On petition for writ of certiorari to the Court of Appeals of
Georgia.
The petition for a writ of certiorari is denied.
Mr. Justice WHITE, with whom Mr. Justice BLACKMUN joins,
dissenting.
Respectfully, I dissent from the denial of certiorari.
I
Section 223 of the Motor Carrier Act, 49 Stat. 565, 49 U.S.C.
323, prohibits a common carrier by motor vehicle from delivering
freight transported in interstate commerce until all tariff rates
and charges have been paid, except as permitted by rules and
regulations of the Interstate Commerce Commission. The Interstate
Commerce Commission, pursuant to 49 U. S.C. 323, has adopted
regulations that allow delivery without prior collection of freight
charges but limit the credit that may be extended: Freight bills
must be presented to the shipper and collected within seven days.
49 CFR 1322 (1977). A "shipper" is defined as the person who
undertakes to pay the tariff charges. Ibid. The regulations are
silent about what happens if the carrier fails to comply with the
time limits established by them. The question raised by this case
is whether failure by the carrier to comply with
Page 439 U.S.
1014 , 1015
the time limits prescribed by 49 CFR 1322 (1977) estops the
carrier from collecting the freight charges from the shipper.
The Georgia Court of Appeals in this case held that it did,
thereby joining the Seventh Circuit, which had reached a similar
result in Consolidated Freightways Corp. of Delaware v. Admiral
Corp.,
442 F.2d
56 ( 1971).
Judge Swygert dissented in the Consolidated Freightways Corp.
case, reasoning that "[n]othing in the Motor Carrier Act provides
that a carrier's failure to comply with section 323 or the
Interstate Commerce Commission's credit regulation should result in
the carrier's forfeiting its right to collect freight charges."
Id., at 65. At least two jurisdictions share this view. AAA
Trucking Corp. v. Spherex, Inc., 110 N. H. 472, 272 A.2d 594
(1970); East Texas Motor Freight Lines v. Franklin County
Distilling Co., 184 S.W.2d 505 (Tex.Civ.App.1944).
This conflict among jurisdictions over an issue which
"imperatively demand[s] a single uniform rule," Cooley v. Board of
Wardens, 12 How. 299, 319 (1852), commands the Court's immediate
attention. There is further justification for review in Pittsburgh,
C., C. & St. L. R. Co. v. Fink,
250 U.S. 577 (1919).
There the Court held that a shipper remains liable for the full
legal tariff even though the carrier mistakenly billed him for
less, rejecting an argument that estoppel prevented collection on
the ground that "[e]stoppel could not become the means of
successfully avoiding the requirement of the act as to equal rates,
in violation of the provisions of the statute." Id., at 583. The
Fink case, although concerning Interstate Commerce Act provisions
regulating railroads and not motor carriers, is directly analogous
to this case, suggesting that the decision below may be at variance
with our prior case law.
Because of the substantiality of the federal issue raised, I
would grant certiorari and set this case for argument.
Page 439 U.S.
1014 , 1016
II
Although I dissent from denial of certiorari, it must be
acknowledged that this case is no more deserving of plenary
consideration than many other cases in which certiorari has been
denied so far this Term.
A.
During the week of September 25, the Court met in Conference to
deal with the petitions for certiorari, jurisdictional statements
in appeals, petitions for rehearing, and miscellaneous motions that
had accumulated and had been studied during the summer.* There was
a total of 992 items on the Conference List, of which 865 were
petitions for writs of certiorari and 59 were appeals. As the Order
Lists for this Term prior to today indicate, of these the Court has
so far granted 24 petitions for certiorari, 23 paid and 1 unpaid,
and has set for plenary consideration 6 appeals. In addition,
summary action on the merits was taken on 15 petitions for
certiorari, 8 paid and 7 unpaid, and on 30 statements of
jurisdiction. Seven hundred and ninety-four petitions for
certiorari were denied, 365 paid and 429 unpaid. Twenty-one appeals
were dismissed and denied. There were thus 396 paid petitions for
certiorari acted on and 437 unpaid, for a total of 833. Fifty-seven
of the 59 appeals were also disposed of. For one reason or other,
the remaining 32 petitions and 2 appeals have been held over for
later action.
The 23 paid petitions granted amount to 5.81% of the 396 paid
petitions acted upon. Summary action was taken on an additional
2.02%, making a total of 7.83% of the paid peti-
Page 439 U.S.
