In this task, you are given a text of many news articles seperated by special token "|||||". Your task is to summarize them.


  
 President Trump reacts to a question about the 9th Circuit at the U.S. Department of the Interior on April 26. (Brendan Smialowski/AFP/Getty Images) 
  
 In the short time since he took office, President Trump has made no secret of his contempt for the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 9th Circuit, the country’s largest federal appellate court. 
  
 “A disgraceful decision!” Trump tweeted in February when the California-based court upheld a ruling against his controversial travel ban. The circuit was “in chaos” and “frankly in turmoil,” he said later. Its “terrible decisions,” he said, had been overturned “at a record number.” 
  
 Tuesday’s ruling against Trump’s sanctuary cities executive order brought another volley of criticisms (even though the decision came not from the appeals court but from a lower court judge in the circuit, which includes courts in nine states, Guam and the Northern Mariana Islands). 
  
 [Trump blasts ‘ridiculous’ court ruling that blocked his order on sanctuary cities] 
  
 Reacting to the ruling, Trump told the Washington Examiner that he was “absolutely” considering Republican-backed proposals to split the 9th Circuit into multiple courts. “It’s outrageous,” he said. 
  
 None of this — the insults, the criticisms, the threats to break up the court — is new. For decades, the 9th Circuit has been a whipping boy for conservatives, who say it suffers from an incorrigible left-wing bias that clouds its decisions. They point to a string of high-profile rulings over the years in favor of liberal causes, and note that most of the court’s jurists are Democratic appointees. 
  
 They also argue, erroneously, that its decisions get overturned more than any other appeals court. 
  
 Most of the grumbling happens when the 9th Circuit issues a ruling critics don’t like. The implication is that they couldn’t possibly be wrong on the law in such cases and that their defeats are a product of the court’s ideological tilt. 
  
 Sometimes things get hyperbolic. Conservative pundits are fond of calling the court the “Ninth Circus” or the “Nutty Ninth.” Newt Gingrich once proposed abolishing it entirely, bashing its opinions as “dictatorial” and “anti-American.” 
  
 “America can find no more ghoulish poster children for what is fundamentally dishonest about liberal judicial activism than those judges of the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals,” conservative commentator Mark Q. Rhoads, a former Illinois legislator, once wrote of the court. 
  
 There was indeed a period when the 9th Circuit was overwhelmingly liberal. In the 1970s, President Jimmy Carter worked with a Democratic Congress to add seats on the court, then stacked it with left-wing jurists. By the end of his term, Carter had installed 15 judges to the court, including the “liberal lion” Judge Stephen Reinhardt. 
  
 “Carter appointed some of the most liberal judges ever, to any court,” Judge Alex Kozinski, a conservative 9th Circuit judge appointed by President Ronald Reagan, told the New York Times in 2010. 
  
 Where does the court stand today? That depends on whom you ask. 
  
 Conservatives say Carter’s legacy is alive and well on the 9th Circuit. As evidence, they cite a number of supposedly liberal-leaning decisions, including a 2002 ruling that found the Pledge of Allegiance unconstitutional because of its “one nation under God” line, as well as the landmark 2012 ruling that threw out California’s same-sex marriage ban. The court’s travel ban ruling appears to have been added to the list of offending decisions. 
  
 But some legal observers contend that the court, while still generally more liberal than other circuits, has drifted back toward the center. Ben Feuer, chairman of the California Appellate Law Group LLP and a former 9th Circuit clerk, wrote last year that President Barack Obama had appointed less overtly liberal judges to replace retiring Carter appointees. 
  
 “The court earned its flower-child reputation fairly,” Feuer wrote in the Los Angeles Times. He added: “But whereas the Carter judges reliably took left-leaning positions, the Obama judges are less predictable. That’s a big difference given the 9th Circuit’s mythic liberality.” 
  
 University of Richmond Law School professor Carl Tobias seemed to agree, calling the 9th Circuit’s liberal reputation “dated.” 
  
 “The reputation is certainly deserved based on the history of the last 40 years or so,” Hellman told the Associated Press in February. “It’s been more liberal, by which we mean more sympathetic to habeas petitioners, civil rights plaintiffs, anti-trust cases, immigration cases. But it’s less of an outlier now than it was.” 
  
