COVID-19 Response

Learn how Pitt Law is building a healthy and resilient community

The Barco Law Library is open during regular library hours for Pitt Law faculty and students only.  Due to COVID-19 restrictions, we are not open to Pitt users outside of Pitt Law; and we are not open to the public.

Arthur Hellman

Professor Emeritus of Law

Biography

Professor Arthur D. Hellman has achieved a national reputation as a scholar of the federal courts. He does more than write about the subject; he has also influenced the development of the law in three separate areas: the jurisdiction of the federal courts, the regulation of ethics in the federal judiciary, and the structure of the federal appellate system.

Professor Hellman has worked with the Judiciary Committees in the House and Senate in drafting federal courts legislation. The legislative histories of two major jurisdictional statutes – the Federal Courts Jurisdiction and Venue Clarification Act of 2011 and the “Holmes Group Fix” (enacted as part of the America Invents Act) – acknowledge his contributions.

In addition to his drafting work, Professor Hellman has testified as an invited witness at numerous hearings of both Judiciary Committees. His testimony has focused on a wide variety of legislative issues related to the federal courts, including the jurisdiction of the Supreme Court; proposals to divide the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals; federal judicial discipline; unpublished appellate opinions; and the constitutionality of legislative restrictions on the powers of the federal courts.

Professor Hellman is one of the leading academic commentators on issues of federal judicial ethics. He received public recognition from leading members of the House Judiciary Committee for his work in helping to draft the Judicial Improvements Act of 2002, the current version of the law that governs the handling of misconduct complaints against federal judges. His suggestions were also incorporated into successive revisions of the Rules for Judicial-Conduct and Judicial-Disability Proceedings.

Professor Hellman is the nation's leading academic authority on the largest of the federal appellate courts, the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals. From 1999 through 2001 he served on the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals Evaluation Committee — the only academic on the committee. A decade earlier, he supervised a distinguished group of legal scholars and political scientists in analyzing the innovations of the Ninth Circuit and its court of appeals.

Professor Hellman’s publications include numerous articles and several books, including two casebooks, Federal Courts: Cases and Materials on Judicial Federalism and the Lawyering Process (4th edition 2017) (with David Stras, Ryan Scott, and F. Andrew Hessick); and First Amendment Law: Freedom of Speech and Freedom of Religion (4th edition 2018) (with William D. Araiza, Thomas E. Baker, and Ashutosh A. Bhagwat). Both are published by Carolina Academic Press.

In 2005 Professor Hellman was appointed as the inaugural holder of the Sally Ann Semenko Endowed Chair at the University. In 2002 he received the Chancellor’s Distinguished Research Award “as a faculty member who has an outstanding and continuing record of research and scholarly activity.”

Before joining the Pitt Law faculty, Professor Hellman was deputy executive director of the Commission on Revision of the Federal Court Appellate System (Hruska Commission).  He received his JD from Yale University Law School and his BA from Harvard University.

Key/Recent Publications

Books:

  • Arthur D. Hellman, William D. Araiza & Thomas E. Baker, First Amendment Law: Freedom of Expression & Freedom of Religion, (4th ed., Carolina Academic Press 2018).
  • Arthur D. Hellman & Lauren K. Robel, Federal Courts: Cases and Materials on Judicial Federalism and the Lawyering Process 4th Edition (Carolina Academic Press 2017).
  • Arthur D. Hellman & Lauren K. Robel, The Judicial Code Supplement (Carolina Academic Press 2016).
  • Arthur D. Hellman, Restructuring Justice: The Innovations of the Ninth Circuit and the Future of the Federal Courts (general editor and contributor) (Cornell University Press, 1990).
  • Arthur D. Hellman, Laws Against Marijuana: The Price We Pay (University of Illinois Press, 1975).

Articles and Other Writings:

