United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit

Fifth Circuit
Court of Appeals
Judgeships
Posts: 17
Judges: 17
Vacancies: 0
Judges
Chief: Jennifer Elrod
Active judges: Dana Douglas, Stuart Kyle Duncan, Jennifer Elrod, Kurt Engelhardt, James Graves, Catharina Haynes, Stephen Higginson, James C. Ho, Edith Jones, Andrew Oldham, Irma Ramirez, Priscilla Richman, Jerry Smith, Leslie Southwick, Carl Stewart, Don Willett, Cory Wilson Senior judges: Rhesa Barksdale, Fortunato Benavides, Edith Clement, W. Eugene Davis, James Dennis, John Duhe, Patrick Higginbotham, E. Grady Jolly, Carolyn King, Jacques Wiener

The United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit is a federal appellate court with appellate jurisdiction. It hears appeals from all of the circuit courts within its jurisdiction and its rulings may be appealed to the Supreme Court of the United States. Appeals are heard in the John Minor Wisdom U.S. Courthouse in New Orleans, Louisiana.

Vacancies

See also: Current federal judicial vacancies

There are no current vacancies on the Fifth Circuit, out of the court's 17 judicial positions.

Pending nominations

There are no pending nominees for this court.

Active judges

Article III judges

Judge	Appointed By	Assumed Office	Bachelors	Law
Edith Jones	Ronald Reagan (R)	April 4, 1985 -	Cornell University, 1971	University of Texas School of Law, 1974
Jerry Smith	Ronald Reagan (R)	December 21, 1987 -	Yale University, 1969	Yale Law School, 1972
Carl Stewart	Bill Clinton (D)	May 9, 1994 -	Dillard University, 1971	Loyola University, New Orleans School of Law, 1974
Priscilla Richman	George W. Bush (R)	June 3, 2005 -	Baylor University, 1975	Baylor University School of Law, 1977
Jennifer Elrod	George W. Bush (R)	October 19, 2007 -	Baylor University, 1988	Harvard Law School, 1992
Leslie Southwick	George W. Bush (R)	October 29, 2007 -	Rice University, 1972	University of Texas School of Law, 1975
Catharina Haynes	George W. Bush (R)	April 18, 2008 -	Florida Institute of Technology, 1983	Emory University School of Law, 1986
James Graves	Barack Obama (D)	February 15, 2011 -	Millsaps College, 1975	Syracuse University College of Law, 1980
Stephen Higginson	Barack Obama (D)	November 2, 2011 -	Harvard University, 1983	Yale Law School, 1987
Don Willett	Donald Trump (R)	January 2, 2018 -	Baylor University, 1988	Duke University School of Law, 1992
James C. Ho	Donald Trump (R)	January 4, 2018 -	Stanford University, 1995	University of Chicago, 1999
Stuart Kyle Duncan	Donald Trump (R)	May 1, 2018 -	Louisiana State University, 1994	Louisiana State University, Paul M. Hebert Law Center, 1997
Kurt Engelhardt	Donald Trump (R)	May 10, 2018 -	Louisiana State University, 1982	Louisiana State University, Paul M. Hebert Law Center, 1985
Andrew Oldham	Donald Trump (R)	July 19, 2018 -	University of Virginia, 2001	Harvard Law School, 2005
Cory Wilson	Donald Trump (R)	July 3, 2020 -	University of Mississippi, 1992	Yale Law School, 1995
Dana Douglas	Joe Biden (D)	December 16, 2022 -	Miami University of Ohio, 1997	Loyola University New Orleans College of Law, 2000
Irma Ramirez	Joe Biden (D)	December 8, 2023 -	West Texas State University, 1986	Southern Methodist University, Dedman School of Law, 1991

Active Article III judges by appointing political party

Below is a display of the number of active judges by the party of the appointing president. It does not reflect how a judge may rule on specific cases or their own political preferences.

