United States Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit

Seventh Circuit
Court of Appeals
Judgeships
Posts: 11
Judges: 11
Vacancies: 0
Judges
Chief: Diane Sykes
Active judges: Michael B. Brennan, Frank Easterbrook, Candace Jackson-Akiwumi, Thomas L. Kirsch II, Joshua Kolar, John Z. Lee, Nancy Maldonado, Doris Pryor, Michael Scudder, Amy St. Eve, Diane Sykes Senior judges: William Bauer, Joel Flaum, David Hamilton, Daniel Manion, Kenneth Ripple, Ilana Rovner, Diane Wood

The United States Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit is a federal appellate court with appellate jurisdiction. It hears appeals from all of the circuit courts within its jurisdiction and its rulings may be appealed to the Supreme Court of the United States.

Appeals are heard in the Everett M. Dirksen Federal Building in downtown Chicago.

Three judges of the Seventh Circuit went on to serve on the Supreme Court of the United States. Sherman Minton was appointed to the Supreme Court in 1949 by Harry Truman (D), John Paul Stevens was appointed in 1975 by Gerald Ford (R), and Amy Coney Barrett was appointed in 2020 by Donald Trump (R).

This page contains the following information on the Seventh Circuit.

• An overview of the court's jurisdiction
• A list of the court's active and senior judges
• A list of the court's current vacancies
• A brief history of the court
• Case reversal statistics by the Supreme Court of the United States
• Noteworthy cases heard by the court
• A list of the court's former judges
• Information about U.S. Courts of Appeals
• Where the court is located

Vacancies

See also: Current federal judicial vacancies

There are no current vacancies on the Seventh Circuit out of the court's 11 judicial positions.

Pending nominations

There are no pending nominees for this court.

Active judges

Article III judges

Judge	Appointed By	Assumed Office	Bachelors	Law
Frank Easterbrook	Ronald Reagan (R)	April 4, 1985 -	Swarthmore College, 1970	University of Chicago Law School, 1973
Diane Sykes	George W. Bush (R)	July 1, 2004 -	Northwestern University, 1980	Marquette University Law School, 1984
Michael B. Brennan	Donald Trump (R)	May 11, 2018 -	University of Notre Dame, 1986	Northwestern University School of Law, 1989
Michael Scudder	Donald Trump (R)	May 21, 2018 -	Saint Joseph's College, 1993	Northwestern University Pritzker School of Law, 1998
Amy St. Eve	Donald Trump (R)	May 23, 2018 -	Cornell University, 1987	Cornell Law School, 1990
Thomas L. Kirsch II	Donald Trump (R)	December 17, 2020 -	Indiana University, 1996	Harvard Law School, 1999
Candace Jackson-Akiwumi	Joe Biden (D)	July 1, 2021 -	Princeton University, 2000	Yale Law School, 2005
John Z. Lee	Joe Biden (D)	September 9, 2022 -	Harvard University, 1989	Harvard Law School, 1992
Doris Pryor	Joe Biden (D)	December 9, 2022 -	University of Central Arkansas, 1999	Indiana University School of Law, 2003
Joshua Kolar	Joe Biden (D)	January 31, 2024 -	Northwestern University, 1999	Northwestern University Law School, 2003
Nancy Maldonado	Joe Biden (D)	July 11, 2024 -	Harvard College, 1997	Columbia Law School, 2001

Active Article III judges by appointing political party

Below is a display of the number of active judges by the party of the appointing president. It does not reflect how a judge may rule on specific cases or their own political preferences.

• Democrat appointed: 5
• Republican appointed: 6

Senior judges

Senior status is a classification for federal judges at all levels who are semi-retired. Senior judges are Article III judges who, having met eligibility through age and service requirements, continue to serve on federal courts while typically hearing a reduced number of cases. Some senior judges, however, elect to retain a full caseload after taking senior status. According to the Administrative Office of U.S. Courts, senior judges "typically handle about 15 percent of the federal courts' workload annually." The date listed under assumed office in the table below reflects the date that the judge took senior status.