  • Snapback, Version 2.0: The Best Solution to the Problem of Snap Removal: Supplementary Statement to the Hearing Before the House Committee on the Judiciary -- Subcommittee on Courts, Intellectual Property, and the Internet, November 14, 2019, U. of Pittsburgh Legal Studies Research Paper No. 2020-01, available on SSRN.
  • Snapback! A Narrowly Tailored Legislative Solution to the Problem of Snap Removal, Hearing Before the House Committee on the Judiciary -- Subcommittee on Courts, Intellectual Property, and the Internet, November 14, 2019, U. of Pittsburgh Legal Studies Research Paper No. 2019-23, available on SSRN.
  • An Unfinished Dialogue: Congress, the Judiciary, and the Rules for Federal Judicial Misconduct Proceedings, 32 Georgetown Journal of Legal Ethics 341 (2019), available on SSRN.
  • Ensuring an Exemplary Judiciary Workplace: An Alternative to a Mandatory Reporting Requirement for Judges: Supplementary statement to the Hearing before the Judicial Conference of the United States Committee on Judicial Conduct and Disability and Committee on Codes of Conduct, October 30, 2018, U. of Pittsburgh Legal Studies Research Paper No. 2018-37, available on SSRN.
  • Comments on Proposed Amendments to the Rules for Judicial-Conduct and Judicial-Disability Proceedings, Hearing before the Judicial Conference of the United States, Committee on Judicial Conduct and Disability and Committee on Codes of Conduct, October 30, 2018 , U. of Pittsburgh Legal Studies Research Paper No. 2018-34, available on SSRN.
  • The “Fraudulent Joinder Prevention Act of 2016”:  A New Standard and a New Rationale for an Old Doctrine, The Federalist Society Review, Vol. 17, at 34 (2016), U. of Pittsburgh Legal Studies Research Paper No. 2016-19, available on SSRN.
  • The Federal Courts Jurisdiction and Venue Clarification Act is Now LawJurist, (2011). 
  • The Federal Courts Jurisdiction and Venue Clarification Act: Some Missing Pieces, Jurist, (Jan 2012). 
  • Arthur D. Hellman, Another Voice for the 'Dialogue': Federal Courts as a Litigation Course,  53 St. Louis University Law Journal 761 (2009) (symposium issue).
  • Arthur D. Hellman, When Judges Are Accused: An Initial Look at the New Federal Judicial Misconduct Rules22 Notre Dame Journal of Law, Ethics & Public Policy 325 (2008).
  • Arthur D. Hellman, The View from the Trenches: A Report on the Breakout Sessions at the 2005 National Conference on Appellate Justice, 8  Journal of Appellate Practice & Process 141 (2006).
  • Arthur D. Hellman, The Regulation of Judicial Ethics in the Federal System: A Peek Behind Closed Doors , 69 U. Pitt. L. Rev. 189 (2008). Available on SSRN.
  • Arthur D. Hellman, Justice O'Connor and "The Threat to Judicial Independence": The Cowgirl Who Cried Wolf?, 39 Arizona State Law Journal 845 (2007).
  • Arthur D. Hellman, Judges Judging Judges: The Federal Judicial Misconduct Statutes and the Breyer Committee Report, 21 Justice System Journal 426 (2007).
  • Arthur D. Hellman, Assessing Judgeship Needs in the Federal Courts of Appeals: Policy Choices and Process Concerns, 5 J. App. Prac. & Proc. 239 (2003).
  • Arthur D. Hellman, Sex, Drugs, and Democracy: Who’s Afraid of Free Speech?, 41 Brandeis Law Journal 417-445 (2003). Available on SSRN
  • Unresolved Intercircuit Conflicts: The Nature and Scope of the Problem (Federal Judicial Center 1996) (suppliementing Phase I report transmitted to Congress by the Chief Justice pursuant to Judicial Improvements Act of 1990).

Selected Presentations:

  • Invited witness, hearing of Subcommittee on Courts, Intellectual Property, and the Internet of the House Judiciary Committee, Washington, D.C., Nov. 14, 2019. Topic: Examining the Use of “Snap” Removals to Circumvent the Forum Defendant Rule.
  • Invited witness, hearing of the Committee on Judicial Conduct and Disability of the Judicial Conference of the United States, Washington, D.C., Oct. 30, 2018. Topic: Proposed Amendments to the Rules for Judicial-Conduct and Judicial-Disability Proceedings.
  • Panel member, Spring 2017 meeting of American Academy of Appellate Lawyers, Boston, Mass., Apr. 9, 2017.  Topic:  “The Strategic Use of Amici.”
  • Panel member, 2016 Federalist Society Lawyers Convention, Washington, D.C., Nov. 19, 2016.  Topic:  “Using Judicial Processes for Political Purposes” (Legal Education & Professional Responsibility Practice Group).
  • Speaker, Conference on “Are the Cases Out There?  Scrutinizing the Supreme Court’s Declining Docket,” sponsored by the Center for Judicial Engagement of the Institute for Justice, Arlington, Va., Oct. 4, 2016.

Other Activities

  • Organizer and principal moderator, conference on “A Court Transformed: The Ninth Circuit, the 1978 Judgeship Act, and the Carter Judges,” Richard H. Chambers Courthouse, Pasadena, CA, Feb. 17, 2018. Sponsors: California Academy of Appellate Lawyers, Appellate Courts Section of the Los Angeles County Bar Association, Department of Political Science of Loyola Marymount University, and Ninth Judicial Circuit Historical Society.
  • Conference Reporter, Steering Committee member, and speaker, 2005 National Conference on Appellate Justice, Washington, D.C., (Nov. 2005). Conference sponsors: Federal Judicial Center, National Center for State Courts, Institute for Judicial Administration, and American Academy of Appellate Lawyers.
  • Co-organizer (with Professor Stephen L. Wasby and Dean Toni Massaro) and speaker, Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals Conference, Tucson, Arizona, September 2005. Conference sponsor: University of Arizona James E. Rogers College of Law. Proceedings published at 48 ARIZ. L. REV. 221 367 (2006).
  • Speaker at program sponsored by Program in Public Law at Duke University Law School, Durham, NC, Apr. 9, 2005. Topic: "Should Life Tenure for Supreme Court Justices Be Reconsidered?"
  • Member, Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals Evaluation Committee, 1999-2001 (appointed by Chief Judge Hug to 10-person committee whose mission was "to examine the existing policies, practices and administrative structure of the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals, in order to make recommendations to its judges to improve the delivery of justice in the region it serves.").