President Donald Trump has ushered in the end of an era — no more will liberals dominate the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals and use the federal appellate court as a rubber stamp for defeating pro-life legislation and pushing abortion on demand.

Today the U.S. Senate voted to confirm Deputy Assistant Attorney General Lawrence VanDyke to serve on the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals. President Trump nominated VanDyke in September.

Lawrence VanDyke graduated from Harvard Law School with high honors. Prior to his nomination to the 9th Circuit, VanDyke served as deputy assistant attorney general at the Department of Justice. He has extensive experience serving as solicitor general in both Montana and Nevada, as well as in private practice.
Leading pro-life groups celebrated his confirmation.

“We congratulate Lawrence VanDyke on his confirmation. He will be an outstanding addition to the 9th Circuit,” said SBA List President Marjorie Dannenfelser. “His distinguished record makes him highly qualified to serve on the federal bench. He is a committed and strong constitutionalist who will uphold the values and deeply held beliefs of our nation. VanDyke joins the ranks of over 150 judges confirmed to the court by President Trump – judges of the highest caliber with respect for the Constitution and the rights of all people. We are very pleased to see him confirmed.”

Father Frank Pavone of Priests for Life told LifeNews.com that President Trump has been sucessful in remaking the federal appeals court. With the Senate’s confirmation this week of Patrick Bumatay and Lawrence VanDyke for the Ninth Circuit, the president has now seated more than 170 federal judges, including his two Supreme Court nominees.

“With the confirmation this week of two judges for the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals, President Trump continues to make good on his promise to end liberal judicial activism on the federal bench. With 13 of 29 judges on the court appointed by Republican presidents, the liberal rubber stamp of the Ninth Circuit has been stilled.”



https://www.lifenews.com/2019/12/11...ourt-as-senate-confirms-lawrence-vandyke

Some good news on a schitty day. Thanks for posting that.

This is critical. Any time in the past decade or two, a Lib has wanted some wacky lib policy implemented, all they had to do was to get a hearing in the 9th district, and it was all over. This is why Schiff and Pelosi are desperate to get rid of Trump this is really a ground breaking development.

Maybe I’m missing something.....but with 29 seated, don’t you need 15 to have the majority? memtb

This from 5 months ago


https://welovetrump.com/2019/07/12/...t-its-approaching-a-republican-majority/

Not all 29 get a voice or share in the decision.

Some argue that the Ninth Circuit faces several adverse consequences of its large size.[13]
Chief among these is the Ninth Circuit's unique rules concerning the composition of an en banc court. In other circuits, en banc courts are composed of all active circuit judges, plus (depending on the rules of the particular court) any senior judges who took part in the original panel decision. By contrast, in the Ninth Circuit it is impractical for 29 or more judges to take part in a single oral argument and deliberate on a decision en masse. The court thus provides for a limited en banc review by the Chief Judge and a panel of 10 randomly selected judges.[14] This means that en banc reviews may not actually reflect the views of the majority of the court and indeed may not include any of the three judges involved in the decision being reviewed in the first place.

Many times cases are heard by just a panel from the whole Court. Given the new numbers, the odds of a "conservative" majority on that panel have gone up. And if they rule conservatively, many times the whole Court refuses to hear the en banc request and the ruling stands, just as with the SCOTUS refusing to take a case.

Just my take of what I've seen over the years living in this 9th District.

Geno

Circuit court cases traditionally are heard and decided by randomly selected 3 judge panels, and only a few cases per year are heard by an en banc panel, which, as noted by Swifty52, can be an abbreviated panel in the Ninth. I would expect a full en banc panel when there is a major conflict between different panels within the Circuit involving a "hot button" topic.

Yeah, Swifty called it, I didn't remember the part about the 9th being "special" in that way.

Have seen a couple of en banc reviews over the years, like you said cases with major implications over jurisdiction and usually conflicts between panels.

Geno