1014 , 1017
tions that were either granted or disposed of on the merits. The
single unpaid petition granted amounted to 0.23% of the unpaid
petitions acted on . Summary action was taken on an additional
1.60% of unpaid petitions, making a total of 1.83% of the unpaid
petitions which were granted or on which summary action was
taken.
B
Our Rule 19 provides that one of the principal factors in
determining whether certiorari should be granted is whether the
decision below conflicts with another decision: Is the federal law,
statutory or constitutional, being interpreted and enforced
differently in different sections of the country? This has been an
important criterion for the exercise of the Court's powers since
most of the Court's jurisdiction was made discretionary in
1925.
When one examines the petitions for certiorari on the September
25 Conference List that have so far been denied, it is not
difficult to find a good many cases in which the Court refused to
review lower court decisions that conflicted with decisions of
other federal or state appellate courts. The following are examples
of such cases.
Mansfield v. Estelle, No. 77-6709, order reported below (opinion
unpublished),
568 F.2d
1366 (CA5 1978): "farce or mockery" standard for judging the
effectiveness of retained counsel; a more stringent standard for
appointed counsel. Cf. United States v. DeCoster, 159 U.S.App.D.C.
326,
487 F.2d
1197 (1973) (diligent, conscientious, and reasonably competent
assistance); Moore v. United States,
432 F.2d
730, 736 (CA3 1970) ("the exercise of the customary skill and
knowledge which normally prevails at the time and place"); United
States ex rel. Williams v. Twomey,
510 F.2d
634, 641 (CA7 1975) ("assistance which meets a minimum standard
of professional representation"); United States v. Easter,
539 F.2d
663, 666 (CA8 1976) ("reasonably competent" assistance). Also
cf. United States v. McCord, 166 U.S.App.
Page 439 U.S.
1014 , 1018
D.C. 1,
509 F.2d
334 (1974), cert. denied, 421 U.S. 930 (1975); Goodwin v.
Cardwell,
432 F.2d
521 (CA6 1970); United States ex rel. Williams v. Twomey,
supra, 510 F.2d, at 640; Blanchard v. Brewer,
429
F.2d 89 (CA8 1970), cert. denied, 401 U.S. 1002 (1971); Ellis
v. Oklahoma,
430 F.2d
1352 (CA10 1970), cert. denied, 401 U.S. 1010 (1971), all
rejecting the distinction between paid and appointed counsel.
United States v. Kelley, 439 U.S. 830, opinion below,
568 F.2d
259 (CA2 1978): timely administrative claim is not a
jurisdictional prerequisite to recovery in suits in which the
United States is substituted as defendant pursuant to the Federal
Drivers' Act, 28 U.S.C. 2679(b)-(e). Contra, Meeker v. United
States,
435 F.2d
1219 ( CA8 1970).
Pennsylvania v. United States Tobacco Co., 439 U.S. 880, opinion
below, 478 Pa. 125,
386 A.2d
471 (1978): broad interpretation of "solicitation" in 15 U.S.C.
381(a), which prohibits a State from taxing the income of persons
whose only contact with the State is solicitation of orders.
Contra, Clairol, Inc. v. Kingsley, 109 N.J. Super. 22,
262 A.2d 213, aff'd, 57 N.J. 199,
270 A.2d
702 (1970), dismissed for want of a substantial federal
question, 402 U.S. 902, 91 S. Ct. 1377 (1971).
Lacey v. United States, 439 U.S. 832, order reported below
(opinion unpublished),
578 F.2d
1371 (CA2 1978): not impermissibly coercive per se to give a
second Allen (Allen v. United States,
164 U.S. 492 (1896))
charge to a jury that has twice reported inability to reach a
verdict and has not requested repetition of the charge. Accord,
United States v. Robinson,
560 F.2d
507 ( CA2 1977) (en banc). Contra, United States v. Seawell,
550 F.2d
1159 (CA9 1977).
Guiffre v. United States, 439 U.S. 833, opinion below
576 F.2d
126 (CA7 1978): coverage of federal bank robbery statute, 18
U.S.C. 2113(b), is not limited to conduct that would fall within
the common-law definition of larceny. Accord, United States v.