• Democrat appointed: 5
• Republican appointed: 12

Senior judges

Senior status is a classification for federal judges at all levels who are semi-retired. Senior judges are Article III judges who, having met eligibility through age and service requirements, continue to serve on federal courts while typically hearing a reduced number of cases. Some senior judges, however, elect to retain a full caseload after taking senior status. According to the Administrative Office of U.S. Courts, senior judges "typically handle about 15 percent of the federal courts' workload annually." The date listed under assumed office in the table below reflects the date that the judge took senior status.

Judge	Appointed By	Assumed Office	Bachelors	Law
John Duhe	Ronald Reagan (R)	April 7, 1999 -	Tulane University, 1955	Tulane University Law School, 1957
Patrick Higginbotham	Ronald Reagan (R)	August 28, 2006 -	University of Alabama, 1960	University of Alabama School of Law, 1961
Rhesa Barksdale	George H.W. Bush (R)	August 8, 2009 -	U.S. Military Academy, 1966	University of Mississippi Law Center, 1972
Jacques Wiener	George H.W. Bush (R)	September 30, 2010 -	Tulane University, 1956	Tulane University Law School, 1961
Fortunato Benavides	Bill Clinton (D)	February 3, 2012 -	University of Houston, 1968	University of Houston Law Center, 1972
Carolyn King	Jimmy Carter (D)	December 31, 2013 -	Smith College, 1959	Yale Law School, 1962
W. Eugene Davis	Ronald Reagan (R)	December 31, 2016 -		Tulane University Law School, 1960
E. Grady Jolly	Ronald Reagan (R)	October 3, 2017 -	University of Mississippi, 1959	University of Mississippi Law Center, 1962
Edith Clement	George W. Bush (R)	May 14, 2018 -	University of Alabama, 1969	Tulane University Law School, 1972
James Dennis		December 13, 2022 -	Louisiana Tech University, 1959	Louisiana State University, Paul M. Hebert Law Center, 1962

Senior judges by appointing political party

Below is a display of the number of senior judges by the party of the appointing president. It does not reflect how a judge may rule on specific cases or their own political preferences.

• Democrat appointed: 3
• Republican appointed: 7

Former chief judges

In order to qualify for the office of chief judge in an Article III circuit or district court, or on the United States Court of International Trade, a judge must be in active service and hold seniority over the court's commissioned judges who are 64 years of age or under, have served one year or more, and have not previously served as chief judge.

In the event that no judge on the court meets those qualifications, the youngest judge in regular active service aged 65 years or more and who has served as a judge for one year or more shall become chief judge. If no judge meets those qualifications, the judge holding seniority in active service who has not served as chief before shall become the chief judge.

The chief judge serves for a term of seven years until another judge becomes eligible to serve in the position. No judge is permitted to serve as chief judge after reaching the age of 70 years unless no other judge is qualified to serve.

Unlike the chief justice of the United States, a chief judge returns to active service after the expiration of their term and does not create a vacancy on the court by the fact of their promotion.

On the United States Court of Federal Claims, the chief judge is selected by the president of the United States. The judge must be less than 70 years of age. A chief may serve until they reach age 70 or until another judge is designated by the president as the new chief judge. If the president selects a new chief judge, the former chief judge may continue active service on the court for the remainder of their appointed term.

Priscilla Richman - (2019-2024) Carl Stewart - (2012-2019) Edith Jones - (2006-2012) Carolyn King - (1999-2006) Henry Politz - (1992-1999) Charles Clark - (1981-1992) John Godbold - (1981) James Coleman - (1979-1981)

Joseph Chappell Hutcheson - (1967-1979) John Brown - (1967-1979) Elbert Tuttle - (1960-1967) Richard Rives - (1959-1960)

Former judges

For information on former judges, see former judges of the Fifth Circuit.

Jurisdiction

Map of the Fifth Circuit. Click on a district to find out more about it.

The Fifth Circuit has appellate jurisdiction over cases heard in one of its subsidiary districts. These cases can include civil and criminal matters that fall under federal law. Appeals of rulings by the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit are petitioned to the Supreme Court of the United States. Justice Samuel Alito is the circuit justice for the Fifth Circuit.

