9th Circuit Court of Appeals watch (judges & composition of CA9, not cases)

[five.five-six]

There are 29 Judges plus one Chief Judge; then there are 19 Senior Judges who are semi-retired and hear a very limited number of (if any) cases per year to maintain their status.

Thus, there are "30 active seats," but only 29 "Judges" as such. When it comes to the 29 + 1...

• 9 appointed by Clinton
• 7 by Obama
• 4 by G.W. Bush
• 10 by Trump

As regards the 19 Senior Judges...

• 2 appointed by Nixon
• 4 by Carter
• 3 by Reagan
• 2 by G.H.W. Bush
• 5 by Clinton
• 3 by G.W. Bush

That gives Democrats 16 of the 30 'active' judges and 9 of the 'Senior' Judges; while Republicans have 14 of the 30 'active' judges and 10 of the 'Senior' Judges.

In that sense, what Trump has done with his 10 appointments is restore some semblance of 'balance' to the 9th Circuit. Though it has not tipped 'conservative,' it does, in theory, give 'conservatives' a fighting chance in the 9th.

But he can keep going while impeached?

[CCWFacts]

This site is kept updated and shows a good overview of what is happening with regard appointments of judges to federal courts.

That's cool! Clearly there are a few circuits (including our 9th) which are a couple of judges away from being flipped. Hoping Trump gets a second term, and we'll have a couple more circuits (certainly including the 9th) flipped.

[socal m1 shooter]

[...]
In that sense, what Trump has done with his 10 appointments is restore some semblance of 'balance' to the 9th Circuit. Though it has not tipped 'conservative,' it does, in theory, give 'conservatives' a fighting chance in the 9th.

This site is kept updated and shows a good overview of what is happening with regard appointments of judges to federal courts.

[Paladin]

Let's try to keep this thread On Topic.

From the OP (bolding added):

Since we already have a "SCOTUS watch" (http://www.calguns.net/calgunforum/s...1#post21060351), I thought I'd start one for CA9 since most RKBA cases don't make it to SCOTUS. (Yeah, understatement of the year...) Just post any news/rumors in the press re. appointments/retirements/public statements (re. the 2nd A RKBA), by nominees or judges for CA9 with a link.

[pacrat]

Democrats have to deal with much more of a roll of the dice now then the sure thing they used to have. Maybe they think twice on creating legislation that could blow up in their faces.

A rather naive opinion that assumes the Ca Legs give a crap. THEY DON'T!

They don't believe in the constitution as the LAW of the LAND. So they either ignore or CRAP on it every chance they get.

https://youtu.be/Z6Dj8tdSC1A

https://youtu.be/zKwz1RjrMXo

A-holes like Reggie pass legislation with the foregone conclusion that it is unconstitutional and will be overturned in court. But they pass it knowing it will take years, if not decades, to work through the courts. Meanwhile they fulfill their Anti 2A agenda suppressing citizens rights.

In CrapOfornia they pass dozens of laws a year. And the march of suppression moves forward exponentially. While we get "MAYBE" one pro 2A ruling out of SCOTUS every TEN years.

It's a numbers game we have been losing for decades.

[baggss]

LOL!

Main reason I posted it was to show her physical and mental health: both look good for a gal her age (86 yo).

I knew that one of our Senators was a whore who slept her way into politics, I just didn't realize the other was Skeletor.

[Solidsnake87]

I seem to recall hearing about two ninth circuit judges either retiring or taking senior status quite soon, one in January and one in February. I cannot find the source. Can anyone help me locate the article? I know the article I'm referring to was published in the last four months. Now that its January, I've been expecting to see more news on this stuff.

[OC_Gunman]

Seems unlikely given how they just voted on impeachment with nothing that would meet the burden of proof in a criminal trial and probably not the "preponderance of evidence" standard of a civil trial either. No, they're all in at this point. Look at the shenanigans they're trying for in Virginia, Georgia and Kansas right now, to name but a few places. They realize their bluff is about to be called, but they're all in at this point. They know that they have until November to consolidate iron fisted power by hook or by crook and they intend to do so by an means necessary - vote fraud, amnesty, impeachment, restoration of rights to felons, releasing criminals onto the streets, fast tracking green card holders, ballot harvesting, it's all in play. Every last vote is going to matter because the communists are going to play every card in the deck that they have to turn this nation into their hellish utopia. They're beyond emboldened - they're now desperate.

This guy gets it - - I'd subscribe to your newsletter (if boomer) or podcast (if millennial)!

[ironpegasus]

Democrats have to deal with much more of a roll of the dice now then the sure thing they used to have. Maybe they think twice on creating legislation that could blow up in their faces.

