This does present an excellent case for breaking up the 9th Cir.
This is the most persuasive argument for breaking up the Ninth to me. If you can't sit en banc you shouldn't be a single court of appeals.
November 3, 2026 at 8:10 PM
This does present an excellent case for breaking up the 9th Cir.
This could only happen in the 9th Cir. which uses en banc panels bc actually seating the entire bench is impracticable.
November 3, 2026 at 8:01 PM
This could only happen in the 9th Cir. which uses en banc panels bc actually seating the entire bench is impracticable.
Hmm -- surprisingly slow, no? 9th Cir ruled mid-afternoon Friday.
November 2, 2026 at 4:30 PM
Hmm -- surprisingly slow, no? 9th Cir ruled mid-afternoon Friday.
chat is it good when the judge talks to you like this
November 2, 2026 at 9:39 PM
chat is it good when the judge talks to you like this
Well, well, well - a huge roadblock on the MAGA's legal superhighway from the 5th Cir to Roberts #SCOTUS - thanks the voters in Texas.
God bless Texans who gave us #Blexas. 🙏🏼
God bless Texans who gave us #Blexas. 🙏🏼
NEW:
MAGA's own private law firm is going to be run by a Democrat.
I talked to Texas Attorney General-elect Nathan Johnson, who plans big changes that will have nationwide implications:
www.nbcnews.com/politics/202...
MAGA's own private law firm is going to be run by a Democrat.
I talked to Texas Attorney General-elect Nathan Johnson, who plans big changes that will have nationwide implications:
www.nbcnews.com/politics/202...
Texas election upset means ‘MAGA’s own private law firm’ will be led by a Democrat
Democrat Nathan Johnson, who will take over as Texas Attorney General, tells NBC News he plans a major overhaul of the office that has frequently led Republican litigation efforts.
www.nbcnews.com
November 4, 2026 at 10:59 PM
go full en banc, 9th cir
BREAKING: On a 6-5 vote, the limited en banc Ninth Circuit court reinstates the three-judge panel’s ruling granting DOJ’s requested stay of the district court’s TRO in the SEIU-led election workers case. storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.us...
November 3, 2026 at 8:47 PM
go full en banc, 9th cir
For the nonlawyers:
Getting the notice of appeal right is pretty easy. The 9th Cir has a form you can use.
DOJ goofed it, possibly fatally.
Getting the notice of appeal right is pretty easy. The 9th Cir has a form you can use.
DOJ goofed it, possibly fatally.
Cases I'm reading (h/t @gabrielmalor.bsky.social):
— Smith v. Berry (1992): supreme.justia.com/cases/federa...
— Foman v. Davis (1962): supreme.justia.com/cases/federa...
Biggest issue I see is them not saying "Ninth Circuit," tbh, since that is part of "the information required by Rule 3(c)."
— Smith v. Berry (1992): supreme.justia.com/cases/federa...
— Foman v. Davis (1962): supreme.justia.com/cases/federa...
Biggest issue I see is them not saying "Ninth Circuit," tbh, since that is part of "the information required by Rule 3(c)."
![The Fourth Circuit's other ground for dismissing Smith's appeal is also insufficient. The Federal Rules do envision that the notice of appeal and the appellant's brief will be two separate filings. Compare Fed. Rule App. Proc. 3(c) (content of notice of appeal) with Fed. Rule App. Proc. 28(a) (content of appellant's brief). They do not preclude an appellate court from treating a filing styled as a brief as a notice of appeal, however, if the filing is timely under Rule 4 and conveys the information required by Rule 3(c). Such treatment is in fact appropriate under Torres and under Rule 3(c)'s provision that "[a]n appeal shall not be dismissed for informality of form or title of the notice of appeal."](https://cdn.bsky.app/img/feed_thumbnail/plain/did:plc:36eqtmzysqf7wsslczw4uxcd/bafkreiayucbmlalt26hbw4roilrhp3agwvbzamgrtxecrluu4oicha54d4)
November 2, 2026 at 12:55 AM
For the nonlawyers:
Getting the notice of appeal right is pretty easy. The 9th Cir has a form you can use.
DOJ goofed it, possibly fatally.
Getting the notice of appeal right is pretty easy. The 9th Cir has a form you can use.
DOJ goofed it, possibly fatally.
Le V. Astrue is the 9th Cir. one you should be peeping.
November 2, 2026 at 5:57 AM
Le V. Astrue is the 9th Cir. one you should be peeping.
TX state govt lawsuits were also THE vehicle for running stuff up the 5th Cir.-->SCOTUS ladder, too. Cutting that pathway off has HUGE implications for anything a Dem prez does in 2029+
November 4, 2026 at 6:09 PM
TX state govt lawsuits were also THE vehicle for running stuff up the 5th Cir.-->SCOTUS ladder, too. Cutting that pathway off has HUGE implications for anything a Dem prez does in 2029+
I think we should step up traffic and parking enforcement on all the roads and streets between the 5th Cir courthouse and all its judges' homes
Just to test a hypothesis i have
Just to test a hypothesis i have
November 4, 2026 at 4:36 PM
I think we should step up traffic and parking enforcement on all the roads and streets between the 5th Cir courthouse and all its judges' homes
Just to test a hypothesis i have
Just to test a hypothesis i have
glad you asked
November 3, 2026 at 2:59 AM
glad you asked
Je soutiens donc les suggestions d'Henrik Davi de récupérer les moyens dépensés avec une efficacité douteuse (CIR, apprentissage subventionnant le supérieur privé lucratif) et les affecter à résorber ces questions.
