Want to keep track of the status of all pending federal judicial nominations? Here is the Senate Judiciary’s Committee’s website.
Category: federal courts
Federal Judicial Center unveils enhanced database of historical docket data
The Federal Judicial Center has updated and enhanced its interactive database on federal case filings, covering civil and criminal cases from 1970 to the present, appeals from 1971 to the present, and bankruptcy filings from 2008 to the present. This is undoubtedly a valuable asset for court researchers.
Several new federal judicial nominees have state court experience, and that’s great news
On Monday, the President nominated ten individuals for federal judgeships — five on the circuit courts of appeal, four on the district courts, and one on the U.S. Court of Claims. Three of the ten (Joan Larsen of Michigan, David Stras of Minnesota, and David Nye of Idaho) currently sit on state courts — Larsen and Stras on their state supreme courts, and Nye on his state’s trial bench.
The value of state court experience for federal judges has not been discussed much, but it should be. An intimate knowledge of state law and state court operations is surprisingly useful for the federal bench. And appointing federal judges from the state courts has valuable ripple effects for the states as well. More after the jump.
Fourth Circuit allows CSPAN broadcast of hearing on President’s immigration order
Yesterday, the Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals heard the latest challenge to President Trump’s executive order on immigration. For the first time in circuit history, the court allowed the arguments to be recorded and broadcast on CSPAN.
Even without video, it was an insightful colloquy to listen to. Imagine if viewers could have seen who was talking! Still, score one for transparency, and for the court not being afraid to show its important work to the broader public.
Previous coverage here.
President to nominate ten for federal judgeships today
A few more details here.
Among the rumored names are several state supreme court justices. If that pans out, we’ll have more to say in the coming days on the impact of state-level experience on the federal bench.
Oral arguments in federal court continue to decline
The Legal Intelligencer reports that only 17.5% of federal appellate cases decided on their merits were disposed of after oral argument in 2015-16, the most recent statistical year available. Put another way, nearly five out of every six cases that are filed in the U.S. Courts of Appeal are decided without any sort of oral hearing. That is a significant drop: ten years ago, nearly 26% of cases received an oral hearing before disposition. Twenty years ago, the number was better than 40%.
The decline in hearings at the appellate level is, unfortunately, representative of a larger trend. A few years ago, Judge William Young (D. Mass.) and I examined the time that federal district judges spent on trials and courtroom hearings — a statistic we called “bench presence” — and found a year-over-year decline from FY2008 through FY2013. By 2013, federal district judges — our trial judges! — reported spending about only 2 hours a day on average in the courtroom.
Continue reading “Oral arguments in federal court continue to decline”
New head for Florida’s federal judicial nominating panel
In Florida, as in many other states, the state’s U.S. Senators have created a nominating panel to recommend potential nominees for the federal judicial openings. As part of the larger vacancy crisis, Florida currently has seven openings at the federal district court level. The state’s Lieutenant Governor, Carlos Lopez-Cantera, has been chosen as the new head of the nominating panel.
Let’s hope that the panel does good work, President Trump takes advantage of their pre-screening process, Senators Rubio and Nelson help shepherd the nominees through the Senate, and the people of Florida are able to enjoy a full-strength federal bench in short order.
The latest rumors on federal appellate court nominees
David Lat has a circuit-by-circuit breakdown of possible nominees for the federal courts of appeals. Must read stuff, as always.
Patent infringement case filings dip to their lowest level since Q3 2011
IP Watchdog has an excellent breakdown. And this part of the analysis seems spot on:
Past litigation reports from Lex Machina have pointed to the fact that volatility in patent case filings are typically triggered by changes to the patent system, or even just proposed changes. Spikes in patent litigation have closely preceded changes like the abrogation of Form 18 to plead patent infringement in district court as well as the enactment of provisions of the America Invents Act. Given the fact that the debate on patent reform isn’t currently reverberating in Congress the way it has in recent years, it’s possible that the recent downturn in high-volume plaintiff filings is due to calmer waters in the patent system. The next foreseeable change to the U.S. patent system stem from the U.S. Supreme Court’s upcoming decision in TC Heartland v. Kraft Foods Group Brands, so it will be interesting to see if the court’s ruling in that case creates any similar volatility in case filings.
New judges get their “opportunity to preside over an MDL docket”
This is a very interesting article on the increasing and intentional assignment of multi-district litigation (MDL) dockets to relatively new federal judges.
The Interdependent Third Branch 