Seems unlikely given how they just voted on impeachment with nothing that would meet the burden of proof in a criminal trial and probably not the "preponderance of evidence" standard of a civil trial either. No, they're all in at this point. Look at the shenanigans they're trying for in Virginia, Georgia and Kansas right now, to name but a few places. They realize their bluff is about to be called, but they're all in at this point. They know that they have until November to consolidate iron fisted power by hook or by crook and they intend to do so by an means necessary - vote fraud, amnesty, impeachment, restoration of rights to felons, releasing criminals onto the streets, fast tracking green card holders, ballot harvesting, it's all in play. Every last vote is going to matter because the communists are going to play every card in the deck that they have to turn this nation into their hellish utopia. They're beyond emboldened - they're now desperate.

[CessnaDriver]

Democrats have to deal with much more of a roll of the dice now then the sure thing they used to have. Maybe they think twice on creating legislation that could blow up in their faces.

[sigstroker]

Doing such actions is like going nuclear. At that point, everyone realizes that no one will show any self-control on anything.

We're already way past that with the shampeachment.

[CCWFacts]

Thanks for the explanation of 30 vs 29. Now I understand.

All the Clinton appointees were born in the 40s and 50s, so at least one or two of them will leave active status during Trump's next term (let's hope).

In that sense, what Trump has done with his 10 appointments is restore some semblance of 'balance' to the 9th Circuit. Though it has not tipped 'conservative,' it does, in theory, give 'conservatives' a fighting chance in the 9th.

Right. Peruta would have gone differently today than it did a few years ago. The en banc would have had about an even chance of being conservative and the state would not have gambled everything on a coin toss.

[TrappedinCalifornia]

Weird, Wiki says there are 29 judges, Fox says "30 active seats". Is there a difference between a judge and an active seat?

Sometimes it's hard to follow all these issues.

But anyway - we have 14 judges, out of either 29 or 30, so that's good, and some of the liberal judges are 70+ so Trump will definitely make more appointments if he gets a 2nd term.

There are 29 Judges plus one Chief Judge; then there are 19 Senior Judges who are semi-retired and hear a very limited number of (if any) cases per year to maintain their status.

Thus, there are "30 active seats," but only 29 "Judges" as such. When it comes to the 29 + 1...

• 9 appointed by Clinton
• 7 by Obama
• 4 by G.W. Bush
• 10 by Trump

As regards the 19 Senior Judges...

• 2 appointed by Nixon
• 4 by Carter
• 3 by Reagan
• 2 by G.H.W. Bush
• 5 by Clinton
• 3 by G.W. Bush

That gives Democrats 16 of the 30 'active' judges and 9 of the 'Senior' Judges; while Republicans have 14 of the 30 'active' judges and 10 of the 'Senior' Judges.

In that sense, what Trump has done with his 10 appointments is restore some semblance of 'balance' to the 9th Circuit. Though it has not tipped 'conservative,' it does, in theory, give 'conservatives' a fighting chance in the 9th.

[Bigdog68]

I would look at what happened when FDR tried to pack the court in the 1930s to back his new deal policies. It may seem simple, when you control house, senate, and presidency, but even FDR at start of second term blew his chance to pack the court. But heck, given how far we have come, the Dems would love to add 20 seats to SCOTUS and a new level of political courts aimed at social justice.

[CCWFacts]

If the Republicans get the house, Senate, and presidency in 2020, does that mean trump gets the ability to expand the ninth as Carter did in 1978?

What is the process for that?

Pretty sure the process is the same as passing any other bill in Congress: both houses must pass the same bill and then the president signs it. It's easy. Unfortunately I think it's the same steps to expand SCOTUS, meaning that a future Democratic government could very easily wipe out Trump's judicial legacy.

Doing such actions is like going nuclear. At that point, everyone realizes that no one will show any self-control on anything.

If our government process did go nuclear, quite a few things could be done. Obviously, the courts could be completely packed and made into creations of a single party, by a simple act of congress.

One other thing that could happen, which no one is talking about, is doing the same thing with the Senate itself. In fact adding states is quite simple. I think it only takes an act of Congress. Nothing would prevent a Republican congress from making Idaho into 44 states (one for each county), which would be essentially packing the Senate, adding 80+ Republican senators. It would also add 80+ Republican state governments. At that point an Article V constitutional convention could easily be called; Idaho's countiesstates would count towards the 3/4 of states necessary, and the convention would happen and would be dominated by Idaho and it could make whatever changes to the constitution it wants to. Again, that can be done by a simple act of Congress, and the only thing that prevents such shenanigans is a sense that certain moves are off limits.

However, the other party has already pulled one massive move which is so far off limits that it's treason, which is that they are importing millions and millions of their own voters and making them citizens, which is effectively packing the electorate. So the other party has already gone nuclear and I don't know what our party is waiting for. "Multicultural democracy" is an oxymoron, like "inclusive community" for example.