Fistell,
460 F.2d
157 (CA2 1972); Thaggard v. United States,
354 F.2d
735 ( CA5 1965), cert. denied, 383
Page 439 U.S.
1014 , 1019
U.S. 958 (1966). Contra, LeMasters v. United States,
378 F.2d
262 (CA9 1967); United States v. Rogers,
289
F.2d 433 (CA4 1961) (dictum).
Holcomb v. United States, 439 U.S. 850, order reported below,
578 F.2d
1381 (CA6 1978): a person accused of violating 18 U.S.C.
922(a)(6) by falsely denying that he has ever been convicted of a
crime is not entitled to litigate the constitutionality of that
conviction. Accord, United States v. Edwards,
568
F.2d 68 (CA8 1977 ); United States v. Allen,
556 F.2d
720 (CA4 1977); United States v. Graves,
554
F.2d 65 (CA3 1977) (en banc); United States v. Ransom,
545 F.2d
481 (CA5), cert. denied, 434 U.S. 908 ( 1977). Contra, United
States v. Pricepaul,
540 F.2d
417 (CA9 1976).
Burke v. New Jersey Education Assn., 439 U.S. 894, 58 L. Ed. 2d
239, opinion below,
579 F.2d
764 (CA3 1978): litigation of federal constitutional issues in
a 42 U.S.C. 1983 action is not precluded by a prior state
adjudication of the same cause of action in which the federal
issues could have been but were not raised. Other Circuits have
taken different approaches to this issue. Cf. Kurek v. Pleasure
Driveway and Park District of Peoria,
557 F.2d
580 (CA7 1977); Graves v. Olgiati,
550 F.2d
1327 (CA2 1977); Scoggin v. Schrunk,
522
F.2d 436 (CA9 1975); Spence v. Latting,
512
F.2d 93 (CA10), cert. denied, 423 U.S. 896 (1975); Lovely v.
Laliberte,
498 F.2d
1261 (CA1 1974).
Johnson v. Georgia, 439 U.S. 881, opinion below, 240 Ga. 526,
242 S.E.2d 53
(1978): Double Jeopardy Clause does not bar a State from revoking
an individual's probation for an offense of which he was previously
acquitted. Contra, People v. Grayson,
58 Ill. 2d
260,
319 N.E.2d 43
(1974).
McKethan v. United States,
439 U.S. 936, and Garner
v. United States,
439
U.S. 936, opinion below,
574 F.2d
1141 (CA4 1978): admission into evidence of grand jury
testimony of unavailable witness proper under Confrontation Clause
and Federal Rules of Evidence. But see United States v. Gonzalez,
559 F.2d
1271 (CA5 1977); United States v. Fiore,
443
F.2d 112 (CA2 1971).
Page 439 U.S.
1014 , 1020
C
Also among the petitions for certiorari that were denied were
those appearing to conflict with a decision of this Court. Under
our Rules, this is a substantial reason for granting certiorari.
Examples of such cases follow.
Sears, Roebuck & Co. v. Roberts, 439 U.S. 860d 168, opinion
below,
573 F.2d
976 (CA7 1978): assignor of exclusive license may recover in
action for fraud against assignee despite invalidity of the patent.
Arguably inconsistent with Lear, Inc. v. Adkins,
395 U.S. 653 (1969).
First Nat. Bank of Memphis v. Smith, 439 U.S. 883, 58 L. Ed. 2d
195, opinion below sub nom. Torian Estate v. Smith,
564 S.W.2d
521 ( Ark.1978): State need not give full faith and credit to
judgment of court of sister State with in personam jurisdiction
over property claimants but affecting personal property with no
connection to that State. Arguably inconsistent with Baker v.
Baker, Eccles & Co.,
242 U.S. 394 (1917).
Arnold v. Hogan, 439 U.S. 840, order below unpublished,
D.C.Ct.App., No. 12347 (1978): neither the Due Process Clause nor
the Ex Post Facto Clause infringed by the abolition of the
corroboration requirement in a criminal trial for rape, where the
requirement was judge made but long standing, and is abolished in
the course of the instant trial. Arguably inconsistent with Weiler
v. United States,
323
U.S. 606 (1945), and Calder v. Bull, 3 Dall. 386, 390
(1798).