The United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit has appellate jurisdiction over the district courts in the following districts:

• Eastern District of Louisiana
• Middle District of Louisiana
• Western District of Louisiana
• Northern District of Mississippi
• Southern District of Mississippi
• Eastern District of Texas
• Northern District of Texas
• Southern District of Texas
• Western District of Texas

Caseloads

This section contains court management statistics dating back to 2010. It was last updated in September 2024. Click [show] below for more information on caseload terms and definitions.

Caseload statistics explanation
Term	Explanation
Cases filed and terminated	The number of civil and criminal lawsuits formally initiated or decided by the court in a calendar year. The chart below reflects the table columns Cases filed and Cases terminated.
Average time from filing to disposition	The average amount of time, in months, from a case's date of filing to date of disposition (acquittal, sentencing, dismissal, etc.). The chart below reflects the table columns Median time (Criminal) and Median time (Civil).
Starting case load	The number of cases pending from the previous calendar year.
Cases filed	The number of civil and criminal lawsuits formally initiated in a calendar year.
Cases terminated	The total number of civil and criminal lawsuits decided by the court in a calendar year.
Remaining cases	The number of civil and criminal cases pending at the end of a given year.
Median time (Criminal)	The average amount of time, in months, from a case's date of filing to the date of disposition. In criminal cases, the date of disposition occurs on the day of sentencing or acquittal/dismissal.
Median time (Civil)	The average amount of time, in months, from a case's date of filing to the date of disposition.
Three-year civil cases	The number and percent of civil cases that were filed more than three years before the end of the given calendar year.
Vacant posts	The number of months during the year an authorized judgeship was vacant.
Trial/Post	The number of trials completed divided by the number of authorized judgeships on the court. Trials include evidentiary trials, hearings on temporary restraining orders, and preliminary injunctions.
Source: United States Courts, "Explanation of the Judicial Caseload Profiles for United States District Courts," accessed September 25, 2018

United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit caseload stats, 2010-2023
Year	Appeals Filed	Appeals Terminated	Pending Appeals	Terminations on the Merits (per Active Judge)	Procedural Terminations (per Active Judge)	Total Written Decisions (per Active Judge)	Number of Judgeships	Number of Sitting Senior Judges	Number of Vacant Judgeship Months	Median Time From Filing Notice of Appeal to Disposition
2010	7,512	7,529	4,689	632	172	201	17	6	15	11
2011	7,413	7,634	4,464	640	157	195	17	6	11	10
2012	7,627	7,299	4,790	645	109	198	17	7	16	9
2013	7,455	7,547	4,694	745	139	229	17	7	24	9
2014	7,765	7,996	4,638	807	156	225	17	8	29	9
2015	7,636	7,398	4,876	769	130	233	17	6	24	9
2016	8,470	8,092	5,252	828	133	259	17	6	24	9
2017	7,075	7,562	4,758	740	115	236	17	8	39	10
2018	7,525	7,658	4,625	621	110	194	17	7	54	9
2019	6,984	6,998	4,611	596	82	184	17	9	24	9
2020	6,277	5,743	5,138	565	78	172	17	8	12	10
2021	6,386	7,089	4,434	572	79	180	17	7	0	10
2022	5,782	6,549	3,662	629	66	188	17	8	4	9
2023	5,499	5,868	3,292	581	67	160	17	8	12	8
Average	7,100	7,212	4,566	669	114	204	17	7	21	9

History

In 1980, the Fifth Circuit's jurisdiction was split with the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals Reorganization Act and the Eleventh Circuit Act. At that point, the states of Mississippi, Louisiana, and Texas became the new Fifth Circuit, while Alabama, Georgia, and Florida became the new United States Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit.

