Caseload Burdens and Jurisdictional Limitations: Some Observations from the History of the Federal Courts

Judge Newman has asked that we talk not about him today but about the federal courts. Naturally, I will honor his request, but I must also say that I can think of no better place to start such a discussion than with the exceptionally valuable contributions he has made over the past two decades in examining the institutional problems that confront the federal courts and in proposing thoughtful and imaginative ways to deal with them. He has been especially concerned with the problems created by a heavy and growing federal caseload,1 and his many suggestions—including ideas about rethinking issues of systemic fairness and proposals for making much of the jurisdiction of the lower courts discretionary—compel our attention and warrant serious consideration.2 Most important is the fact that in his many discussions of jurisdictional reform Judge Newman has consistently reaffirmed the principle that the “pure gold” of the American judicial system is the guarantee of “vital protections of individual rights.”3 Consequently, he has proposed limitations on the jurisdiction of the federal courts only to ensure that the federal judiciary retains its high quality and fulfills its essential constitutional role.4 The “mission of the federal courts,” he