Digital Commons Network^™

Filling Federal Appellate Vacancies, Carl W. Tobias

Law Faculty Publications

Judicial selection for the United States Courts of Appeals has rarely been so controversial. Delay in nominating and analyzing candidates as well as fractious accusations, recriminations, and "paybacks" between Democrats and Republicans have vexed circuit appointments over two decades. Many judgeships remain empty for long periods, while one position has been vacant since 1994. Certain appellate tribunals have confronted acute difficulties. The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit recently operated absent half its judicial complement across eight months, and numerous courts labored without one in three members at various junctures.

The Senate, which furnishes advice and consent, has …

Unmasking Judicial Extremism, Carl W. Tobias

Law Faculty Publications

Review of Cass R. Sunstein, Radicals in Robes: Why Extreme Right-Wing Courts Are Wrong for America (2005)

Resolving Amicus Curiae Motions In The Third Circuit And Beyond, Carl W. Tobias

Law Faculty Publications

Amicus curiae briefs are deeply woven into the fabric of modern federal appellate practice. Indeed, amici curiae submit briefs in approximately ninety percent of the cases that the United States Supreme Court entertains, and the Justices deny a minuscule number of amicus requests to participate. Amicus practice is less ubiquitous in the United States Courts of Appeals. Amici seek to file comparatively few briefs, nearly all of which the appellate courts permit, while many tribunals have not developed a comprehensive jurisprudence for resolving amicus motions. Nonetheless, the United States Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit has articulated rather stringent …