The Fifth Circuit played a role in the Civil Rights Movement, hearing many noteworthy cases. A 1964 Time Magazine article on the Fifth Circuit entitled, "The Fascinating & Frenetic Fifth," said this about the court:

“

Apart from the Supreme Court, the most fascinating bench in the U.S. is the Deep South's Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals — the trail-blazing intermediate court that handles most of the nation's civil rights cases by hearing appeals from district courts in Alabama, Florida, Georgia, Texas, Louisiana and Mississippi. "Without the Fifth Circuit," says a leading civil rights lawyer, "we would be on the verge of actual war fare in the South."

”

Judicial posts

The following table highlights the development of judicial posts for the Fifth Circuit. The table displays the statute that authorized an increase in judgeships, the year the statute was passed, and the number of judges authorized for the court in the statute.

Year	Statute	Total Seats
March 3, 1891	26 Stat. 826	2
January 25, 1899	30 Stat. 803	3
June 10, 1930	46 Stat. 538	4
May 31, 1938	52 Stat. 584	5
December 14, 1942	56 Stat. 1050	6
February 10, 1954	68 Stat. 8	7
May 19, 1961	75 Stat. 80	9
March 18, 1966	80 Stat. 75	13
June 18, 1968	82 Stat. 184	15
October 20, 1978	92 Stat. 1629	26
October 14, 1980	94 Stat. 1994	14
July 10, 1984	98 Stat. 333	16
December 1, 1990	104 Stat. 5089	17

Reversal rate

See also: SCOTUS case reversal rates (2007 - Present)

Since 2007, SCOTUS has released opinions in 1,250 cases. Of those, it reversed a lower court decision 891 times (71.3 percent) while affirming a lower court decision 347 times (27.8 percent).

In that time period, SCOTUS has decided 105 cases originating from the Fifth Circuit, affirming in 28 cases and reversing in 78 cases, for a reversal rate of 74.3 percent. As of the end of the 2023 term, of the Article III circuits—the ordinal circuits, the D.C. Circuit, and the Federal Circuit—the court with the lowest rate of overturned decisions is the Fourth Circuit at 62.1 percent.

Noteworthy cases

The following are noteworthy cases heard before this court. To suggest cases we should cover here, email us. To read opinions published by this court, click here.

• Fifth Circuit finds constitutional flaws in SEC enforcement (2022)

Click for summary→

A divided three-judge panel of the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit on May 18, 2022, found a trio of constitutional deficits with the Securities and Exchange Commission’s (SEC) enforcement proceedings that could affect the future scope of federal agency authority. The panel held in Jarkesy v. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) that the SEC administrative law judges’ (ALJs) two layers of removal protections unconstitutionally insulate them from presidential oversight; that the agency’s adjudication proceedings violate the Seventh Amendment right to a jury trial; and that Congress unconstitutionally delegated legislative power to the SEC by failing to provide the agency with an intelligible principle to guide its enforcement actions. “Congress has given the Securities and Exchange Commission substantial power to enforce the nation’s securities laws. It often acts as both prosecutor and judge, and its decisions have broad consequences for personal liberty and property. But the Constitution constrains the SEC’s powers by protecting individual rights and the prerogatives of the other branches of government,” wrote Judge Jennifer Walker Elrod in the opinion. Articles: United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit, "Jarkesy v. Securities and Exchange Commission," May 18, 2022 National Law Review, "Federal Court Calls Unconstitutional the U.S. Securities & Exchange Commission’s In-House Administrative Proceedings for Securities Fraud Cases," May 24, 2022

• Fifth Circuit overturns Texas' bingo money ban (2014)

Click for summary→

In July 2014, the Fifth Circuit, sitting en banc, ruled to allow charities to spend bingo proceeds on political speech. The Fifth Circuit, affirming a trial court opinion, found a ban against such spending unconstitutional under the First Amendment. Chief Judge Carl Stewart wrote the opinion, saying that Texas "fail[ed] to identify a compelling state interest" to justify the continuation of the ban. Articles: Courthouse News Service, "Fifth Circuit Overturns Bingo Politics Ban," July 29, 2014 Star-Telegram, "Texas bingo operators win suit to lobby lawmakers," July 29, 2014

