The Federal Appellate Judiciary in the 21st Century Federal Judicial Center ~ THE FEDERAL JUDICIAL CENTER Board The OUef Justice of the United States Chllirmlln Judge J. Clilfurd Wallace Ollef Judge William C. O'Kclley Unital Smtes Court of AfJPe"'ls United Smtes Distri&t Court for the Ninib Cinuit Northem Distri&t of Georgill Judge Monroe G. McKay Judge David D. Dowd, Jr. Unital StMes Court of AfJPe"'ls United St:#tes District Court for the Te1Iib Cinuit NlJrthem Distri&t of 0hW Judge Jose A. Cabranes Judge Robert E. Ginsberg Unital Stlltes Distri&t Court United Stlltes &nkruptcy Court Distri&t of ConMCricut Northem Distri&t of Illinois L. Ralph Mecham Director of the Administrlltil1e Office of the Unital St:#tes Courts Director Judge John C. Godbold Deputy Director CurIes W. Nihan Division Directors Daniel L. Skoler Russell R. Wheeler Continuing EdUCIJtion & Trllining SpeciRl F.ducllti01'UJi SeT'Pi&es William B. Eldridge Richard D. Fennell ReseRrch In'lWl1l1tions & Systems Dnelopment Alice L. O'Donnell Inter-judiciRl AjfR.irs & In.furwuJtion Senices 1520 H Street, NW. Washington, D.C. 20005 Telephone (202) 633-6011 The Federal Appellate Judiciary in the Twenty-first Century Cynthia Harrison and Russell R. Wheeler Editors Federal Judicial Center 1989 This publication was produced in furtherance of the Center's statu­ tory mission to develop and conduct programs ofcontinuing educa­ tion and training for personnel of the federal judicial system. The statements, conclusions, and points ofview are those of the authors. This work has been reviewed by Center staff, and publication signi­ fies that it is regarded as responsible and valuable. It should be em­ phasized, however, that on matters ofpolicy the Center speaks only through its Board. Cite ase. Harrison & R. Wheeler, eds., The Federal Appellate Judiciary in the Twenty-first Century (Federal Judicial Center 1989). FJC-SES-89-1 Contents Preface John C. Godbold.............................. .... ........... .... 1 Introduction William H. Rehnquist ....................... 9 Chapter I The Functioning of the Federal Appellate Courts in the Future Maintaining the Quality of the Federal Appellate Bench Griffin B. Bell......................................................... 17 Maintaining Effective Procedures in the Federal Appellate Courts John J. Gibbons ..................................................... 22 The Changing Character of Legal Clerkships William J. Bauer..................................................... 29 Governance of the Courts and Structure of the Circuits John C. Godbold .......... ..................................... .... 32 III Contents Chapter II The Role of the Federal Judiciary and the Future Allocation of Jurisdiction Martin H. Redish...... ...... ..... ....... 39 Commentary Levin H. Campbell A New Tier? .......................................................... 53 A. Leon Higginbotham, Jr. Federal Jurisdiction: The Essential Guarantor of Human Rights................................. ...... .............. ... 57 Jon O. Newman Discretionary Access to the Federal Courts ................. 63 Chapter III U.S. Courts of Appeals and U.S. District Courts: Relationships in the Future Paul D. Carrington........................ 69 Commentary William J. Holloway, Jr. Certifying Questions to State Supreme Courts... ........ 93 Joseph F. Weis, Jr. Restoring the Authority ofthe District Court............ 97 iv Contents William W Schwarzer Defining Standards ofReview................................. 100 Chapter IV The Relationship Between the Federal and State Courts Laurence H. Tribe ........................ 105 Commentary Alvin B. Rubin Reallocation: A Two- Way Street .............................. 123 Robert C. Murphy Perceiving Competence in the State Courts...... .......... 127 Chapter V Uniformity ofFederal Law A. Leo Levin............................. 131 Commentary Byron R. White Enlarging the Capacity ofthe Supreme Court........... 145 Donald P. Lay Efficiency and Deference.......................................... 148 v Contents Pierce Lively A Long-Range View................................................ 153 Mary M. Schroeder Clear LawSj Clear Opinions ..................................... 157 Chapter VI Perspectives from the Circuits: Maintaining the Character and Collegiality of the Courts ofAppeals A Healthy and Diverse Judiciary Charles Clark .......................................................... 163 Goodwill and Dedication Harrison L. Winter ................................................. 167 Calendars, Collegiality, and Other Intangibles on the Courts ofAppeals Patricia M. Wald .................................................... 