Judge	Appointed By	Assumed Office	Bachelors	Law
William Bauer	Gerald Ford (R)	October 31, 1994 -	Elmhurst College, 1949	DePaul University College of Law, 1952
Daniel Manion	Ronald Reagan (R)	December 18, 2007 -	University of Notre Dame, 1964	Indiana University, Indianapolis School of Law, 1973
Kenneth Ripple	Ronald Reagan (R)	September 1, 2008 -	Fordham University, 1965	University of Virginia School of Law, 1968
Joel Flaum	Ronald Reagan (R)	November 30, 2020 -	Union College, 1958	Northwestern University School of Law, 1963
Diane Wood	Bill Clinton (D)	September 7, 2022 -	University of Texas, Austin, 1971	University of Texas School of Law, 1975
David Hamilton	Barack Obama (D)	December 5, 2022 -	Haverford College, 1979	Yale Law School, 1983
Ilana Rovner	George H.W. Bush (R)	July 11, 2024 -	Bryn Mawr College, 1960	Chicago-Kent College of Law, 1966

Senior judges by appointing political party

Below is a display of the number of senior judges by the party of the appointing president. It does not reflect how a judge may rule on specific cases or their own political preferences.

• Democrat appointed: 2
• Republican appointed: 5

Former chief judges

In order to qualify for the office of chief judge in an Article III circuit or district court, or on the United States Court of International Trade, a judge must be in active service and hold seniority over the court's commissioned judges who are 64 years of age or under, have served one year or more, and have not previously served as chief judge.

In the event that no judge on the court meets those qualifications, the youngest judge in regular active service aged 65 years or more and who has served as a judge for one year or more shall become chief judge. If no judge meets those qualifications, the judge holding seniority in active service who has not served as chief before shall become the chief judge.

The chief judge serves for a term of seven years until another judge becomes eligible to serve in the position. No judge is permitted to serve as chief judge after reaching the age of 70 years unless no other judge is qualified to serve.

Unlike the chief justice of the United States, a chief judge returns to active service after the expiration of their term and does not create a vacancy on the court by the fact of their promotion.

On the United States Court of Federal Claims, the chief judge is selected by the president of the United States. The judge must be less than 70 years of age. A chief may serve until they reach age 70 or until another judge is designated by the president as the new chief judge. If the president selects a new chief judge, the former chief judge may continue active service on the court for the remainder of their appointed term.

Diane Wood - (2013-2020) Frank Easterbrook - (2006-2013) Joel Flaum - (2000-2006) Richard Posner - (1993-2000) William Bauer - (1986-1993) Walter Cummings - (1981-1986) Thomas Fairchild - (1975-1981)

Luther Swygert - (1970-1975) Latham Castle - (1968-1970) John Hastings - (1959-1968) Francis Duffy - (1954-1959) James Earl Major - (1948-1954) William Morris Sparks - (1948)

Former judges

For more information about the judges of the Seventh Circuit, see former federal judges of the Seventh Circuit.

Jurisdiction

Map of the Seventh Circuit. Click on a district to find out more about it.

The Seventh Circuit has appellate jurisdiction over cases heard in one of its subsidiary districts. These cases can include civil and criminal matters that fall under federal law. Appeals of rulings by the Seventh Circuit are petitioned to the Supreme Court of the United States. Justice Amy Coney Barrett is the circuit justice for the Seventh Circuit.

The United States Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit has appellate jurisdiction over the courts in the following districts:

• Central District of Illinois
• Northern District of Illinois
• Southern District of Illinois
• Northern District of Indiana
• Southern District of Indiana
• Eastern District of Wisconsin
• Western District of Wisconsin

Caseloads

This section contains court management statistics dating back to 2010. It was last updated in September 2024.

Click [show] below for more information on caseload terms and definitions.

