Why is the Goliath 9th Circuit Court getting castrated?

Last month, legislation was reportedly introduced in the U.S. Congress by two Republican senators to leave only three states and "two island districts" within the #USCourtofAppealsforthe9thCircuit,

• the "most reversed" U.S. Court of Appeals for the 9th Circuit,
• the court with the most backlog in the country,
• the court that, same as other federal courts, handles death penalty appeals,
• and yet also the court where its busy judge Alex Kozinski has time and is allowed to hold nights with movies and booze in the courthouse,
• as well as has time to lend his consulting hand to award-winning multi-episode movie series, like the recent "The Goliath" (which a lot of complex procedural issues were covered correctly, which required a lot of work on behalf of the consultant) and where Judge Kozinski also satisfied his movie mania by playing a role - of Judge Kozinski;
• not to mention Alex Kozinski lending his helping hand in reviewing scientific validity of forensic evidence, a mammoth project that resulted in a 174-page report.

Right now the 9th Circuit covers an enormous area:

Apparently, "The Goliath" of the court, even with its 44 district judges, does not handle its duties very well, if parties are waiting for 15 months or more for resolution of their cases.

Moreover, according to the statement to the U.S. Senate's Judiciary Committee of that same 9th Circuit's Judge Alex Kozinski who has his finger in every pie - including, most recently, not only "The Goliath" movie series, but also participation in the committee on scientific validity of evidence used in court (a most time-consuming endeavor), when parties ask for hearings "en banc", they do not get them - ever, because the court considers it "too impractical" to have the entire court of 44 judges, from all over the country, to hear a particular case, and thus the "en banc" (the whole court) decisions are not truly en banc in this single federal appellate court in the United States.

So, why is the 9th Circuit getting castrated (oops, reduced)?

Is it because of the long-standing problems of that court, failure to provide a review of cases within a reasonable time, failure to conduct en banc decisions truly en banc, by the entire court?

Or is it because the Court irated the President of the United States by its recent, admittedly lousy, performance of its two judges, Canby and Freidland, during the oral argument of the frivolous case challenging, without standing, the President's Executive Order on immigration?

Of course, the 9th Circuit, in its unanimous decision issued today, found standing - but yet, the 9th Circuit did not have authority to overrule a decision of Judge Gordon from the 1st Circuit where Judge Gordon did not find standing of immigrants that are located outside of the country, and who refused to stop the President's discretionary and facially neutral Executive Order.

That alone which makes the 9th Circuit decision allowing the stay of the President's Executive Order nationwide to proceed pending the President's appeal, while that stay, without authority, included Massachusetts, jurisdiction of the 1st Circuit, not the 9th Circuit, made the 9th Circuit decision overbroad and void as being made without jurisdiction, not to mention its other defects.

I will publish my comparison of the decisions of Judge Gordon and the 9th Circuit tomorrow.

As to castration of the 9th Circuit which was planned in anticipation of what happened today, it looks, unfortunately, that, even though the need existed for a very long time, any long overdue changes in jurisdiction of that court only started to occur when the court stepped on President's toes.

And that is teaching us, common folks, that in this country, positive changes can only take place if interest of big money or powerful people are involved.

But - that is not the rule of law, is it?