When did Congress create separate judges for the circuit courts?
Congress established sixteen judgeships in six circuit courts in the Judiciary Act of 1801. The first five circuits would receive three judges each, while a single judge would man the Sixth Circuit. The outgoing administration of Federalist president John Adams wanted to strengthen the federal judicial system, particularly before the Democratic-Republican administration of incoming president Thomas Jefferson and a new Congress dominated by Jefferson’s party took office. The Democratic-Republicans repealed the Judiciary Act of 1801 in the Judiciary Act of 1802. This new law kept the structure of the six circuits but abolished the separate judgeships.
Which federal judges lost their jobs because of the Judiciary Act of 1802?
The Judiciary Act of 1802 abolished the new judgeships created by the Judiciary Act of 1801. The following judges lost their jobs: First Circuit: Benjamin Bourne and Jeremiah Smith; Second Circuit: Egbert Benson, Samuel Hitchcock, and Oliver Wolcott; Third Circuit: Richard Bassett, William Griffith, and William Tilghman; Fourth Circuit: Philip Barton Key, Charles Magill, and George Keith Taylor; Fifth Circuit: Joseph Clay, Dominic Augustin Hall, and Edward Harris; and Sixth Circuit: William McClung.
What law created the U.S. Courts of Appeals that exists today?
Congress created nine circuit courts of appeals by the Judiciary Act of 1891, also called the Evarts Act, named after U.S. senator William Evarts of New York. These new circuit court of appeals featured three judges each. A court of appeals for the D.C. Circuit was added in 1893; a court of appeals for the Tenth Circuit was added in 1929; and the Eleventh Circuit was added in 1980 by dividing the existing Fifth Circuit into two parts. In 1982, the Court created the Federal Circuit, which hears specialized appeals in patent and civil personnel cases among others. The Evarts Act essentially established the basic model for the modern-day federal judicial system.
William Maxwell Evarts, best known for serving as President Andrew Johnson’s counsel during his impeachment proceedings. He also was a U.S. senator and served in the Abraham Lincoln and Rutherford B. Hayes administrations. Brady-Handy Photograph Collection/Library of Congress.
Who was William Evarts?
William Maxwell Evarts was one of the nation’s leading lawyers. He also served in the U.S. Senate and sponsored the Judiciary Act of 1891. Evarts served as counsel for then-President Andrew Johnson during his impeachment proceedings. He also served as U.S. attorney for President Abraham Lincoln and as secretary of state for President Rutherford B. Hayes.
How does the system created by the Founding Fathers compare with the current federal court system?
The Judiciary Act of 1789 created the same three-tiered court system of federal district courts, federal circuits, and U.S. Supreme Court that exists today. The Evarts Act modernized the system by actually placing new judges on the circuit court appellate level, as opposed to staffing the circuit courts with district judges and U.S. Supreme Court justices. Now, there are ninety-four federal district courts, thirteen federal circuit courts of appeals, and one U.S. Supreme Court composed of nine justices. One major difference in the current system from the 1789 system is that now there are separate judges on the federal circuit courts of appeals. Another major difference is that the circuit courts of appeals are appellate courts; they no longer function as trial courts.
How many judges on the Court of Appeals hear individual cases?
Most cases that reach the federal appeals courts are heard by panels of three judges. Sometimes the panel consists of three federal appeals court judges and sometimes it is composed of two federal appeals court judges and a district court judge within that circuit.
The Current Federal Appeals Courts
There is one national federal appeals court, called the Federal Circuit, that hears specialized cases, such as patent and civil service personnel cases, that arise throughout the country.
There are also twelve regional courts of appeals based in various parts of the country. Each one hears cases coming through the federal court system from specific geographic regions of the country.
D.C. Circuit (located in the District of Columbia): covers the District of Columbia
First Circuit (Boston): Maine, Massachusetts, Rhode Island, and Puerto Rico Second Circuit (New York City): Connecticut, New York, and Vermont Third Circuit (Philadelphia): Delaware, New Jersey, Pennsylvania, and the Virgin Islands Fourth Circuit (Richmond): Maryland, North Carolina, South Carolina, Virginia, and West Virginia
Fifth Circuit (New Orleans): Louisiana, Mississippi, and Texas
Sixth Circuit (Cincinnati): Kentucky, Michigan, Ohio, and Tennessee
Seventh Circuit (Chicago): Illinois, Indiana, and Wisconsin
Eighth Circuit (St. Louis): Arkansas, Iowa, Minnesota, Missouri, Nebraska, North Dakota, and South Dakota
Ninth Circuit (San Francisco): Alaska, Arizona, California, Hawaii, Idaho, Montana, Nevada, Oregon, Washington, Guam, and the Northern Mariana Islands
Tenth Circuit (Denver): Colorado, Kansas, New Mexico, Oklahoma, Utah, and Wyoming
Eleventh Circuit (Atlanta): Alabama, Florida, and Georgia
When a party loses a case before a three-judge panel, the losing party can then appeal for full-panel, or en banc, review. En banc review means that the full panel of non-retired members of the federal appeals court will sit and hear the case. This number generally ranges from eleven to fifteen. Federal Rules of Appellate Procedure, Rule 35, provides: “An en banc hearing or rehearing is not favored and ordinarily will not be granted unless: (1) en banc consideration is necessary to secure or maintain uniformity of the court’s decisions; or (2) the proceeding involves a question of extreme importance.” There is no exact science as to when a court might grant en banc review. But Rule 35 offers two possibilities—when the panel decision conflicts with an earlier panel decision or when the case is extremely important.
U.S. Supreme Court’s Original Jurisdiction
“The Supreme Court shall have original and exclusive jurisdiction of all controversies between two or more States. (b) The Supreme Court shall have original but not exclusive jurisdiction of: (1) All actions or proceedings to which ambassadors, other public ministers, consuls, or vice consuls of foreign states are parties; (2) All controversies between the United States and a State; (3) All actions or proceedings by a State against the citizens of another State or against aliens.”
JURISDICTION
What is jurisdiction?
Jurisdiction refers to the legal power and authority of a court to hear and decide a case. When a court is said to have jurisdiction, it means that the court is the proper forum to decide the legal controversy in question. Often, legal professionals use the term jurisdiction to mean the court’s area of authority in geographic terms. For instance, the Sixth U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals is a federal appeals court that has jurisdiction over federal cases that arise in Tennessee, Kentucky, Ohio, and Michigan. The Sixth Circuit would not have jurisdiction over a federal case that arose in Illinois. That would be a decision within the control of the Seventh U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals.
What types of jurisdiction does the U.S. Supreme Court have?
The