PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Read twice and referred to the Committee on Judiciary.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in Senate · Jul 19, 1999
Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals En Banc Procedures Act of 1999 - Amends the Federal judicial code to allow 40 percent or more of the circuit judges of the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals (Court) who are in regular active service to order a hearing or rehearing before the court en banc for such circuit (currently, a majority must vote affirmatively to rehear a case en banc).Provides that a majority of the judges shall be required to sit on a court en banc for such circuit (currently, 11 judges must sit on a court en banc).Requires that: (1) the Court be organized into no fewer than three administrative units based on geographic regions; (2) each panel of the Court be assigned to an administrative unit; and (3) in any case or controversy heard by any panel of an administrative unit, at least one judge of that unit be assigned to that panel (currently, there is no requirement that the Court have geographical representation on its panels).
People & committees
Sen. Feinstein, Dianne [D-CA] · D–CA
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Read twice and referred to the Committee on Judiciary.
Sponsor introductory remarks on measure. (CR S8884-8885)
Introduced in Senate
Primary sources
Text links open the official source. We currently store references to these documents.
No related bills are listed in this snapshot. This does not establish whether the proposal has appeared in earlier Congresses.
Source last updated: Aug 10, 2026. Consult Congress.gov for the current record.
AI Conversation Starters
Choose a perspective, copy a prompt, and paste it into your preferred AI. Each prompt includes the bill version and available official source links, and asks for counterarguments as well as supporting evidence.
Analyze S.1403 as objectively as possible. Explain its main provisions, who would be affected, possible benefits and harms, implementation, exceptions, and uncertainties. Present the strongest arguments for and against it, and identify evidence needed to assess its public impact.
Examine S.1403 through a progressive lens, focusing on fairness, access, economic inequality, and effects on vulnerable communities. Explain potential benefits, costs, and unintended consequences. Consider the strongest counterarguments and distinguish stated goals from demonstrated outcomes.
Examine S.1403 through a conservative lens, focusing on fiscal responsibility, institutional stability, federalism, and the scope of government. Explain potential benefits, costs, and unintended consequences. Consider the strongest counterarguments and any provisions that challenge this perspective.
Examine S.1403 through a civil-liberties and limited-government lens. Consider individual rights, privacy, voluntary choice, accountability, and government power. Explain tradeoffs, possible safeguards, and the strongest counterarguments without assuming the proposal is beneficial or harmful.