• Parents permitted to intervene in school voucher desegregation suit (2014)      Judge(s):Edith Clement, Grady Jolly and Jerry Smith (Brumfield, et al v. Dodd, 13-31262)	Click for summary→
On April 10, 2014, a three-judge panel of the Fifth Circuit composed of Judges Edith Clement, Grady Jolly, and Jerry Smith, ruled that parents would be permitted to intervene in a suit filed against Louisiana's Superintendent of Public Education by the Department of Justice to ensure its school-voucher program was in compliance with federal desegregation orders. In the underlying case, the U.S. government filed suit for an injunction, demanding that the state's voucher program not be used to send students in failing schools under federal desegregation orders to private schools. The government alleged that doing so would "cause irreparable injury to the court-ordered desegregation process." Parents were previously denied the opportunity to intervene, but Judge Smith, writing for the majority, noted that the children's guardians need only show the possibility that their interests would be affected by the case's resolution in order to intervene. In concluding the ruling, Smith stated: “ It would indeed be a questionable rule that would require prospective intervenors to wait on the sidelines until after a court has already decided enough issues contrary to their interests. ”

• Blocked provisions of abortion law reinstated (2013)      Judge(s):Priscilla Richman, Jennifer Elrod, and Catharina Haynes (Planned Parenthood of Greater Texas, et. al v. Gregory Abbott, Attorney General of Texas, 13-51008)	Click for summary→
On October 31, 2013, a panel of judges on the Fifth Circuit reinstated most of the provisions that had previously been ruled unconstitutional by the Western District of Texas' Judge Earl Yeakel, with the exception of regulations for abortion-inducing drugs. The ruling issued an emergency stay while the constitutionality of the law was being considered. The stay allowed the law to go into effect on November 1, 2013. In a statement, Texas Attorney General and 2014 gubernatorial candidate Greg Abbott (R) said: “ This unanimous decision is a vindication of the careful deliberation by the Texas Legislature to craft a law to protect the health and safety of Texas women. ” The president of Planned Parenthood Federation of America disagreed, saying: “ This restriction clearly violates Texas women’s constitutional rights by drastically reducing access to safe and legal abortion statewide. ” District Court ruling On October 28, 2013, Judge Yeakel prevented parts of a Texas abortion law from taking effect. The provisions requiring doctors performing the procedure to have admitting privileges at nearby hospitals and regulating use of abortion-inducing drugs were blocked. In the ruling, Judge Yeakel said that requiring doctors to have admitting privileges "does not bear a rational relationship to the legitimate right of the state in preserving and promoting fetal life or a woman’s health." Governor Rick Perry (R) said that the state would continue to enforce the parts of the law blocked by the ruling as the state appealed to the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals. Aspects of the law that were not challenged or would still stand following the ruling included: requiring that women have an extra office visit before undergoing the procedure, a ban on abortions 20 weeks after conception, and a requirement that abortion centers meet the specifications of ambulatory surgery centers.

• Corporate political speech upheld by Fifth Circuit (2013)      Judge(s):James Dennis, Jerry Smith, and Stephen Higginson (Texans for Free Enterprise v. Texas Ethics Commission, et al, 13-50014)	Click for summary→
On October 16, 2013, Judge Jerry Smith, writing on behalf of a three-judge panel of the Fifth Circuit which included Judges James Dennis and Stephen Higginson, affirmed a ruling made by the United States District Court for the Western District of Texas as to corporations' ability to fund political speech. In the underlying case, Texans for Free Enterprise (TFE), a political action committee that uses its donated funds to support or oppose political candidates, filed suit against the Texas Ethics Commission because portions of the Texas Election Code prohibited the PAC from receiving money from corporations. TFE sought an enforcement injunction, and the federal trial court granted a preliminary one in the political action group's favor. The Ethics Commission appealed the suit to the Fifth Circuit, where the lower court's ruling was affirmed. Judge Smith ruled that, in light of the Supreme Court's decision in Citizens United, the parts of the Texas Election Code that banned corporate funding of political speech were an unconstitutional abridgement of free speech. Judge Smith concluded his decision by writing that while "TFE’s ability to speak is undoubtedly limited when it cannot raise money to pay for speech," injunctions refencing the First Amendment, "are always in the public interest."

