We report after each month on interesting statistics from the data we generate from the daily opinion summaries from the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit, and at the end of each court year (Oct.-Sept.) we will aggregate that–all of which provides useful insights into the inner workings of the Court, the relative success of various appeals, and more. The July 2025 statistics are based on 207 total opinions released by the Court (3 fewer than in the previous month):
Where the appeals are coming from
- Only one district court within the Fifth Circuit logged a perfect affirmance rate in July 2025, with all opinions in the Fifth released during the month that originated from that district being affirmances: the Western District of Louisiana, with 14 affirmances.
- The Nothern District of Texas was the district with the most decisions originating from there in July, 55 total decisions. From the district, 49 of those were full affirmances or appeal dismissals; 1 was a partial affirmance/partial reversal/vacatur; 2 were full reversals; 1 was a grant of a writ of mandamus; 1 was a full vacatur; and 1 was a grant of an order for en banc rehearing.
- From the Western District of Texas, 42 decisions were full affirmances/appeal dismissals; 3 partial affirmances/partial reversals/vacaturs; 2 full reversals; and 1 full vacatur.
- From decisions from the Southern District of Texas there were 38 full affirmances/appeal dismissals; 2 partial affirmances/partial reversals/vacaturs; and 1 full reversal.
- From the Eastern District of Texas there were 9 full affirmances/appeal dismissals; and 1 full vacatur.
- From the Eastern District of Louisiana there were 6 full affirmances/appeal dismissals; and 1 partial affirmance/partial reversal/vacatur.
- From the Middle District of Louisiana there were 2 full affirmances/appeal dismissals; and 1 partial affirmance/partial reversal/vacatur.
- From the Southern District of Mississippi, there were 8 full affirmances/appeal dismissals; and 1 full reversal.
- From the Northern District of Mississippi, there were 2 full affirmances; and 1 full reversal.
- From petitions for review of Board of Immigration Appeal decisions, there were 13 denials.
- From appeals from the U.S. Tax Court there was 1 full affirmance.
- From appeals from or petitions for review of other agency decisions, there were 2 denials of petitions for review, and 1 full reversal.
What the appeals are about, and who they benefit
- The largest number of appeals were of criminal conviction and/or sentencing issues. 120 resulted in full affirmances/appeal dismissals; and 1 full reversal. 120 of the dispositions favored the prosecution, and 1 favored the defendant.
- In post-conviction relief cases, including state and federal habeas petitions, there were 4 full affirmances; 1 partial affirmance/partial reversal/vacatur; and 1 order of en banc rehearing. 4 dispositions favored the government, and 2 favored the petitioner.
- In immigration cases, there were 13 dismissals/denials of petitions for review of Board of Immigration Appeals orders. All 13 dispositions favored the government.
- In prisoner suits, there were 7 full affirmances/appeal dismissals. All seven dispositions favored the government defendants.
- In commercial – civil cases, there were 11 full affirmances/appeal dismissals; 2 partial affirmances/partial reversals/vacaturs; 1 full reversal; 1 grant of a writ for mandamus; 1 full vacatur; and 1 denial of a petition for review of an agency decision. 10 of the dispositions favored the defendant, and 7 favored the plaintiff.
- In civil rights/constitutional claims (non-prisoner-suits), there were 12 full affirmances/appeal dismissals; 2 partial affirmances/partial reversals/vacaturs; and 2 full reversals. 13 of the dispositions favored the defendant, and 3 favored the plaintiff.
- In employment/labor law cases, there were 7 full affirmances/appeal dismissals; 1 partial affirmance/partial reversal/vacatur; 3 full vacaturs; and 1 denial of a petition for agency review. 10 of the dispositions favored an employer; and 2 favored the employee.
- In qualified immunity cases, there were 2 full affirmances/appeal dismissals; and 1 partial affirmance/partial reversal/vacatur. 1 disposition favored the government defendant, and 2 favored the plaintiffs.
- In personal injury/non-commercial tort cases, there was 1 full affirmance/appeal dismissal. That one disposition favored the defendant.
- In administrative law cases, there was 1 full affirmance. That one disposition favored the defendant/agency.
- In bankruptcy cases, there were 2 full affirmances. Both dispositions favored the debtor.
- In arbitration law cases, there was 1 full reversal. That one disposition favored the defendant.
- In tax law cases, there were 2 full affirmances. Both dispositions favored the taxing authority.
- In environmental law/toxic tort decisions, there was 1 full affirmance. That one disposition favored the defendant.