171 Chapter VII Perspectives from the Judicial Conference: Accommodating the Tension Between National and Decentralized Administration Awakening the Judiciary: Recent Developments in National Judicial Administration Wilfred Feinberg ..... ...... ...... ...... ...... ........ .... ........... 185 VI Contents The Role ofTechnology in the Future of the Courts Howard T. Markey ................................................. 193 Chapter VIII Working With the Congress of the Future Frank M. Coffin .......................... 199 Chapter IX The Governance of Space Societies William J. Brennan, Jr..................... 215 Appendices Appendix A. Thoughts for a Third Century: A Roscoe Pound Vision by Paul D. Carrington ....... 227 Appendix B-1. Judicial Conference of the United States and Its Committees, September 1988 ........... 231 Appendix B-2. Additional Committees of the Judicia) Conference of the United States ................. 249 Figures.......................................................................... 251 Contributors ............................................................... 269 vii The Federal Appellate Judiciary in the 21st Century ERRATA SHEET June 18, 1990 Figure 6: The correct number ofen bancs for the twelve circuits in 1989 is 99 and for the Ninth Circuit, 7 (.25% ofcases terminated on the merits). Figure 7: For 1978, the median time from filing notice ofappeal to final disposition was 10.5 months. Figure 8: The final sentence in the box should read: "In 1989, it granted certiorari in less than 1% (0.9%) ofthe 19,322 appeals cases terminated on the merits." (Certiorari data come from Supreme Court terms beginning in October of the preceding year.) Figure 9: Tables B-1 and B-5 should be listed as the sources for 1950 and 1960. Figure 15: Discrepanciesexist between the 1989 figures reversal rate figures here, which were drawn from preliminary data, and those in the published AO report. The correct reversal rate for the Fourth Circuit is 9.85% and the rate for all circuits, 13.5%. In addition to these corrections, revised charf;J are provided for Figures 3 and 10 (see revene); a revision a/Table 1, which appears on page 88, is printed beluw. Table 1 U.S. Courts ofAppeals and U.S. Distrkt Courts Nonsettlement of Civil Cases, 1958 and 1988 1958 1988 Civil Cases Commenced in U.S. District Court 67,115 239,634 (257% increase) Civil Trials Completed 7,062 12,536 (78% increase) Court ofAppeals Civil Cases (from the District Courts) Terminated on the Merits 1,978 13,854 (600% increase) Nonsettlement Rate (Court ofAppeals Civil Cases Terminated on the Merits as a Percentage of District Court Civil Filings) 2.95% 5.78% A major decline in the rate ofnonsettlement ofpending federal civil litigation accounts for much ofthe increase in federal appellate caseload. Ifparties were settling pending civil litigation prior to submission to a court ofappeals at the 1958 rate of97.05%, the courts of appeals would have been asked to decide only 7,069 civil appeals in 1988 instead of 13,854. ~-:---.-~-~.---.--~~.-..~-------------------. Note: All data are from Annual Report ofthe Director ofthe Administrative Office of the U.S. Courts, 1958 (Tables B-1, C-l, C-8), 1988 (Tables B-1, C-l, C-7). Figure 3: Filings per Judgeship: District Courts and Courts of Appeals, 1960-1989 600 500 L~kl / 1 1-1 / -r 400 "" • V \ ./" • v' - /" '''''f~~ .........·-T,.­ ",,'~v -­ 300 l\....... y-" )-' j...-I v 200 r-' "'­ p/" )-l)--< y-' Y 1\ )-l V r-' V 347% net increase .J 100 .---' )-' I-i o L-~_F_ili--,ng1=-=-pcr_d»_'tn_·_ct-'-jud......;:g_ah_i.:.p______Q_Fili_·n..::~!'"".ppdl.tejudgahil Hm:Oata do not rdIect judicial """'perfonnod by ..ru0l'0I'visions judse'northe effect of..cancies. ('They doinclude tempOl'UY judS..hipt.) They alto do not includedota,or the CourtofJlppeal"or the Foderal Circuit ortransfer case. within the district cOW1•. Cue dau are reported on a statistical)'l'''' ending June ao; juds",hip data are for the calendar )'I'll. Sot."w. Annual R<:port of the Director ofthe il.dministno... Office ofthe U.S. Courts,I970(Tabl.. 2,12),1980 (Tabl.. I, a), 1981 (Table 42), 1985 (Table a8), 1986 (Table 1),1987 (Tabl", B, D), 1989 (Tabl.. I, a,S8, B, D). "Number ofAuthorized 1udse.hip., 1789·1986: il.dministntiYe Office of the U.S. Court•. Figure 10. Appeals Arising from Prisoner Petitions, 1950-1989 10,000 1:1 Habeas Corpus/Federal Question 9,000 8,000 D Habeas Corpus/U.S. Defendant 7,000 D Motion to Vacate Sentence 6,000 • Civil Rights & Other Prisoner PetitionsjU.S. Defendant 5,000 • Civil Rights & Other Prisoner Petitions/Federal Question 4,000 3,000 2,000 1,000 0 1950 1960 1970 1980 1989 Sot.",,, Annual R<:port ofthe Direetorofthe Adminiottati... Office oI'the U.S. Courts,I950,1955,1960(Table B·5),1965,1970, 1975, 1980, 1985, 1989 (Table B·7). Twelye·month period. end June ao. Preface John C. Godbold Director Federal