Mellon Bank v. Southland Mobile Homes of S. C., Inc.,
439 U.S. 900, opinion
below sub nom. Southland Mobile Homes v. Associates Financial
Services Co., 270 S.C. 527,
244 S.E.2d
212 ( 1978): venue in suits against national banks under the
National Bank Act, 12 U.S.C. 94. Arguably inconsistent with
Michigan Nat. Bank v. Robertson,
372 U.S. 591 (1963).
Smith v. Collin,
439 U.S. 916, opinion
below,
578 F.2d
1197 (CA7 1978): local ordinance prohibiting the dissemination
of materials that would promote hatred toward persons on the
Page 439 U.S.
1014 , 1021
basis of their heritage held unconstitutional. Arguably
inconsistent with Beauharnais v. Illinois,
343 U.S. 250 (1952).
D
Rule 19 also indicates that likely candidates for certiorari are
those cases in which a state or federal court has decided an
important question of federal law not heretofore determined by this
Court. Some of the cases from our initial Conference List which
involved issues of this kind and which the Court declined to review
are the following.
Lowe v. United States, 439 U.S. 869, and Dixon v. United States,
439 U.S. 869, opinion below,
575 F.2d
1193 (CA6 1978): whether 19 U.S.C. 482 subjects mail entering
the United States to customs inspection at a place other than the
point of entry into this country, an issue reserved in United
States v. Ramsey,
431
U.S. 606 (1977).
Beatty v. Lycoming County Children's Services, 439 U.S. 880,
opinion below sub nom. In re William L., 477 Pa. 322,
383 A.2d
1228 (1978): rejecting equal protection and due process
challenges to a Pennsylvania statute permitting termination of
parental rights (so that the child may be adopted) on a showing of
incapacity, without any evidence of abuse or misconduct.
Warden of West Virginia Penitentiary v. Jones, 439 U.S. 830,
opinion below, --- W.Va. ___,
241 S.E.2d
914 (1978): Mullaney v. Wilbur,
421 U.S. 684 (1975) is to
be applied retroactively to collateral proceedings, an issue not
expressly decided in Hankerson v. North Carolina,
432 U.S. 233 (1977).
Eastern Scientific Co. v. Wild Heerbrugg Instruments, Inc., 439
U.S. 833, opinion below,
572 F.2d
883 (CA1 1978): under Continental T.V., Inc. v. GTE Sylvania,
Inc.,
433 U.S. 36
(1977), territorial restrictions enforced by resale price
maintenance are not per se illegal.
Indiana v. Martin,
439 U.S. 900, order
reported below,
577 F.2d
749 (CA7 1978): the prosecution bears the burden of
Page 439 U.S.
1014 , 1022
showing reliability of in-court identification subsequent to
impermissibly suggestive lineup identification.
Frazier v. Weatherholtz, 439 U.S. 876, opinion below,
572 F.2d
994 (CA4 1978): burden of proving self-defense may be placed on
the accused in a criminal prosecution.
International Business Machines Corp. v. FCC, 439 U.S. 875,
opinion below sub nom. American Tel. & Tel. Co. v. FCC,
572 F.2d
17 (CA2 1978): whether the Commission possesses and has
consciously exercised discretion to consider whether to refrain
from rate regulation of resellers of telephone transmission
services.
Marshall v. Daniel Construction Co., 439 U.S. 880, 58 L. Ed. 2d
192, opinion below,
563 F.2d
707 (CA5 1978): worker has no right under Occupational Safety
and Health Act to refuse to perform tasks that he reasonably
believes present an immediate risk of death or serious injury, and
employee who does so may be properly discharged; the Secretary of
Labor's regulation to the contrary held invalid.
Kerr-McGee Chemical Corp. v. Andrus, 439 U.S. 880, 58 L. Ed. 2d
193, order reported below, 187 U.S.App.D.C. 426,
574 F.2d
637 (1978 ): regulations promulgated by the Secretary of the
Interior may be applied retroactively to deny mining leases that
were assertedly granted under formerly prevailing standards.
University of Texas Medical Branch at Galveston v. United
States, 439 U.S. 820, opinion below
557 F.2d
438 (CA5 1977): the impact of Wyandotte Transportation Co. v.
United States,
389
U.S. 191 (1967), implying a right of action under 15 of the
Rivers and Harbors Appropriation Act of 1899, 30 Stat. 1152, 33
U.S.C. 409, upon the availability of a defense under the Limitation
of Shipowners' Liability Act.