- In products liability decisions, there was 1 full affirmance. That one disposition favored the defendant.
- In environmental law/toxic tort decisions, there was 1 full affirmance. That one disposition favored the defendant.
- In maritime law cases, there was 1 partial affirmance/partial reversal/vacatur. That one disposition favored the plaintiff.
- In class action cases, there was 1 full vacatur. That disposition favored the plaintiff.
- In attorney discipline decisions, there was 1 full vacatur. That disposition favored the plaintiff.
How much law is being made?
- Of the 207 opinions released by the 5th Circuit in July 2025, 31 were designated for publication. 21 of those were full affirmances; 3 were partial affirmances/partial reversals/vacaturs; 4 were full reversals; 1 was a grant of a writ of mandamus; 1 was a full vacatur; and 1 was an order of en banc rehearing.
- 176 of the July opinions were unpublished, including 150 full affirmances/appeal dismissals; 5 partial affirmances/partial reversals/vacaturs; 4 full reversals; 2 full vacaturs; 13 denials/dismissals of petitions to review BIA orders; and 2 denials of petitions to review other agency actions.
Who was doing what on the Court?
Who was the busiest, in that they were on the most panels issuing opinions in July? (Judge Oldham). Who was the busiest writer, authoring the most attributed opinions (including majority, concurring, and dissenting opinions)? (Judge Richman, with 7). Who concurred the most in separate opinions? (Judges Oldham, Wilson, and Douglas with 1 each). Who authored the most dissenting or dubitante opinions? (Judge Oldham, with 2). How many opinions did the Court issue per curiam, with no author listed? (179, with 173 of those unpublished; but 1 of the designated “per curiam” decisions was not a “true” per curia for the court, as it was accompanied by a separate concurrence and/or dissent). Who participated in making the most law, participating in the most panels with published opinions? (Judges Graves and Oldham, with 9 each). We have all that below (senior-status judges in italics):
| Judge | On panel | In majority | Author majority | Author concur | Author dissent/ dubitante | Published | Unpublished |
| Elrod | 19 | 19 | 1 | 6 | 13 | ||
| Jones | 40 | 40 | 2 | 5 | 35 | ||
| Smith | 15 | 15 | 1 | 2 | 13 | ||
| Stewart | 38 | 38 | 1 | 3 | 25 | ||
| Richman | 20 | 20 | 7 | 6 | 14 | ||
| Southwick | 40 | 40 | 1 | 4 | 36 | ||
| Haynes | 34 | 34 | 1 | 33 | |||
| Graves | 41 | 40 | 4 | 1 | 9 | 32 | |
| Higginson | 22 | 22 | 3 | 2 | 20 | ||
| Willett | 25 | 24 | 1 | 1 | 6 | 19 | |
| Ho | 22 | 22 | 1 | 21 | |||
| Duncan | 12 | 12 | 2 | 10 | |||
| Engelhardt | 23 | 23 | 1 | 5 | 18 | ||
| Oldham | 57 | 55 | 1 | 1 | 2 | 9 | 48 |
| Wilson | 29 | 29 | 1 | 3 | 26 | ||
| Douglas | 28 | 27 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 4 | 24 |
| Ramirez | 34 | 34 | 3 | 31 | |||
| Dist. Ct. Judge sitting by designation | 6 | 6 | 3 | 4 | 2 | ||
| King | 31 | 31 | 1 | 3 | 28 | ||
| Jolly | 6 | 6 | 1 | 5 | |||
| Higginbotham | 27 | 27 | 1 | 3 | 24 | ||
| Davis | 6 | 6 | 6 | ||||
| Wiener | 5 | 5 | 1 | 4 | |||
| Barksdale | 17 | 17 | 17 | ||||
| Dennis | 15 | 14 | 1 | 3 | 12 | ||
| Clement | 6 | 6 | 3 | 3 | |||
| Unattributed/ Clerk | |||||||
| per curiam | 179 | 6 | 173 |
Conclusions? Most decisions in July, as always, were unanimous, with 6 dissents and 3 concurrences out of 207 opinions. Among senior-status judges, Judges King and Higginbotham had the heaviest participation in panels, with as much as some of the active-status judges. Meanwhile, among active-status judges, the lightest production in June was from Judges Duncan and Smith.
Wrap it all together, and an opinion in July 2025 was most likely to be an unpublished per curiam affirming a criminal decision from the Northern District of Texas, with Judges Oldham, Graves, and Jones or Southwick on the panel.
Take the Fifth 