Caseload statistics explanation
Term	Explanation
Cases filed and terminated	The number of civil and criminal lawsuits formally initiated or decided by the court in a calendar year. The chart below reflects the table columns Cases filed and Cases terminated.
Average time from filing to disposition	The average amount of time, in months, from a case's date of filing to date of disposition (acquittal, sentencing, dismissal, etc.). The chart below reflects the table columns Median time (Criminal) and Median time (Civil).
Starting case load	The number of cases pending from the previous calendar year.
Cases filed	The number of civil and criminal lawsuits formally initiated in a calendar year.
Cases terminated	The total number of civil and criminal lawsuits decided by the court in a calendar year.
Remaining cases	The number of civil and criminal cases pending at the end of a given year.
Median time (Criminal)	The average amount of time, in months, from a case's date of filing to the date of disposition. In criminal cases, the date of disposition occurs on the day of sentencing or acquittal/dismissal.
Median time (Civil)	The average amount of time, in months, from a case's date of filing to the date of disposition.
Three-year civil cases	The number and percent of civil cases that were filed more than three years before the end of the given calendar year.
Vacant posts	The number of months during the year an authorized judgeship was vacant.
Trial/Post	The number of trials completed divided by the number of authorized judgeships on the court. Trials include evidentiary trials, hearings on temporary restraining orders, and preliminary injunctions.
Source: United States Courts, "Explanation of the Judicial Caseload Profiles for United States District Courts," accessed September 25, 2018

United States Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit caseload stats, 2010-2023
Year	Appeals Filed	Appeals Terminated	Pending Appeals	Terminations on the Merits (per Active Judge)	Procedural Terminations (per Active Judge)	Total Written Decisions (per Active Judge)	Number of Judgeships	Number of Sitting Senior Judges	Number of Vacant Judgeship Months	Median Time From Filing Notice of Appeal to Disposition
2010	3,098	3,336	1,913	319	106	107	11	6	12	11
2011	3,005	2,987	1,930	332	85	99	11	6	12	9
2012	3,031	3,010	1,949	383	66	121	11	5	12	8
2013	2,992	3,034	1,906	419	44	137	11	4	12	8
2014	2,917	3,023	1,812	422	47	134	11	4	12	7
2015	2,977	2,906	1,880	404	39	134	11	5	22	7
2016	3,362	3,361	1,804	565	50	190	11	4	24	6
2017	2,730	2,793	1,739	416	52	140	11	5	35	8
2018	2,812	2,727	1,826	407	42	134	11	6	40	8
2019	2,629	2,656	1,795	344	56	113	11	4	0	9
2020	2,615	2,575	1,833	394	46	130	11	4	3	9
2021	2,493	2,539	1,787	377	57	124	11	4	24	9
2022	2,362	2,358	1,791	331	55	110	11	6	7	9
2023	2,588	2,529	1,851	284	56	96	11	4	6	9
Average	2,829	2,845	1,844	386	57	126	11	5	16	8

History

Court history

The Seventh Circuit was established by the United States Congress in 1891 by the Evarts Act of 1891, which established the first nine appeals circuits. Over the years, nine additional seats were added to the court, resulting in a total of eleven seats. The court has moved six times throughout its history although it has remained in the city of Chicago.

Judicial posts

The following table highlights the development of judicial posts for the Seventh Circuit:

Year	Statute	Total Seats
March 3, 1891	26 Stat. 826	2
February 8, 1895	28 Stat. 643	3
March 3, 1905	33 Stat. 992	4
May 31, 1938	52 Stat. 584	5
August 3, 1949	63 Stat. 493	6
May 19, 1961	75 Stat. 80	7
March 18, 1966	80 Stat. 75	8
October 20, 1978	92 Stat. 1629,1632	9
July 10, 1984	98 Stat. 333	11

Reversal rate

See also: SCOTUS case reversal rates (2007 - Present)

Since 2007, SCOTUS has released opinions in 1,250 cases. Of those, it reversed a lower court decision 891 times (71.3 percent) while affirming a lower court decision 347 times (27.8 percent).

In that time period, SCOTUS has decided 55 cases originating from the Seventh Circuit, affirming in 20 cases and reversing in 35 cases, for a reversal rate of 63.6 percent. As of the end of the 2023 term, of the Article III circuits—the ordinal circuits, the D.C. Circuit, and the Federal Circuit—the court with the lowest rate of overturned decisions is the Fourth Circuit at 62.1 percent.

Noteworthy cases

The following are noteworthy cases heard before this court. To suggest cases we should cover here, email us. To read opinions published by this court, click here.