Early v. Palm Beach Newspapers, Inc., 439 U.S. 910, opinion
below, 334 So. 2d 50 (Fla.App.1976), appeal and cert. dismissed,
354 So. 2d 351
(Fla.1977): statements labeled as opinions or editorials and
containing no misstatements of fact may not be the subject of a
constitutionally valid libel action.
Page 439 U.S.
1014 , 1023
E
I do not suggest that the Court should have granted certiorari
in all of these cases or that it should review all cases of this
kind in the future. The reason is that we are performing at our
full capacity, i. e., we are now extending plenary review to as
many cases as we can adequately consider, decide, and explain by
full opinion.
In 1937, in a letter to Senator Wheeler, Mr. Chief Justice
Hughes stated that the Court was fully abreast of its work and was
granting plenary consideration to all cases that deserved decision
by an institution such as the Supreme Court. The Chief Justice
said:
"Granting certiorari is not a matter of favor but of sound
judicial discretion. It is not the importance of the parties or the
amount of money involved that is in any sense controlling. The
action of the Court is governed by its rules.
* * * * *
"I think that it is safe to say that about 60 percent of the
applications for certiorari are wholly without merit and ought
never to have been made. There are probably about 20 percent or so
in addition which have a fair degree of plausibility but which fail
to survive critical examination. The remainder, falling short, I
believe, of 20 percent, show substantial grounds and are granted. I
think that it is the view of the members of the Court that if any
error is made in dealing with these applications it is on the side
of liberality."
In 1937, there were fewer than 1,000 new filings on the Supreme
Court docket. In 1962, there were about 2,800 and today about
4,000. No longer is it possible to review 20% or even 10% of the
cases in which petitions are filed.
For the 24 years ending with the 1970 Term, in cases granted
plenary consideration, the Court issued an average
Page 439 U.S.
1014 , 1024
of 101 full opinions plus 10 to 15 per curiam opinions. Since
1970, we have averaged 132 full opinions plus 15 per curiams -these
opinions deciding an average of 170 cases-and we cannot hope
substantially to exceed this average or to increase the percentage
of all cases docketed to which we give plenary review. Indeed, if
the certiorari docket resumes the remarkable growth that it
exhibited prior to 1972, which it may well do when the output of
the courts of appeals begins to reflect the many new judgeships
created by the Omnibus Judgeship Act just passed by Congress, the
percentage of petitions filed that can be reviewed here will
inevitably decline even further.
There is no doubt that those concerned with the coherence of the
federal law must carefully consider the various alternatives
available to assure that the appellate system has the capacity to
function in the manner contemplated by the Constitution. As others
have already noted, there is grave doubt that this function is
being adequately performed.
In 1972, a study group chaired by Paul Freund of the Harvard Law
School examined the problem. Its stark conclusion was:
"The statistics of the Court's current workload, both in
absolute terms and in the mounting trend, are impressive evidence
that the conditions essential for the performance of the Court's
mission do not exist. For an ordinary appellate court the
burgeoning volume of cases would be a staggering burden; for the
Supreme Court the pressures of the docket are incompatible with the
appropriate fulfillment of its historic and essential functions."
Federal Judicial Center, Report of the Study Group on the Caseload
of the Supreme Court 5 (1972), reprinted in 57 F.R.D. 573, 581
(1973).
Likewise, the Commission on Revision of the Federal Court
Appellate System, which was established by Congress, concluded in
1975 that the present appellate arrangements leave
Page 439 U.S.
1014 , 1025
unsettled too many conflicting decisions and important questions
of federal law. The point has been reached at which "the percentage
of cases accorded review [has] dipped below the minimum necessary
for effective monitoring of the nation's courts on issues of
federal statutory and constitutional law." Commission on Revision
of the Federal Court Appellate System, Structure and Internal
Procedures: Recommendations for Change 29 (1975), reprinted in 67
F.R.D. 195, 217 (1976).
The Commission recommended the creation of a National Court of
Appeals, which would not be interposed between the lower courts and
this Court but whose mission in the main would be to decide cases
that this Court referred to it. Legislation was proposed to
implement the Commission's recommendations. Under the proposal,
cases from lower courts would first be filed here, as under the
present system. This Court would then not only select and dispose
of its own argument docket, but would also refer additional cases
to the new court for its decision. The bill did not proceed beyond
the hearing stage.
