BERMAN, WATERS OPPOSE BREAKING UP APPEALS COURT REPRESENTATIVES SUGGEST POLITICAL MOTIVATION IS BEHIND PROPOSAL.

Byline: Lisa Friedman Washington Bureau

A political desire to break up what many consider a liberal court is the real motive behind congressional efforts to reorganize the California-based 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, Democrats charged Tuesday.

In a hearing before the House Judiciary Committee, California Reps. Howard Berman, D-Van Nuys, and Maxine Waters, D-Los Angeles, said they opposed splitting up the federal appeals court that serves California.

``If judicial activism were valid grounds for reorganizing the courts, we would have to restructure the U.S. Supreme Court,'' Berman said. He called arguments that the court covers too vast an area and is too slow in disposing of appeals ``underwhelming.''

The legislation, sponsored by Rep. Mike Simpson, R-Idaho, would create a new, 12th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals to serve Idaho, Alaska, Guam, Hawaii, Montana, Washington and the Northern Mariana Islands. The 9th Circuit would continue to serve California, Nevada and Arizona.

Simpson and others argue that, 21 times over the past 23 years, the 9th Circuit was rated one of the slowest circuits in disposing of appeals.

``Justice delayed is justice denied,'' said Rep. Lamar Smith, R-Texas, chairman of the judiciary subcommittee on the courts, who supports the split.

In testimony before the committee, three 9th Circuit justices gave mixed reviews to the proposal.

Judge Diarmuid O'Scannlain of Portland, Ore., called reorganization ``the best way to cure the administrative ills affecting my court.

``No circuit, not even mine, should resist the inevitable,'' he said.

Meanwhile, Chief Judge Mary Schroeder of Arizona and Judge Alex Kozinski of Pasadena said they didn't believe a convincing argument had been made for splitting the court.

Both argued that the 9th Circuit had made strides in reducing delays but maintained that the problem rested largely with the failure of the White House, over several administrations, to appoint judges.

In addition, they said, the proposed split wouldn't solve caseload problems, since Arizona, California and Nevada provide 82 percent of the court's cases.

``I believe the case has not been made,'' said Kozinski, a leading conservative on the 9th Circuit court who was among the justices on the panel that decided not to delay California's Oct. 7 recall election.

Simpson's bill is similar to legislation he sponsored last year after a three-judge panel on the court ruled that Congress violated the Constitution when it added ``under God'' to the Pledge of Allegiance in 1954.

Any legislation to reorganize the 9th Circuit is expected to face a tough fight in the U.S. Senate.

Lisa Friedman, [phone]

lisa.friedman(at)langnews.com