (3/11ish)
Read 14 tweets

Did Thread Reader help you today?

Support us! We are indie developers!


This site is made by just two indie developers on a laptop doing marketing, support and development! Read more about the story.

Become a Premium Member ($3/month or $30/year) and get exclusive features!

Become Premium

Too expensive? Make a small donation by buying us coffee ($5) or help with server cost ($10)

Donate via Paypal Become our Patreon

Thank you for your support!

Follow Us on Twitter!