Take the Fifth

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 August 2025 statistics are based on 255 total opinions released by the Court (48 more than in the previous month):

Where the appeals are coming from

• Two district courts within the Fifth Circuit logged perfect affirmance rates in August 2025, with all opinions in the Fifth released during the month that originated from those districts being affirmances: the Northern District of Mississippi, with 3 affirmances, and the Southern District of Mississippi, with 9 affirmances.
• The Western District of Texas was the district with the most decisions originating from there in August, 63 total decisions. From the district, 54 of those were full affirmances or appeal dismissals; 1 was a partial affirmance/partial reversal/vacatur; 5 were full reversals; 2 were full vacaturs; and 1 was a grant of an order for en banc rehearing.
• From the Northern District of Texas, 53 decisions were full affirmances/appeal dismissals; 1 partial affirmance/partial reversal/vacatur; 3 full reversals; and 3 full vacaturs.
• From decisions from the Southern District of Texas there were 36 full affirmances/appeal dismissals; 2 partial affirmances/partial reversals/vacaturs; 4 full reversals; and 3 full vacaturs.
• From the Eastern District of Texas there were 17 full affirmances/appeal dismissals; 2 partial affirmances/partial reversals/vacaturs; and 1 full vacatur.
• From the Eastern District of Louisiana there were 13 full affirmances/appeal dismissals; and 1 partial affirmance/partial reversal/vacatur.
• From the Middle District of Louisiana there were 5 full affirmances/appeal dismissals; 3 full reversals; and 2 full vacaturs.
• From the Western District of Louisiana, there were 14 full affirmances/appeal dismissals; 2 partial affirmances/partial reversals/vacaturs; and 1 full reversal.
• From petitions for review of Board of Immigration Appeal decisions, there were 10 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 2 grants of petitions for review.

What the appeals are about, and who they benefit

• The largest number of appeals were of criminal conviction and/or sentencing issues. 123 resulted in full affirmances/appeal dismissals; 2 partial affirmances/partial reversals/vacaturs; 2 full reversals; and 4 vacaturs. 123 of the dispositions favored the prosecution, and 8 favored the defendant.
• In post-conviction relief cases, including state and federal habeas petitions, there were 4 full affirmances. All 4 dispositions favored the government.
• In immigration cases, there was 1 full affirmance; 1 order of en banc rehearing; and 10 dismissals/denials of petitions for review of Board of Immigration Appeals orders. 11 dispositions favored the government; and 1 favored the immigrant.
• In prisoner suits, there were 12 full affirmances/appeal dismissals; 2 partial affirmances/partial reversals/vacaturs; 2 full reversals; and 1 full vacatur. 13 dispositions favored the government defendants; and 4 favored the prisoner plaintiff.
• In commercial – civil cases, there were 13 full affirmances/appeal dismissals; 2 partial affirmances/partial reversals/vacaturs; 2 full reversals; and 1 full vacatur. 10 of the dispositions favored the defendant, and 8 favored the plaintiff.
• In civil rights/constitutional claims (non-prisoner-suits), there were 18 full affirmances/appeal dismissals; 1 partial affirmance/partial reversal/vacatur; and 3 full reversals. 19 of the dispositions favored the defendant, and 3 favored the plaintiff.
• In employment/labor law cases, there were 16 full affirmances/appeal dismissals; 1 partial affirmance/partial reversal/vacatur; and 1 full reversal. 14 of the dispositions favored an employer; and 4 favored the employee.
• In qualified immunity cases, there were 5 full affirmances/appeal dismissals; and 2 full reversals. 6 disposition favored the government defendant, and 1 favored the plaintiff.
• In personal injury/non-commercial tort cases, there were 3 full affirmances/appeal dismissals; and 1 full reversal. 3 dispositions favored the defendant; and 1 favored the plaintiff.
• In administrative law cases, there were 3 full affirmances; 1 full reversal; 2 full vacaturs; 1 order of an banc rehearing; 1 denial of a petition for review of an agency decision; and 1 grant of a petition for review of agency decision. 7 dispositions favored the defendant/agency; and 2 favored the plaintiff.
• In arbitration law cases, there was 1 full affirmance. That one disposition favored the defendant.
• In tax law cases, there was 1 full affirmance. That dispositions favored the taxing authority.
• In environmental law/toxic tort decisions, there was 1 full affirmance; and 1 denial of a petition for agency decision. Both dispositions favored the defendant.
• In products liability decisions, there was 1 full affirmance. That one disposition favored the defendant.
• In class action cases, there was 1 full vacatur. That disposition favored the defendant.
• In international law decisions, there was 1 full affirmance. That disposition favored the plaintiff.
• In social security cases, there was 1 full affirmance. That disposition favored the government.
• In voting rights/election law cases, there was 1 full affirmance; and 2 full reversals. 2 of those dispositions favored the government defendants; 1 favored the challenger plaintiffs.