Court strikes down Indiana abortion law

See also: Seventh Circuit

On April 19, 2018, a panel of the Seventh Circuit ruled that an Indiana law prohibiting abortions if the provider knew the patient was terminating the pregnancy because of a reason listed in the statute, such as race or disability, was unconstitutional. The court referred to this part of the law as the non-discrimination provisions. The law would have also required providers to inform women seeking abortions of the non-discrimination provisions and instituted changes to the handling of aborted fetuses. The court concluded that all three parts of the law were unconstitutional under Supreme Court precedent:

“

The non-discrimination provisions clearly violate well-established Supreme Court precedent holding that a woman may terminate her pregnancy prior to viability, and that the State may not prohibit a woman from exercising that right for any reason. Because the non-discrimination provisions are unconstitutional, so too is the provision that a woman be informed of them. Additionally, the amended fetal disposition provisions violate substantive due process because they have no rational relationship to a legitimate state interest.

”

Judge Daniel Manion concurred in the court's judgment as to the first two provisions but dissented as to the third provision. He would have ruled that the fetal disposition provisions related to a legitimate state interest.

• Seventh Circuit upholds restraint on enforcement of abortion law (2013)

Click for summary→

The Wisconsin Legislature passed a law requiring doctors who perform abortions in the state to have admitting privileges at a hospital within 30 miles of their facility. Opponents of the law, primarily Planned Parenthood, argued that such a requirement would effectively prevent women in certain portions of the state from obtaining an abortion because hospitals usually grant admitting privileges to a doctor who can refer a set number of patients to it. Opponents said modern abortions rarely face complications requiring hospital admittance; therefore, few abortion doctors would meet a hospital's quota of referrals. Planned Parenthood sued to stop enforcement of this law and, in July 2013, U.S. District Judge William Conley issued a one-year restraining order preventing the state from taking action against a doctor who did not have admitting privileges. The state appealed to the Seventh Circuit, which upheld Judge Conley’s order on December 20, 2013. Judge Richard Posner wrote for the three-judge panel. He said that had the law not been enjoined, two of the state’s four abortion clinics would have been shut down. Further, “fully qualified” doctors were unable to comply with the law due to hospital restrictions and policies concerning granting admitting privileges. Judge Posner said that the state was treating abortion differently from other invasive outpatient procedures and, under the equal protection clause, the law was a violation. He ruled that the one-year restraining order was proper in this case. JudgesDavid Hamilton and Daniel Manion were also part of the panel. Articles: Courthouse News, "Abortion Law Remains Enjoined in Wisconsin," December 24, 2013 Journal Sentinel, "Federal appeals court upholds temporary block on state abortion law," December 20, 2013

• Court allows for warrantless entry and seizure (2014)      Judge(s):Joel Flaum, Daniel Manion, and Ilana Rovner (Krysta Sutterfield v. City of Milwaukee, et. al., No. 12-2272)	Click for summary→
In May 2014, the Seventh Circuit found that Milwaukee Police had the authority to enter Krysta Sutterfield's home without a warrant due to exigent circumstances. The city claimed that Sutterfield posed harm to herself, following a comment made during a doctor's appointment. As a result, police arrived at Sutterfield's home, questioned her, seized firearms from her home, arrested her, and took her for an emergency mental evaluation. Sutterfield, who insisted she was of sound mental health at the time of the incident, sued on the basis of her Second, Fourth, and Fourteenth Amendment rights. The Seventh Circuit agreed that the police officers were protected under qualified immunity even if Sutterfield's Fourth Amendment rights were violated. This decision affirmed a ruling by Judge Joseph Stadtmueller of the Eastern District of Wisconsin.