• Fifth Circuit rules on Texas Open Meetings Law (2012)      Judge(s):Rhesa Barksdale, James Dennis, and Jacques Wiener (Rangra v. Brown, No. 06-51587)	Click for summary→
Judge James Dennis wrote the opinion in the case Avinash Rangra; Anna Monclova v. Frank D. Brown, concerning the application of First Amendment rights within the context of the Texas Open Meetings law. The case was appealed from the Western District of Texas, where it was ruled that "the First Amendment affords absolutely no protection to speech by elected officials made pursuant to their official duties." Dennis, along with Judges Jacques Wiener, Jr. and Rhesa Barksdale, disagreed, and sent the case back to the trial court for review. Update: In September 2012, the case again made its way to the Fifth Circuit, where Judges Emilio Garza, Jerry Smith, and Leslie Southwick upheld the Texas Open Meetings Law. The court found that it did not abridge the free speech of city officials. To read that opinion, see United States Court of Appeals for the 5th Circuit, Asgeirsson et al v. Texas Attorney General, September 28, 2012.

• Clipper Estates case (2010)      Judge(s):Thomas Reavley, Edward Prado, and Priscilla Richman (Joffroin v. Tufaro, 606 F. 3d 235)	Click for summary→
Judge Martin Feldman of the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Louisiana dismissed a lawsuit filed by fifty people who lived in the Clipper Estates in suburban New Orleans under allegations of violations of the Racketeering Influenced and Corrupt Organizations (RICO) Act. The residents sued on allegations that the owner of Clipper Estates used money he assessed against them after Hurricane Katrina for personal purposes instead of improving the subdivision as he promised. Feldman dismissed the lawsuit claiming the plaintiffs had no standing under RICO. The case was appealed to the Fifth Circuit, where judges Thomas Reavley, Edward Prado, and Priscilla Richman affirmed Feldman's decision. It was determined that the plaintiffs in the case did not have standing after applying the three-part test from Whalen v. Carter, 954 F.2d 1087, 1093 (5th Cir. 1992).

Before the U.S. Supreme Court

This section focuses on cases the U.S. Supreme Court heard that originated in this court. To suggest cases we should cover here, email us.

2024-2025 term

See also: Supreme Court cases, October term 2024-2025

The following case was scheduled for argument before the U.S. Supreme Court during the 2024-2025 term.

2024-2025 U.S. Supreme Court cases from the 5th Circuit
Case	Opinion author	Decision	Vote
Garland v. VanDerStok	TBD	TBD	TBD
Food and Drug Administration v. Wages and White Lion Investments, LLC	TBD	TBD	TBD
Hewitt v. United States (Consolidated with Duffey v. United States)	TBD	TBD	TBD
FDA v. R.J. Reynolds Vapor Co.	TBD	TBD	TBD
Barnes v. Felix	TBD	TBD	TBD
Nuclear Regulatory Commission v. Texas (Consolidated with Interim Storage Partners v. Texas)	TBD	TBD	TBD
Gutierrez v. Saenz	TBD	TBD	TBD
Environmental Protection Agency v. Calumet Shreveport Refining, LLC	TBD	TBD	TBD
Federal Communications Commission v. Consumers’ Research (Consolidated with Schools, Health & Libraries Broadband Coalition v. Consumers’ Research)	TBD	TBD	TBD

2023-2024 term

See also: Supreme Court cases, October term 2023-2024

The following case was heard by the U.S. Supreme Court during the 2023-2024 term.