Mr. Chief Justice BURGER.
Reasonable men can, and do, have differing views on the specific
cases recited by Mr. Justice WHITE, but his analysis of the broad
workload problem confronting this Court is sound and constitutes an
important service. It is not a healthy situation when cases
deserving authoritative resolution must remain unresolved because
we are currently accepting more cases for plenary review than we
can cope with in the manner they deserved.
It is now six years since a committee of distinguished
practitioners and scholars, all of them intimately familiar with
the work of the Court, concluded that the growth in the volume and
changing complexion of that work called for a remedy. Federal
Judicial Center, Report of the Study Group on the Caseload of the
Supreme Court (1972), 57 F.R.D. 573
Page 439 U.S.
1014 , 1026
(1973).1 That committee, chaired by Professor Paul A. Freund,2
after tracing the rise in the Court's filings and opinions,
proposed the creation of a new national, intermediate appellate
court to afford review of cases which it was not possible for this
Court to review. The Study Group on the Caseload of the Supreme
Court saw a twofold function for the proposed court:
"(1) screening all petitions for certiorari and appeals that
would at present be filed in the Supreme Court, referring the most
review-worthy . . . to the Supreme Court . . ., and denying the
rest; and
"(2) retaining for decision on the merits cases of genuine
conflict between circuits (except those of special moment, which
would be certified to the Supreme Court)." Id., at 611.
Responding to urgings from the Judicial Branch and the
tremendous increase in the workload of the federal courts, the
Congress in 1972 established a commission representing all three
branches of Government to study the problems and make
recommendations. [
Footnote 3]
The commission requested the
Page 439 U.S.
1014 , 1027
views of each Member of this Court. My response in part
stated:
"[I]f no significant changes are made in federal jurisdiction,
including that of the Supreme Court, the creation of an
intermediate appellate court in some form will be imperative. The
notion that nine Justices of the Supreme Court can deal as
effectively and correctly with four times as many docketed cases as
were dealt with only four decades ago may seem flattering to the
incumbent Justices, but Congress must become aware of the enormous
change in the burdens on the Justices in that short period of time.
Indeed, it can be documented that as far back as 40 years ago, 10
years after the Judiciary Act of 1925, many of the Justices were
even then apprehensive about the capacity of the Supreme Court to
perform the functions performed in its first 150 years. The changes
brought on in the 20th century and the new social, political and
economic developments have surely not diminished the importance of
the questions presented to the Supreme Court and have vastly
increased the volume of important questions which can have an
impact of great significance on the country." Report of the
Commission on Revision of the Federal Court Appellate System,
Structure and Internal Procedures: Recommendations for Change,
reprinted in 67 F.R.D. 195, 398-399 (1976).
In June 1975, the Commission on Revision of the Federal Court
Appellate System issued its report, recommending
"the creation of a new national court of appeals, designed to
increase the capacity of the federal judicial system for definitive
adjudication of issues of national law, subject always to Supreme
Court review." Id., at 208.
That Commission found four significant consequences resulting
from the inability of the federal judicial system to provide
Page 439 U.S.
1014 , 1028
adequate capacity for the declaration of national law: (a)
unresolved intercircuit conflict; (b) delay; (c) a burden on the
Supreme Court to hear cases arising from intercircuit conflict
otherwise less worthy than many cases denied review; and (d)
resulting uncertainty in the law. Id., at 217-219.
The Commission proposed a National Court of Appeals consisting
of seven judges with reference jurisdiction and transfer
jurisdiction. Under the proposed reference jurisdiction, the
Supreme Court would be empowered to refer any case within its
appellate jurisdiction to the National Court of Appeals either for
a decision on the merits or, alternatively, for a decision as to
whether the National Court of Appeals should review the case. Under
the proposed transfer jurisdiction, any court of appeals could, in
appropriate and specified circumstances, transfer any case to the
National Court of Appeals for a nationally binding decision,
subject to this Court's consideration. Id., at 238-247.
The recommendations of the Study Group on the Caseload of the
Supreme Court, commonly called the "Freund Committee," have been
available to the Congress and the Bar since 1972. The
recommendations of the Commission on the Federal Court Appellate
System have been available since 1975.