 Claims that the 9th Circuit is the “most reversed” appeals court are less a matter of debate. 
  
 Critics of the court like to cite a statistic showing that nearly 80 percent of 9th Circuit rulings that make it to the U.S. Supreme Court get overturned, earning it the “most reversed” moniker. Trump has mentioned the figure on multiple occasions, and did so again in a tweet Wednesday. 
  
 The claim is misleading at best. The 9th Circuit’s reversal rate was, in fact, 80 percent during the 2015-2016 term, as The Washington Post has reported. But it didn’t have the highest reversal rate that year — nor in any year since 2005. The circuit’s reversal rate was usually higher than the average, but not always. In any case, the Supreme Court only takes up a minuscule fraction of any circuit’s cases in a given year, so a court’s reversal rate, whatever it may be, really doesn’t say much about its jurisprudence. PolitiFact and the Associated Press have reached similar conclusions. 
  
 Breaking up the 9th Circuit is a different story entirely. Conservative groups and Republicans in Congress have long dreamed of carving a new 12th Circuit, floating legislation year after year to split the court in two. Such a bill was introduced again in February by Sens. Jeff Flake (R-Ariz.) and John McCain (R-Ariz). 
  
 There’s no shortage of nonpolitical reasons to break up the 9th Circuit. For one, the court takes on thousands more cases than any other circuit, leading some to argue it’s overburdened. It also covers a sprawling area of the country, spanning 15 federal judicial districts. That’s too big, some say. 
  
 Trump, of course, seems more focused on his ideological battles than the nitty-gritty of the judicial system. 
  
 As he said in February, “Courts seem to be so political.” 
  
 More from Morning Mix 
  
 Portland rose parade canceled after ‘antifascists’ threaten GOP marchers 
  
 ‘We have to take a stand’: Mormon history scholars file brief against Trump travel ban 
  
 ‘Mexican heritage’ judge bashed by Trump will oversee deported ‘dreamer’ case ||||| WASHINGTON (AP) — President Donald Trump is once again taking aim at a federal appeals court district that covers Western states, saying he is considering breaking up a circuit that is a longtime target of Republicans and is where his first travel ban was halted. 
  
 Yet it would take congressional action to break up the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals. Republicans have introduced bills this year to do just that. 
  
 Asked Wednesday during a White House interview by the Washington Examiner if he'd thought about proposals to break up the court, Trump replied, "Absolutely, I have." 
  
 "There are many people that want to break up the 9th Circuit. It's outrageous," he told the Examiner. He accused critics of appealing to the 9th district "because they know that's like, semi-automatic." 
  
 The comments echoed his Twitter criticism of the court Wednesday morning. 
  
 Trump called U.S. District Judge William Orrick's preliminary injunction against his order stripping money from so-called sanctuary cities "ridiculous" on Twitter. He said he planned to take that case to the Supreme Court. However, an administration appeal of the district court's decision must go first to the 9th Circuit. 
  
 Republicans have talked for years about splitting the circuit into two appellate courts, but earlier legislative proposals have failed, most recently in 2005. Those battles have often pitted lawmakers from California against members from smaller, more conservative states. 
  
 Critics say the court has a liberal slant, a high caseload and distances that are too far for judges to travel. The circuit is the largest of the federal appellate courts, representing 20 percent of the U.S. population. It includes California, Alaska, Hawaii, Washington, Oregon, Montana, Idaho, Nevada, Arizona, Guam and the Northern Mariana Islands. 
  
 The circuit has 29 judges, many more than the 5th, which is the next largest circuit with 17 judges. It was created in 1891 when the American West was much less populated. 
  
 Democrats have opposed the split. Sen. Dianne Feinstein, D-Calif., was a leading opponent in the 2005 push, which she said was politically motivated. She has suggested adding judges to the court instead. 
  
 In March, 9th circuit judges appointed by both Democratic and Republican presidents told lawmakers that breaking up the court was a bad idea. 
  