2023-2024 U.S. Supreme Court cases from the 5th Circuit
Case	Opinion author	Decision	Vote
Consumer Financial Protection Bureau v. Community Financial Services Association of America, Limited	Clarence Thomas	reversed and remanded	7-2
Campos-Chaves v. Garland (Consolidated with Garland v. Singh)	Samuel Alito	affirmed	5-4
Food and Drug Administration v. Alliance for Hippocratic Medicine (Consolidated w/ Danco Laboratories, L.L.C. v. Alliance for Hippocratic Medicine)	Brett Kavanaugh	reversed and remanded	9-0
Securities and Exchange Commission v. Jarkesy	John Roberts	affirmed and remanded	6-3
United States v. Rahimi	John Roberts	reversed and remanded	8-1
Devillier v. Texas	Clarence Thomas	vacated and remanded	9-0
NetChoice, LLC v. Paxton	Elena Kagan	vacated and remanded	9-0
Gonzalez v. Trevino	per curiam	vacated and remanded	TBA
Murthy v. Missouri	Amy Coney Barrett	reversed and remanded	6-3
Garland v. Cargill	Clarence Thomas	affirmed	6-3

2022-2023 term

See also: Supreme Court cases, October term 2022-2023

The following cases were scheduled for argument before the U.S. Supreme Court during the 2022-2023 term.

2022-2023 U.S. Supreme Court cases from the 5th Circuit
Case	Opinion author	Decision	Vote
Haaland v. Brackeen (Consolidated with Cherokee Nation v. Brackeen, Texas v. Haaland, Brackeen v. Haaland)	Amy Coney Barrett	affirmed	7-2
Reed v. Goertz	Brett Kavanaugh	reversed	6-3
Helix Energy Solutions Group, Inc. v. Hewitt	Elena Kagan	affirmed	6-3
Securities and Exchange Commission v. Cochran	Elena Kagan	affirmed and remanded	9-0
Bittner v. United States	Neil Gorsuch	reversed and remanded	5-4
Santos-Zacaria v. Garland	Ketanji Brown Jackson	vacated in part and remanded	9-0
Dubin v. United States	Sonia Sotomayor	vacated and remanded	9-0
Department of Education v. Brown	Samuel Alito	vacated and remanded	9-0
United States v. Texas (2022)	Brett Kavanaugh	reversed	8-1

2021-2022 term

See also: Supreme Court cases, October term 2021-2022

The following cases were heard before the U.S. Supreme Court during the 2021-2022 term.

2021-2022 U.S. Supreme Court cases from the 5th Circuit
Case	Opinion author	Decision	Vote
Houston Community College System v. Wilson	Neil Gorsuch	reversed	9-0
Badgerow v. Walters	Elena Kagan	reversed and remanded	8-1
Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization	Samuel Alito	reversed and remanded	6-3
City of Austin, Texas v. Reagan National Advertising of Texas, Inc.	Sonia Sotomayor	reversed and remanded	6-3
Cummings v. Premier Rehab Keller, P.L.L.C.	John Roberts	affirmed	6-3
Ramirez v. Collier	John Roberts	reversed and remanded	8-1
Ysleta del Sur Pueblo v. Texas	Neil Gorsuch	vacated and remanded	5-4
Whole Woman's Health v. Jackson	Neil Gorsuch	affirmed in part, reversed in part, and remanded	8-1
United States v. Texas	Per curiam	dismissed	N/A
Biden v. Texas	John Roberts	reversed and remanded	5-4

2020-2021 term

See also: Supreme Court cases, October term 2020-2021

The following cases were heard before the U.S. Supreme Court during the 2020-2021 term.

2020-2021 U.S. Supreme Court cases from the 5th Circuit
Case	Opinion author	Decision	Vote
Salinas v. United States Railroad Retirement Board	Sonia Sotomayor	reversed and remanded	5-4
California v. Texas (Consolidated with Texas v. California)	Stephen Breyer	reversed and remanded	7-2
Edwards v. Vannoy	Brett Kavanaugh	affirmed	6-3
Henry Schein Inc. v. Archer and White Sales Inc.	per curiam	Petition dismissed	NA
Collins v. Yellen (Consolidated with Yellen v. Collins)	Samuel Alito	affirmed in part, reversed in part, vacated in part, and remanded	7-2
Taylor v. Riojas (Decided without argument)	Per curiam	granted, vacated and remanded	7-1
Mckesson v. Doe (Decided without argument)	Per curiam	granted, vacated and remanded	7-1
City of San Antonio, Texas v. Hotels.com, L.P.	Samuel Alito	affirmed	9-0

2019-2020 term

See also: Supreme Court cases, October term 2019-2020

The following cases were heard before the U.S. Supreme Court during the 2019-2020 term.

