Legal Definitions - in banc

The term "in banc" (often spelled "en banc") refers to a session where all judges of a court, or a large majority of them, participate in hearing and deciding a case, rather than the usual smaller panel of judges. This practice is most common in appellate courts, such as federal circuit courts of appeals or state supreme courts. Courts typically sit "in banc" for cases of exceptional importance, to resolve conflicting decisions made by different smaller panels of judges within the same court, or to reconsider a previous ruling that has significant implications. The purpose is to ensure that the court's decision carries the full weight and authority of the entire judicial body.

• Example 1 (Federal Circuit Court): A three-judge panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit issued a ruling on a complex administrative law challenge. However, another panel in the same circuit had previously issued a contradictory ruling on a very similar legal issue. To resolve this internal conflict and ensure uniformity in the circuit's interpretation of the law, the Fifth Circuit decided to rehear the case in banc, meaning all active judges of the court would participate in the reargument and decision-making process.

  Explanation: This illustrates "in banc" because the entire body of active judges, rather than just a small panel, is convened to hear and decide the case, specifically to address a significant legal conflict within the court's own precedents.

• Example 2 (State Supreme Court): The Supreme Court of a particular state always operates in banc. Every case brought before it, whether an appeal from a lower court or a matter of original jurisdiction, is heard and decided by all nine justices of the court. This ensures that every decision reflects the collective judgment and full authority of the state's highest judicial body.

  Explanation: Here, "in banc" describes the standard operating procedure of this specific court, where all its judges consistently sit together to hear and rule on every case, demonstrating a full bench hearing.

• Example 3 (Significant Public Interest Case): A highly controversial case involving a state's new voting rights legislation reached the state's intermediate court of appeals. Given the profound public interest and the potential statewide impact of the decision, the chief judge, after an initial panel ruling, ordered a rehearing of the case in banc. This allowed all fifteen judges of the appellate court to deliberate on the complex constitutional and policy implications before issuing a final judgment.

  Explanation: This example shows "in banc" being invoked for a case of exceptional importance, where the full complement of judges is brought together to ensure a comprehensive and authoritative review due to the significant societal implications.