The dilemma now confronting this Court-and the country-is not
new. Under the Judiciary Act of 1789, Congress created only 13
federal district judgeships and six Justices of the Supreme Court.
It did not provide for an intermediate appellate court staffed, as
today, with United States circuit judges. Supreme Court Justices
were required to "ride circuit" and to sit with district judges to
form circuit courts, sometimes reviewing district court appeals,
sometimes sitting as trial judges. Later these circuit-riding
judges, acting as Supreme Court Justices, sat in review of the very
cases in which they had participated on Circuit.
Chief Justice John Jay and the Associate Justices urged relief
and circuit courts of appeal were authorized in the
Page 439 U.S.
1014 , 1029
Judiciary Act of 1801; however, after the election of Thomas
Jefferson, that statute was repealed the following year.
Subsequently, Chief Justice Marshall unavailingly urged the
creation of an intermediate tier of courts of appeals. Thus, nearly
a century passed before such courts were finally created in 1891;
they exist today as the United States Courts of Appeals for the 11
Circuits. [
Footnote 4]
In my response of May 29, 1975, to the Commission, 67 F.R.D., at
396, I strongly urged that if an intermediate court was created it
should not be a permanent tier of new judges at the outset. Rather,
I suggested that Congress seriously consider the creation of a
temporary court so that for five years, more or less, an
experimental program could be carried out. [
Footnote 5] The experience could then serve as a
valuable guide to the Congress, without the burden of the
irreversible step of establishing a permanent intermediate court.
[
Footnote 6] Mr. Justice WHITE,
too, favored an additional appellate court, "at least on a trial
basis." He said in his letter to the Commission:
"I should also emphasize that the proposed new court would not
only permit the decision of a good many cases that are not now
being decided at all by this Court, but
Page 439 U.S.
1014 , 1030
would also (1) permit plenary consideration in selected cases
which are within our compulsory appellate jurisdiction but which
are presently being summarily disposed of here; (2) permit this
Court to decline full consideration of and refer to the new court a
substantial number of cases the issues in which are not unusually
important or complex but which are now reviewed here because of
existing conflicts among the circuits or among the federal and
state courts; (3) enable this Court, if it was so minded, to reduce
the total number of cases in which it now hears oral arguments and
writes full opinions, perhaps to the yearly average of
approximately 100 that obtained for 15 years prior to the 1970
Term; and (4) present the opportunity for this Court to review some
cases that it would not now otherwise hear because of docket
pressures." Report of the Commission on Revision of the Federal
Court Appellate System, 67 F.R. D., at 402.7
After nearly nine years' delay, the 95th Congress recently
created 117 additional district and 35 additional circuit
judgeships-all of them long desperately needed, to meet rising
caseloads at both levels. This rise in caseload 8 is thought by
many observers to result from multiple sources: (a) the enactment
of more than 50 statutes by Congress since 1969
Page 439 U.S.
1014 , 1031
increasing the jurisdiction of federal courts; (b) the
increasing tendency to bypass available state and municipal
remedies in favor of assumed swifter remedies in federal courts;
(c) the increasing perceived need for courts to become "problem
solvers" on great social and economic problems rather than the
traditional resolvers of discrete, manageable disputes; 9 (d) the
default, perceived or real, of executive and legislative solutions;
and (e) the increasing complexity of much of the litigation arising
from a modern society. [
Footnote
10]
We cannot assume any lessening in the expansion of federal
jurisdiction or in congressional response to new demands. [
Footnote 11] When the 152 newly
created federal judgeships are filled and operational, decisions of
those judges will likely generate a significant increase in cases
subject to review on appeal or on certiorari in this Court.
The additional judgeships may solve short-term problems, but the
long- term problems of the Supreme Court analyzed by the Freund
Committee and the Commission on Revision of the Federal Court
Appellate System remain as they were a decade ago. If the
improvement in the expeditious dispensation of justice intended by
the Congress and the President
Page 439 U.S.
1014 , 1032
when they authorized 152 new federal judges is to be realized,
these problems should be faced without waiting for a crisis.
Mr. Justice BRENNAN.
It seems appropriate, in light of footnote 7 of the memorandum
of THE CHIEF JUSTICE, to note my statement to the Commission, 67
F.R.D., at 400, that Mr. Justice BRENNAN "remains completely
unpersuaded, as he has repeatedly said, that there is any need for
a new national court." See also my article, The National Court of
Appeals: Another Dissent. 40 U. Chi.L.Rev. 473 (1973).