 The 9th Circuit in February refused to immediately reinstate Trump's ban on travelers from seven predominantly Muslim nations, prompting the administration to release a new, narrower ban. That also has been held up by the courts. ||||| President Trump said Wednesday that he has "absolutely" considered proposals that would split up the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals, where judges have blocked two of his executive actions. 
  
 "Absolutely, I have," Trump said of considering 9th Circuit breakup proposals during a far-ranging interview with the Washington Examiner at the White House. "There are many people that want to break up the 9th Circuit. It's outrageous." 
  
 "Everybody immediately runs to the 9th Circuit. And we have a big country. We have lots of other locations. But they immediately run to the 9th Circuit. Because they know that's like, semi-automatic," Trump said. 
  
 His comments came one day after U.S. District Judge William Orrick temporarily blocked Trump's efforts to withhold funds from any municipality that refuses to cooperate with immigration enforcement officers. Orrick, based in San Francisco, argued that Trump had overstepped his authority in January when he directed the Justice Department to put immigration-related conditions on grants for so-called sanctuary cities that may not be directly related to law enforcement. The case, if appealed, would go before the 9th Circuit. 
  
 Other judges on the court halted two different versions of an executive action aimed at tightening vetting requirements for immigrants from Middle Eastern countries, because both actions called for a temporary suspension of some immigration from several predominantly Muslim countries. 
  
 "The language could not be any clearer. I mean, the language on the ban, it reads so easy that a reasonably good student in the first grade will fully understand it. And they don't even mention the words in their rejection on the ban," Trump said. "And the same thing with this [sanctuary city decision]. I mean, when you have people that are being enabled to commit crime. And in San Francisco, when you look at Kate Steinle being shot and here is the court, you know, right in that same general area. And when you look at a Kate Steinle, when you look at so many other things." 
  
 Trump was referring to a young woman in San Francisco, a sanctuary city, who was gunned down by an illegal immigrant in 2015. He has frequently pointed to Steinle's murder as evidence that sanctuary city policies can be harmful to American citizens. 
  
 "Sanctuary cities have been very, very dangerous, very, very bad. And, you know, we've done a great job on law enforcement, we've done a great job at the border," Trump said. "And all of our most talented people say sanctuary cities are a disaster." 
  
 Republicans have long criticized the 9th Circuit for its perceived liberal leanings and its enormous geographical reach, which has led to bureaucratic backlogs. 
  
 GOP lawmakers have repeatedly introduced legislation that would carve out several states under the 9th Circuit's jurisdiction and create a new court designed to lighten the Ninth's caseload. 
  
 The 9th Circuit hears appeals from courts in nine West Coast states and two U.S. territories. Of its 25 active judges, 18 were appointed by Democratic presidents. 
  
 Trump said Wednesday that opponents of his policies have engaged in "judge shopping" in their efforts to find a sympathetic judicial platform for their partisan objections. 
  
 "You see judge shopping, or what's gone on with these people, they immediately run to the 9th Circuit," Trump said. "It's got close to an 80 percent reversal period, and what's going on in the 9th Circuit is a shame." |||||
Having seen the court block a number of his executive orders during his short time in office, President Trump tells the Washington Examiner he's "absolutely" considering breaking up the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals. "What's going on in the 9th Circuit is a shame," Trump says, adding the 9th Circuit is "outrageous" and his opponents are "judge shopping" by taking cases there. Republicans have been attacking the 9th Circuit for decades, accusing it of being both too liberal and too large, the Washington Post reports. Conservative pundits call it the "Ninth Circus" or the "Nutty Ninth," and Newt Gingrich once proposed getting rid of it entirely for being "anti-American." The first part of Republicans' complaint—that the 9th Circuit is too liberal—isn't as accurate as it used to be. The court's liberal bent declined recently after President Obama placed a handful of centrist judges on it. And the GOP's claim that decisions from the 9th Circuit have the highest rate of being overturned in the Supreme Court is complicated by the fact that the high court takes up a "minuscule fraction" of any courts cases, notes the Post. But Republicans may have a point that the 9th Circuit is too big: The AP reports it has more judges than any other appellate court and covers 20% of the US population. But 9th Circuit judges—appointed by both Democrat and Republican presidents—oppose proposals to break it down into smaller courts. Trump can't break up the court on his own anyway; it would require Congress to act.