Michael Schmier v. United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit and Judicial Council of the Ninth Circuit

Bad Law
2002 Daily Journal DAR 1245·279 F.3d 817·2002 WL 130454·51 Fed. R. Serv. 3d 1123·2002 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 979
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitFebruary 1, 200201-16105California3,815 words

Opinion

Opinion

Michel, J.

Michael Schmier, an attorney practicing employment law in the California federal courts, appeals from a decision by the United States District Court for the Northern District of California holding that, as a matter of law, Schmier had failed to establish standing based on a complaint alleging that the Circuit Rules prohibiting citation to unpublished opinions violate his constitutional rights. Because Schmier’s complaint does nothing more than allege a speculative and abstract interest in having these Circuit Rules invalidated, and because nothing in the complaint indicates that these rules have somehow, caused an injury personal to Schmier, we affirm.

I.

In November 2000, Schmier sued the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit and the Judicial Council for that Circuit, alleging that certain rules they had promulgated, especially Circuit Rule 36-3, violate Schmier’s rights under Article III of the Federal Constitution, along with Schmier’s rights under the First Amendment, the Due Process and Equal Protection Clauses, and under the separation-of-powers doctrine. Circuit Rule 36-3 essentially states that neither parties nor courts in the Ninth Circuit may cite to an…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.