LogFAQs > #892731658

glitteringfairy posted...

Can someone explain this whole federal judge thing? Why was it originally a random judge in Hawaii that over ruled the president and now a random group of judges in Seattle did the same thing? I legitimately don't understand how this whole thing works. Who is deciding which judge does what? Why are judges with different views not constantly over ruling each other?

Federal district courts are only bound by the decisions made by the federal circuit they are located in and decisions by the US Supreme Court.

In this case, the federal judge in Hawaii made his ruling on the matter. Hawaii belongs to the Ninth Circuit, and so the Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit affirmed the decision. Unless/until the Supreme Court reverses, all federal district courts in the Ninth are bound by this decision. However, the article states, the Fourth Circuit is also deciding the matter. The Circuit Courts are coequal to each other and are not bound by the precedent of other Circuit Courts. So the Fourth Circuit could come to the opposite conclusion without issue. This would further spur a Supreme Court ruling, because division among the Circuit Courts causes obvious issues.

Edit: an en banc hearing in the Ninth (a hearing with all of the judges in the circuit) could also reverse the decision.
---

Party leader, passive-aggressive doormat, pasta eater extraordinaire!