Footnotes
[
Footnote *] The analysis following
in the text pertains only to this Term's first Conference List. I
have little doubt, however, that study of our dispositions of cases
on subsequent Conference Lists would yield similar results. New
filings accumulate at the rate of about 80 per week. As of the
close of business on November 29, 869 paid petitions and statements
of jurisdiction had been filed so far this Term, together with 808
unpaid petitions and statements of jurisdiction.
Footnote 1 In the first Term
of Chief Justice Warren's tenure (O.T.1953), for example, this
Court announced 65 signed opinions; his final (1968) Term, 99; with
an average of 96, 1953 to 1968 inclusive. The average, 1969 through
1977, was 125.
Footnote 2 Other members, of
the committee were: Alexander M. Bickel, Peter D. Ehrenhaft,
Russell D. Niles, Bernard G. Segal, Robert L. Stern, and Charles A.
Wright.
Footnote 3 The Chairman and
Vice Chairman of the commission were Senator Roman L. Hruska and
Judge J. Edward Lumbard, respectively; Professor A. Leo Levin was
Executive Director. Members appointed from the Senate and House,
and by the President and Chief Justice, were Senators Quentin N.
Burdick, Hiram L. Fong, and John L. McClellan; Congressmen Jack
Brooks, Walter Flowers, Edward Hutchinson, and Charles E. Wiggins;
Emanuel Celler, Dean Roger C. Cramton, Francis R. Kirkham, Judge
Alfred T. Sulmonetti, Judge Roger Robb, Bernard G. Segal, and
Professor Herbert Wechsler.
Footnote 4 Under the recent
Omnibus Judgeship Act of 1978, Pub.L.95-486, 92 Stat. 1629 (Oct.
20, 1978), the total number of circuit judgeships was increased
from 97 to 132.
Footnote 5 The mode of
selection of members of such an ad hoc court can be worked out
either along the lines recommended by the Freund Committee or
through some other neutral mechanism.
Footnote 6 There is, of
course, precedent for this suggestion, for Congress has created
temporary courts in the past. E. g., Special Regional Rail
Reorganization Court, created by the Regional Rail Reorganization
Act of 1973, 209(b), 87 Stat. 999; Temporary Emergency Court of
Appeals, created by the Act of Dec. 22, 1971, 211(b), 85 Stat. 749;
Emergency Court of Appeals, created by the Emergency Price Control
Act of 1942, 204, 56 Stat. 31.
Footnote 7 Letters to the
Commission from Justices BLACKMUN, POWELL, and REHNQUIST reflect
general agreement with these views of Mr. Justice WHITE on the need
for some relief if this Court is to achieve and maintain the
optimum level of quality in its work. 67 F.R.D., at 404, 406, 407,
respectively. Mr. Justice STEWART expressed the view that it is
"likely that the day would come when a new court would be needed."
Id., at 400.
Footnote 8 For the year
ending June 30, 1970, district court filings were 125, 423, and for
the year ending June 30, 1978, they were 166,539. Courts of appeals
filings rose from 11,662 during the same period in 1970 to 18,918
for the year ending June 30, 1978.
Footnote 9 See S. Rifkind,
Are We Asking too Much of our Courts?, address delivered at the
National Conference on the Causes of Popular Dissatisfaction with
the Administration of Justice, 70 F.R.D. 96, 101-104 ( 1976).
Footnote 10 Provocative
and thoughtful analyses of these subjects are not wanting. See, e.
g., Hellman, The Business of the Supreme Court Under the Judiciary
Act of 1925: The Plenary Docket in the 1970's, 91 Harv.L.Rev. 1711
(1978); S. Rifkind, supra, n. 9; Chayes, The Role of the Judge in
Public Law Litigation, 89 Harv.L.Rev. 1281 (1976).
Footnote 11 These,
obviously, are policy matters for the political branches; but it is
equally true that the Judiciary has an obligation to help focus
attention on its needs as they are perceived by judges who must
give effect to legislation relating to the administration of
justice. It is for Congress to develop appropriate measures to
accommodate the tension arising from contending demands on judicial
resources.
Comments
Be the first to comment
Leave a Comment