• Union challenge to Wisconsin's labor law defeated in court (2014)      Judge(s):Joel Flaum, Ilana Rovner, and Virginia Kendall (Laborers Local 236, AFL-CIO, et al v. Walker, et al, 13-3193)	Click for summary→
On April 18, 2014, a three-judge panel of the Seventh Circuit, composed of Judges Joel Flaum, Ilana Rovner, and Judge Virginia Kendall of the Northern District of Illinois sitting by designation, ruled that Wisconsin's Act 10, a law enacted in 2011 that barred government employers from collectively bargaining with employees' unions over anything save for wages, was constitutional and upheld a lower court opinion from the Western District of Wisconsin. In the underlying case, the American Federation of State, County, and Municipal Employees Local 60 and Laborers Local 236 brought suit against Wisconsin Gov. Scott Walker (R), alleging violations of their First Amendment right to the freedom of association and their right to petition the government for the redress of grievances. The plaintiffs further alleged violations of their Fourteenth Amendment right to equal protection of the laws. Prior to the plaintiffs' appeal, Judge William Conley said that as public employees of the state, they "remain[ed] free to associate and their unions remain[ed] free to speak; municipal employers are simply not allowed to listen." In an opinion written by Judge Flaum, the Seventh Circuit affirmed Judge Conley's ruling, commenting that "the line between constitutionality and unconstitutionally is not drawn according to how open a state decisionmaker is to what you have to say."

• Copyright infringement case based on Facebook posts dismissed (2014)      Judge(s):Richard Posner, Michael Kanne, and John Tinder (Conrad v. AM Community Credit Union, et al, 13-2899)	Click for summary→
On April 14, 2014, a three-judge panel of the Seventh Circuit, composed of Judges Richard Posner, Michael Kanne, and John Tinder, found that Catherine Conrad, a pro se plaintiff, did not have a valid copyright infringement claim related to videos of her singing telegram performance posted on Facebook. In the underlying case, Conrad performed at a credit union trade association conference but asked that audience members not take photos or videos of the performance except for their own personal use. Audience members then posted photos and videos of her performance on their personal Facebook pages, which prompted Conrad to sue, alleging violations of her intellectual property rights. Judge Barbara Crabb of the Western District of Wisconsin dismissed Conrad's suit, finding that it had no legal merit. Conrad further appealed to the Seventh Circuit, where Posner, writing for the majority, affirmed Judge Crabb's dismissal of the lawsuit.

Before the U.S. Supreme Court

This section focuses on cases the U.S. Supreme Court heard that originated in this court. To suggest cases we should cover here, email us.

2024-2025 term

See also: Supreme Court cases, October term 2024-2025

The following case was scheduled for argument before the U.S. Supreme Court during the 2024-2025 term.

2024-2025 U.S. Supreme Court cases from the 7th Circuit
Case	Opinion author	Decision	Vote
Thompson v. United States	TBD	TBD	TBD

2023-2024 term

See also: Supreme Court cases, October term 2023-2024

The following case was heard by the U.S. Supreme Court during the 2023-2024 term.

2023-2024 U.S. Supreme Court cases from the 7th Circuit
Case	Opinion author	Decision	Vote
Snyder v. United States	Brett Kavanaugh	reversed and remanded	6-3
Erlinger v. United States	Neil Gorsuch	vacated and remanded	6-3

2022-2023 term

See also: Supreme Court cases, October term 2022-2023

The following cases were heard by the U.S. Supreme Court during the 2022-2023 term.

2022-2023 U.S. Supreme Court cases from the 7th Circuit
Case	Opinion author	Decision	Vote
Health and Hospital Corporation of Marion County, Indiana v. Talevski	Ketanji Brown Jackson	affirmed	7-2
U.S. ex rel. Schutte v. SuperValu Inc. (Consolidated with U.S. ex rel. Proctor v. Safeway, Inc.)	Clarence Thomas	vacated and remanded	9-0

2021-2022 term

See also: Supreme Court cases, October term 2021-2022

The following cases were heard before the U.S. Supreme Court during the 2021-2022 term.

2021-2022 U.S. Supreme Court cases from the 7th Circuit
Case	Opinion author	Decision	Vote
Servotronics, Inc. v. Rolls-Royce PLC	N/A	Case dismissed	N/A
Hughes v. Northwestern University	Sonia Sotomayor	vacated and remanded	8-0
Southwest Airlines v. Saxon	Clarence Thomas	affirmed	8-0
LeDure v. Union Pacific Railroad Company	Per curiam	affirmed	4-4

2020-2021 term

See also: Supreme Court cases, October term 2020-2021

The following cases were heard before the U.S. Supreme Court during the 2020-2021 term.