November 4, 2026 at 7:18 AM
Je soutiens donc les suggestions d'Henrik Davi de récupérer les moyens dépensés avec une efficacité douteuse (CIR, apprentissage subventionnant le supérieur privé lucratif) et les affecter à résorber ces questions.
Perry's footnote:
"The Court uses 'must' in its legal sense, which is to say it is mandatory."
"The Court uses 'must' in its legal sense, which is to say it is mandatory."
November 2, 2026 at 9:29 PM
Perry's footnote:
"The Court uses 'must' in its legal sense, which is to say it is mandatory."
"The Court uses 'must' in its legal sense, which is to say it is mandatory."
How could this happen? A majority of the 29 active judges in the 9th Cir. voted for en banc rehearing, which vacated the panel decision.
Then, the newly-constituted en banc panel, which is only 11 judges, voted to reinstate the panel decision. Crazy.
Then, the newly-constituted en banc panel, which is only 11 judges, voted to reinstate the panel decision. Crazy.
November 3, 2026 at 8:00 PM
How could this happen? A majority of the 29 active judges in the 9th Cir. voted for en banc rehearing, which vacated the panel decision.
Then, the newly-constituted en banc panel, which is only 11 judges, voted to reinstate the panel decision. Crazy.
Then, the newly-constituted en banc panel, which is only 11 judges, voted to reinstate the panel decision. Crazy.
dissent notes this decision in incompatible with Friday's en banc 9th Cir decision.
November 3, 2026 at 4:46 AM
dissent notes this decision in incompatible with Friday's en banc 9th Cir decision.
NOW: 9th Cir denies Trump DOJ for the SECOND time in California election case storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.us...
storage.courtlistener.com
October 30, 2026 at 7:07 PM
NOW: 9th Cir denies Trump DOJ for the SECOND time in California election case storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.us...
Correction: Though the judge denies DOJ permission to amend its complaint, it technically dismisses "without prejudice," because binding precedent says it must. (As a result, I don't really understand what "without prejudice" means here.)
![75 Barke v. Banks, 25 F.4th 714, 721 (9th Cir. 2022) ("[D]ismissals for lack of Article Ill jurisdiction must be entered without prejudice because a court that lacks jurisdiction "is powerless to reach the merits." (quoting Fleck & Assocs., Inc. v. Phoenix, 471 F.3d 1100, 1106-07 (9th Cir. 2006)).](https://cdn.bsky.app/img/feed_thumbnail/plain/did:plc:vrmx2e5gsi23srsy2n7vljvb/bafkreie7qulrercs5eld3psmukyiurtdwogecge7yhwlwjx62vbmk4juum)
November 1, 2026 at 7:13 PM
Correction: Though the judge denies DOJ permission to amend its complaint, it technically dismisses "without prejudice," because binding precedent says it must. (As a result, I don't really understand what "without prejudice" means here.)
And so violates Rule 3(c), which will present a jurisdictional problem at the 9th Cir.
SCOTUS has held that [a]lthough courts should construe Rule 3 liberally when determining whether it has been complied with, noncompliance is fatal to an appeal."
SCOTUS has held that [a]lthough courts should construe Rule 3 liberally when determining whether it has been complied with, noncompliance is fatal to an appeal."
DOJ's notice of appeal, filed a few hours ago, in US v. Alaska is not worded as a Notice of Appeal is normally worded. It does not say the court to which the ruling is being appealed (the Ninth Circuit). storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.us...
November 2, 2026 at 12:36 AM
And so violates Rule 3(c), which will present a jurisdictional problem at the 9th Cir.
SCOTUS has held that [a]lthough courts should construe Rule 3 liberally when determining whether it has been complied with, noncompliance is fatal to an appeal."
SCOTUS has held that [a]lthough courts should construe Rule 3 liberally when determining whether it has been complied with, noncompliance is fatal to an appeal."
(And I already checked, but the 9th Cir. hasn't ever issued a decision on 3(c)(1)(C), which is fun! Nobody ever made this mistake in a manner worth mentioning before!)
November 2, 2026 at 6:33 AM
(And I already checked, but the 9th Cir. hasn't ever issued a decision on 3(c)(1)(C), which is fun! Nobody ever made this mistake in a manner worth mentioning before!)
JUST IN: 9th Cir. panel, 2-1, stays TRO district judge issued blocking DOJ nationwide from enforcement threats v. election workers. Majority: Bea, Callahan (both GWBush). Dissent: Murguia (Obama). Judge requests en banc vote. Briefs due by 10PM PT Doc: www.documentcloud.org/documents/28...