How much law is being made?

• Of the 255 opinions released by the 5th Circuit in August 2025, 52 were designated for publication. 26 of those were full affirmances; 6 were partial affirmances/partial reversals/vacaturs; 9 were full reversals; 4 were full vacaturs; 1 was an order of en banc rehearing; 2 were denials of petitions for review of BIA orders; 1 was a grant of a petition to review a BIA decision; 2 were denials of petitions to review other agency decisions; and 1 was a grant of a petition to review an agency decision.
• 203 of the August opinions were unpublished, including 179 full affirmances/appeal dismissals; 2 partial affirmances/partial reversals/vacaturs; 6 full reversals; 6 full vacaturs; and 8 denials/dismissals of petitions to review BIA orders.

Who was doing what on the Court?

Who was the busiest, in that they were on the most panels issuing opinions in August? (Judges Ho and Wilson, each on 49 issuing panels). Who was the busiest writer, authoring the most attributed opinions (including majority, concurring, and dissenting opinions)? (Judge Ho, with 7). Who concurred the most in separate opinions? (Judge Ho, with 2). Who authored the most dissenting or dubitante opinions? (Judges Higginson and Ho, with 3 each). How many opinions did the Court issue per curiam, with no author listed? (204, with 195 of those unpublished; but 3 of the designated “per curiam” decisions were not “true” per curia for the court, as they were accompanied by separate concurrences and/or dissents). Who participated in making the most law, participating in the most panels with published opinions? (Chief Judge Elrod, with 13). 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	33	32	3		1	13	20
Jones	41	41	1			2	39
Smith	35	34	3			8	27
Stewart	35	35	1	1 (+1 w/o op.)		9	26
Richman	21	21	4			1	20
Southwick	21	21	2			6	15
Haynes	30	29		1 (+1 w/o op.)	1	5	25
Graves	32	31	4		1	5	27
Higginson	22	19	2		3	6	16
Willett	48	48	5			8	40
Ho	49	46	2	2	3	10	39
Duncan	37	37	2			7	30
Engelhardt	40	39	2		1	8	32
Oldham	27	26			1	1	26
Wilson	49	48	4		1	9	40
Douglas	39	38	4		1	11	28
Ramirez	38	38	1			9	29
Dist. Ct. Judge sitting by designation	13	13	2			2	11
King	31	31				7	24
Jolly	6	6				1	5
Higginbotham	27	27	1			7	20
Davis	8	8					8
Wiener	40	39	3		1	9	31
Barksdale	11	11					11
Dennis	13	12	1		1	6	8
Clement	22	22	2			4	18
Unattributed/ Clerk
per curiam			204			9	195

Conclusions? Most decisions in August, as always, were unanimous, with 15 dissents and 6 concurrences out of 255 opinions. Among senior-status judges, Judges Wiener, King, and Higginbotham had the heaviest participation in panels, with as much as many of the active-status judges. Meanwhile, among active-status judges, the lightest production in August was from Judges Richman and Southwick.

Wrap it all together, and an opinion in August 2025 was most likely to be an unpublished per curiam affirming a criminal decision from the Western District of Texas, with Judges Ho, Wilson, and Willett on the panel.