SJR 8-DIVISION OF 9TH CIRCUIT CT OF APPEALS    MR. BRIAN HOVE, staff for Chair Seekins, explained that SJR 8 relates to splitting the 9th Circuit Court. He noted that twelve days ago the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals upheld a controversial decision, which essentially declared the Pledge of Allegiance unconstitutional. This ruling clearly demonstrates the disconnect the court has with Alaska. SJR 8 respectfully calls upon Congress to divide the 9th Circuit Court. This action is necessitated for a variety of reasons not the least of which includes the vast geographical and philosophical distance separating Alaska from the San Francisco based court. The 9th Circuit Court adjudicates a caseload far beyond that which is reasonably manageable. In total, there are eleven Circuit Courts of Appeal throughout the country, yet the 9th Circuit Court oversees nearly 20 percent of the U.S. population. In other words, the 9th Circuit Court is twice the ideal size. This size disparity is cited as the primary reason for the 9th Circuit Court's relatively high reversal record in cases heard before the U.S. Supreme Court. SJR 8 endorses legislation previously introduced in Congress by Senators Ted Stevens and Frank Murkowski. This legislation would reconfigure the 9th Circuit Court to encompass Arizona, California and Nevada. The proposed new 12th Circuit Court would take in Alaska, Hawaii, Idaho, Montana, Oregon and Washington. Senator Lisa Murkowski recently introduced similar legislation in Congress. SJR 8 simply seeks to accomplish two objectives: (1) to correct a considerable imbalance in the 9th Circuit Court's caseload, and; (2) provide the disparate regions falling within the 9th Circuit Court's current purview with a better informed panel of judges. These objectives are best accomplished by splitting the 9th Circuit Court. MR. HOVE welcomed questions. 2:47 p.m. SENATOR OGAN said splitting the court is not necessarily going to make the judges better because they are there for life. He pointed to the "one nation under God" portion for the Pledge of Allegiance and said he was always perplexed why a lot of judges, especially the 9th Circuit Court judges, seem to look at the establishment clause of the 1st Amendment that disallows the establishment of religion, but seem to totally ignore the second part that says "nor prohibit the free exercise thereof." He said it seems that this resolution is not about the Pledge of Allegiance ruling, but that might be some of the catalyst for the resolution. Although he wished that splitting the court would get rid of some of those judges, attrition would probably have to take care of that. He opined that it is fortunate that the U.S. Supreme Court would overturn the 9th Circuit Court decision once again. SENATOR OGAN asked Mr. Hove if he knew the running tally of 9th circuit cases overturned by the U.S. Supreme Court because the last time he counted, approximately 29 out of 31 cases were overturned. MR. HOVE said he didn't know the precise number. SENATOR OGAN said it is extremely high and splitting the court is not going to get rid of those judges. MR. HOVE said splitting the court might give an opportunity to play a larger role in the process. SENATOR OGAN agreed. MR. HOVE added that whatever the Legislature could do to that extent would certainly be a benefit. SENATOR OGAN informed committee members he attended a hearing at the 9th Circuit Court a couple of years earlier involving the Katie John case and found it fascinating. [Katie John et al vs. United States of America No. 93-35295] CHAIR SEEKINS read from page 2, line 23. The 9th Circuit Court was reversed five of the first six times it was reviewed in the October 2002 term. He said one of the things they are very concerned about and one of the reasons SJR 8 was proposed is a 9th Circuit Judge cannot attain necessary familiarity with federal legislation affecting Alaska because a 9th Circuit Court judge may only sit on the panel of Alaska once every ten years. It is hard to get any continuity for a little state like Alaska with that number of cases and that number of justices. Because of Alaska's extraordinary size, no one ever has a chance to build up any familiarity with federal laws that affect the State of Alaska. SENATOR ELLIS asked how many judgeships were currently vacant on the 9th Circuit Court. MR. HOVE said he didn't have that information, but could provide it if desired. SENATOR ELLIS said he would like that information provided. SENATOR THERRIAULT moved SJR 8 from committee with individual recommendations. There being no objection, it was so ordered.