The Sneaky Extra Rule You Have to Remember Sometimes When You're Citing the Federal Fifth Circuit

Every part of the United States of America is served by a federal district court, and those-- in turn-- are served by federal circuit courts of appeals. Eleven of them are numbered. Each of those cover a geographical area.

First: Maine, Massachusetts, New Hampshire, Puerto Rico, and Rhode Island.
Second: Connecticut, New York, and Vermont.
Third: Delaware, New Jersey, Pennsylvania, and the Virgin Islands.
Fourth: Maryland, North Carolina, South Carolina, Virginia, and West Virginia.
Fifth: Louisiana, Mississippi, and Texas.
Sixth: Kentucky, Michigan, Ohio, and Tennessee.
Seventh: Illinois, Indiana, and Wisconsin.
Eighth: Arkansas, Iowa, Minnesota, Missouri, Nebraska, North Dakota, and South Dakota.
Ninth: Alaska, Arizona, California, Territory of Guam, Hawaii, Idaho, Montana, Nevada, Territory of the Northern Mariana Islands, Oregon, and Washington.
Tenth: Colorado, Kansas, New Mexico, Oklahoma, Utah, and Wyoming.
Eleventh: Alabama, Florida, and Georgia.

There are two other I will save for a later post: the District of Columbia Circuit-- I know, it's kind of geographical-- and the Federal Circuit, which is the only geographically general content-specialized federal court of appeal.

So what's the special rule about the Fifth Circuit? It is Rule 10.8.2 of the Bluebook, A Uniform System of Citation. On October 1 1981, the Fifth Circuit was divided to create the new, smaller Fifth Circuit and an Eleventh Circuit.

So:

1. Cite decisions rendered in 1981 and labeled "5th Cir." by month.
2. Give unit information whenever possible (it seems the court began the transition by having a Fifth Circuit Unit A and a Fifth Circuit Unit B.
3. Designate as "Former 5th" any nonunit judgment labeled as a Former Fifth judgment and rendered after September 30, 1981.

Knowing this rule separates the appellate children from the appellate grown-ups. Although the other circuits have had coverage changes, this separation is the only one the Bluebook cares about.

How Much Power Do Courts Have to Overrule a Federal Agency?

Federal agencies have broad and deep influence over our lives. How far, though, can they go before a court will stop them? The answer is in the rule of the case of Chevron U.S.A. v. Natural Resources Defense Council, 467 U.S. 837 (1984), written by Associate Justice John Paul Stevens which says:

“First, always, is the question whether Congress has spoken directly to the precise question at issue. If the intent of Congress is clear, that is the end of the matter; for the court as well as the agency must give effect to the unambiguously expressed intent of Congress.”

“If the Court determines Congress has not directly addressed the precise question at issue, the court does not simply impose its own construction of the statute . . . Rather”“[I]f the statute is silent or ambiguous with respect to the specific question, the issue for the court is whether the agency’s answer is based on a permissible construction of the statute.

467 U.S. 637, 842-843 (1984).

In this case, the NRDC had objected to some Environmental Protection Agency regs, having won at trial, Chevron, affected by them, appealed and the case ended up with the Supremes.

United States Supreme Court opinions commonly refer to and use this "Chevron deference."

 Chevron U.S.A. v. Natural Resources Defense Council, 467 U.S. 837 (1984)

This blog post is adapted from a post on my website. From now on blog posts are going to be here.