SEIUThompsonCA9110226.PDF
www.documentcloud.org
November 3, 2026 at 4:48 AM
JUST IN: 9th Cir. panel, 2-1, stays TRO district judge issued blocking DOJ nationwide from enforcement threats v. election workers. Majority: Bea, Callahan (both GWBush). Dissent: Murguia (Obama). Judge requests en banc vote. Briefs due by 10PM PT Doc: www.documentcloud.org/documents/28...
《最新のシギサワカヤ活動まとめ》
既刊単行本・趣味の同人誌やグッズなどたくさんございます
【Amazon】
amazon.co.jp/s?k=%E3%82%B...
【メロンブックス】※同人誌はこちらのみでの取り扱いとなります
www.melonbooks.co.jp/fromagee/cir...
【いろんな方面へのリンク】
lit.link/kayashigisawa
既刊単行本・趣味の同人誌やグッズなどたくさんございます
【Amazon】
amazon.co.jp/s?k=%E3%82%B...
【メロンブックス】※同人誌はこちらのみでの取り扱いとなります
www.melonbooks.co.jp/fromagee/cir...
【いろんな方面へのリンク】
lit.link/kayashigisawa
November 4, 2026 at 11:17 AM
《最新のシギサワカヤ活動まとめ》
既刊単行本・趣味の同人誌やグッズなどたくさんございます
【Amazon】
amazon.co.jp/s?k=%E3%82%B...
【メロンブックス】※同人誌はこちらのみでの取り扱いとなります
www.melonbooks.co.jp/fromagee/cir...
【いろんな方面へのリンク】
lit.link/kayashigisawa
既刊単行本・趣味の同人誌やグッズなどたくさんございます
【Amazon】
amazon.co.jp/s?k=%E3%82%B...
【メロンブックス】※同人誌はこちらのみでの取り扱いとなります
www.melonbooks.co.jp/fromagee/cir...
【いろんな方面へのリンク】
lit.link/kayashigisawa
October 30, 2026 at 12:23 AM
That's probably a dozen would-be "run this over to Matthew Kacsmaryk to start the 5th Cir. -> SCOTUS shadow docket pipeline" suits about everything from abortion to trans rights DOA immediately
November 5, 2026 at 3:31 AM
That's probably a dozen would-be "run this over to Matthew Kacsmaryk to start the 5th Cir. -> SCOTUS shadow docket pipeline" suits about everything from abortion to trans rights DOA immediately
1st Cir., 2-1, holds that it will not block Maine's law requiring that children who attend schools must be vaccinated.
Plaintiffs argue that vaccination imposes a substantial burden on parental and religious exercise rights.
Maj. op.: you're overreading Yoder, Mahmoud, and Mirabelli.
LINK
Plaintiffs argue that vaccination imposes a substantial burden on parental and religious exercise rights.
Maj. op.: you're overreading Yoder, Mahmoud, and Mirabelli.
LINK
![On the district court record and the papers before us, plaintiffs have not made the necessary heightened showing of a likelihood of success on the merits. See Bos. Parent Coal. for Acad. Excellence Corp. v. Sch. Comm. of City of Bos., 996 F.3d 37, 44 (1st Cir. 2021) (noting that in the posture of seeking an injunction pending appeal, "the bar is harder to clear" because "an injunction does not simply suspend judicial alteration of the status quo but grants judicial intervention that has been withheld by [a] lower court[ ]") (citations and internal quotation marks omitted; alterations in original). It is not obvious that Yoder, Mahmoud, and Mirabelli govern the situation we face given that Maine's vaccination law does not appear to require a student's submission to school-facilitated instruction. Relatedly, Yoder itself recognized that prior Supreme Court authority allows States to impose the kind of broad public health initiative that underlies this appeal. See Jacobson v. Massachusetts, 197 U.S. 11, 38 (1905) (holding that law requiring adults to be vaccinated did not "invad[e] any right secured by the Federal Constitution"); Zucht v. King, 260 U.S. 174, 176 (1922) (holding that law requiring school children to be vaccinated did not violate the Due Process and Equal Protection Clauses); Prince v. Massachusetts, 321 U.S. 158, 166-67 &](https://cdn.bsky.app/img/feed_thumbnail/plain/did:plc:24vva42nxim6zbcmnozegoef/bafkreiaba6fgstcxctq2yz2tri5npqka2ldmcvgdvki64of4ivzf2q32ze)
November 4, 2026 at 8:15 PM
1st Cir., 2-1, holds that it will not block Maine's law requiring that children who attend schools must be vaccinated.
Plaintiffs argue that vaccination imposes a substantial burden on parental and religious exercise rights.
Maj. op.: you're overreading Yoder, Mahmoud, and Mirabelli.
LINK
Plaintiffs argue that vaccination imposes a substantial burden on parental and religious exercise rights.
Maj. op.: you're overreading Yoder, Mahmoud, and Mirabelli.
LINK
November 4, 2026 at 10:12 PM