The icebox cometh: A former clerk's view of the proposed Ninth Circuit split

Most academic commentators oppose splitting the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals. They argue that the court's size is a virtue and either deny that the court has size-related problems, such as workload, consistency, and reversal rate, or claim that a split would not address these problems. The US Congress, however, is less sure. It has appointed the Commission on Structural Alternatives for the US Courts and asked it to study a possible 9th Circuit split. An insiders view, that of a former elbow clerk, is provided, an it is revealed that a split would significantly decrease the court's workload and increase its consistency and predictability. The so-called icebox split, which would sever Alaska, Idaho, Montana, Oregon, and Washington from the 9th Circuit and create a new 12th Circuit, would best improve the administration of justice without violating other important policies governing circuit boundary setting for a definable group of Americans knit together by common interests. It is concluded that the 9th Circuit should be split and a new circuit created from the icebox states.