2020-2021 U.S. Supreme Court cases from the 7th Circuit
Case	Opinion author	Decision	Vote
City of Chicago, Illinois v. Fulton	Samuel Alito	vacated and remanded	8-0

2019-2020 term

See also: Supreme Court cases, October term 2019-2020

The following cases were heard before the U.S. Supreme Court during the 2019-2020 term.

2019-2020 U.S. Supreme Court cases from the 7th Circuit
Case	Opinion author	Decision	Vote
Republican National Committee v. Democratic National Committee	Per curiam	application for stay granted	5-4

Federal courthouse

The United States Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit has moved into six different court buildings. The original building was located at the northwest corner of Monroe Street and Dearborn Street and shared space with the U.S. Customs House and Post Office. The building was gutted by the Great Chicago Fire in 1871. The court moved to a newly constructed building in 1880 located between Clark, Adams, and Dearborn streets and Jackson Boulevard. The building was poorly constructed, and the court moved again in 1894 to the Monadnock building at the corner of Jackson Boulevard and Dearborn Street. The Monadnock building served as a temporary home until a new courthouse was built in 1905 by architect Henry Ives Cobb. The court moved again in 1938 to 1212 Lake Shore Drive and one final time in 1965 to its present location at the Everett M. Dirksen Federal Building. The current building was constructed by principal architect Ludwig Mies Van Der Rohe. The official court website describes the building, stating,

“

The block-long building rises thirty stories on a skeleton of structural steel, supported by concrete caissons extending to rock one hundred feet below sidewalk level. It is sheathed in a curtain wall of steel, aluminum and bronze-tinted glass. The entire ground level area is paved in granite, extending to the lobby as interior paving and onto the elevator core walls.

”

About United States Courts of Appeal

The United States courts of appeals (or circuit courts) are the intermediate appellate courts of the United States federal courts. The court of appeals was originally created in 1891 and has grown to include thirteen courts.

A court of appeals decides appeals from any of the district courts that are in its federal judicial circuit. The appeals courts also can hear appeals from some administrative agencies. Decisions of the federal appeals courts can, in turn, be appealed to the Supreme Court of the United States.

There are thirteen United States courts of appeals. In addition, there are other federal courts (such as the Court of Appeals for the Armed Forces, which hears appeals in court-martial cases) that have "Court of Appeals" in their titles.

The eleven "numbered" circuits and the D.C. Circuit are defined by geography. The thirteenth court of appeal is the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit. This court has nationwide jurisdiction over certain types of appeals based on what the underlying legal case is about.

All of the courts of appeals also hear appeals from some administrative agency decisions and rulemaking. The largest share of this type of case is heard by the D.C. Circuit. The Federal Circuit hears appeals from specialized trial courts, primarily the Court of International Trade and the Court of Federal Claims, as well as appeals from the district courts in patent cases and certain other specialized matters.

Federal circuit court judges are appointed for life. They are paid approximately $179,500 annually. At the age of 65, a federal judge may choose to retire with his or her full salary. Judges may also choose to go on senior status at age 65, if they have served actively for 15 years.

Appointments by president

The chart below shows the number of appeals court judges confirmed by the U.S. Senate through November 1 of the fourth year of each president's term in office. At this point in the term, President Trump had the most appeals court appointments with 53.

Judges by circuit

See also: Judicial vacancies in federal courts

The table below displays the number of judges in each circuit and indicates how many were appointed by presidents from each major political party. It also includes the number of vacancies on a circuit and how many pending nominations for that circuit are before the United States Senate. The table can be sorted by clicking the column headers above the line. It is updated every Monday.

See also

• Federal courts
• Federal judge
• United States Court of Appeals
• Central District of Illinois
• Northern District of Illinois
• Southern District of Illinois
• Northern District of Indiana
• Southern District of Indiana
• Eastern District of Wisconsin
• Western District of Wisconsin

External links

• Search Google News for this topic
• United States Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit
• Judges of the Seventh Circuit
• Seventh Circuit Official Opinions Database