2019-2020 U.S. Supreme Court cases from the 5th Circuit
Case	Opinion author	Decision	Vote
Hernandez v. Mesa	Samuel Alito	affirmed	5-4
Holguin-Hernandez v. U.S.	Stephen Breyer	vacated and remanded	9-0
Guerrero-Lasprilla v. Barr	Stephen Breyer	vacated and remanded	7-2
Davis v. United States	Per curiam	vacated and remanded	NA
Banister v. Davis	Elena Kagan	reversed and remanded	7-2
June Medical Services LLC v. Russo (Consolidated with Russo v. June Medical Services)	Stephen Breyer	reversed	5-4

Federal courthouse

The Fifth Circuit is housed in the John Minor Wisdom U.S. Court of Appeals Building in New Orleans, Louisiana. The original building was constructed in 1908, and served as both the post office and courthouse. In 1961, the post office moved due to a lack of space. In 1963, the courts left as well, and the building remained vacant until 1965, when it served as a public high school for three years after Hurricane Betsy destroyed McDonough 35 High School. After the building underwent renovations, the Fifth Circuit returned in 1972. In 1974, the building was placed in the National Register of Historic Places.

About United States Court of Appeals

The United States courts of appeals (or circuit courts) are the intermediate appellate courts of the United States federal courts. The court of appeals was originally created in 1891 and has grown to include thirteen courts.

A court of appeals decides appeals from any of the district courts that are in its federal judicial circuit. The appeals courts also can hear appeals from some administrative agencies. Decisions of the federal appeals courts can, in turn, be appealed to the Supreme Court of the United States.

There are thirteen United States courts of appeals. In addition, there are other federal courts (such as the Court of Appeals for the Armed Forces, which hears appeals in court-martial cases) that have "Court of Appeals" in their titles.

The eleven "numbered" circuits and the D.C. Circuit are defined by geography. The thirteenth court of appeal is the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit. This court has nationwide jurisdiction over certain types of appeals based on what the underlying legal case is about.

All of the courts of appeals also hear appeals from some administrative agency decisions and rulemaking. The largest share of this type of case is heard by the D.C. Circuit. The Federal Circuit hears appeals from specialized trial courts, primarily the Court of International Trade and the Court of Federal Claims, as well as appeals from the district courts in patent cases and certain other specialized matters.

Federal circuit court judges are appointed for life. They are paid approximately $179,500 annually. At the age of 65, a federal judge may choose to retire with his or her full salary. Judges may also choose to go on senior status at age 65, if they have served actively for 15 years.

Appointments by president

The chart below shows the number of appeals court judges confirmed by the U.S. Senate through November 1 of the fourth year of each president's term in office. At this point in the term, President Trump had the most appeals court appointments with 53.

Judges by circuit

See also: Judicial vacancies in federal courts

The table below displays the number of judges in each circuit and indicates how many were appointed by presidents from each major political party. It also includes the number of vacancies on a circuit and how many pending nominations for that circuit are before the United States Senate. The table can be sorted by clicking the column headers above the line. It is updated every Monday.

See also

• United States District Court for the Eastern District of Louisiana
• United States District Court for the Middle District of Louisiana
• United States District Court for the Western District of Louisiana
• United States District Court for the Northern District of Mississippi
• United States District Court for the Southern District of Mississippi
• United States District Court for the Eastern District of Texas
• United States District Court for the Northern District of Texas
• United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas
• United States District Court for the Western District of Texas

External links

• Search Google News for this topic
• Official website of the Fifth Circuit
• Opinions of the Fifth Circuit