William A. Fletcher

William A. Fletcher (born June 6, 1945) is a senior United States circuit judge on the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals. Appointed by President Bill Clinton in 1998, he has served on the federal appellate bench for more than two decades and continues to hear cases after assuming senior status in early 2022. In addition to his judicial duties, Fletcher is professor emeritus at the University of California, Berkeley School of Law, where he has taught courses on federal courts.

Early life and legal career

Fletcher was raised in Seattle, Washington, and completed his secondary education at Roosevelt High School, graduating in 1964. He pursued undergraduate studies at Harvard University, receiving a Bachelor of Arts degree in 1968. As a Rhodes Scholar, he then attended Merton College, Oxford, where he earned a second B.A. in 1970. Following his time abroad, Fletcher served as a lieutenant in the United States Navy from 1970 to 1972.

After completing military service, he enrolled at Yale Law School and obtained his Juris Doctor in 1975. His early legal experience included clerkships with two prominent jurists: first with Judge Stanley Alexander Weigel of the United States District Court for the Northern District of California (1975‑1976), and subsequently with Justice William J. Brennan Jr. of the United States Supreme Court (1976‑1977). These formative years provided exposure to both trial‑level and highest‑court adjudication.

Fletcher entered academia in 1977, joining the faculty of UC Berkeley School of Law. Over the next two decades he taught a range of subjects, with particular emphasis on federal courts, and earned recognition as a scholar of appellate practice. His academic career ran concurrently with occasional involvement in public service; notably, his mother, Betty Binns Fletcher, also served on the Ninth Circuit, holding senior status from 1998 until her death in 2012.

Federal appellate service

President Bill Clinton first nominated Fletcher to the Ninth Circuit in April 1995. After that nomination lapsed without a Senate vote, Clinton renominated him on January 7, 1997 to fill the vacancy created by Judge William Albert Norris. The United States Senate confirmed Fletcher on October 8, 1998 by a 57‑41 vote, and he received his commission the following day.

During his active service, Fletcher participated in a broad spectrum of appellate matters, ranging from constitutional challenges to complex regulatory disputes. He authored opinions that addressed issues such as the First Amendment rights of protestors operating outside U.S. borders (Thunder Studios v. Kazal, 2021), Second‑Amendment limits on concealed‑carry regulations (Peruta v. San Diego County, 2016), and state restrictions on medication abortions in Arizona (June 3, 2014). He also contributed to consumer‑protection jurisprudence by writing the majority opinion upholding Nevada’s medical‑debt notification statute (June 15, 2023).

Fletcher’s involvement in death‑penalty cases is particularly notable. In 2009 he filed a lengthy dissent opposing the execution of Kevin Cooper, arguing concerns about factual innocence and racial bias. Later, in December 2015, he joined a panel that blocked a death sentence on the ground that it conflicted with the Supreme Court’s ruling in *Roper v. Simmons* and should apply retroactively.

Between December 2014 and August 2020, Fletcher sat on 34 en banc panels—the most of any judge on the Ninth Circuit aside from Chief Judge Sidney R. Thomas, who participates in every such panel. During that interval he authored four en banc majority opinions, tying for the highest total among his colleagues. Statistical analysis of his voting patterns shows a high degree of alignment with Chief Judge Thomas (97 % concurrence) and more variable agreement with other judges on en banc panels.

On May 18, 2021 Fletcher announced his intention to assume senior status once his successor was appointed. He formally entered senior status on January 24, 2022, thereby reducing his caseload while retaining the authority to hear cases and contribute to panel decisions.

Jurisprudence and legacy

Fletcher is frequently described as a pragmatic jurist who emphasizes thorough factual and legal analysis in his opinions. In public remarks he has highlighted the importance of a judicial culture that demands clear articulation of both factual foundations and legal reasoning, acknowledging that while judges may fall short of this ideal, striving toward it remains essential.

His scholarly work and courtroom practice reflect an ongoing concern with procedural fairness and the integrity of the judicial process. The 2013 Madison Lecture titled “Our Broken Death Penalty” underscored his critical view of capital punishment, characterizing it as fundamentally flawed rather than merely imperfectly applied. Subsequent speeches reiterated doubts about the death penalty’s deterrent effect and its fiscal burden.

Fletcher’s decisions have touched on a wide array of substantive issues. In First‑Amendment matters he has protected expressive activities even when participants were physically abroad, reinforcing the principle that speech rights can extend beyond national borders. His Second‑Amendment opinion in *Peruta* upheld a state ban on concealed weapons, illustrating a willingness to interpret constitutional protections within the context of public safety considerations.

On reproductive rights, Fletcher blocked an Arizona statute that would have eliminated medication abortions and later joined opinions striking down federal “gag rule” provisions that restricted abortion funding. These rulings align with broader Ninth Circuit trends favoring access to reproductive health services.

Consumer‑protection jurisprudence also bears his imprint; the Nevada medical‑debt notification decision reflects a concern for safeguarding vulnerable debtors through procedural safeguards. Moreover, his participation in cases involving detainee conditions at the border demonstrates engagement with complex questions of immigration law and human rights.

Beyond individual opinions, Fletcher’s extensive involvement in en banc panels has positioned him as an influential voice in shaping Ninth Circuit jurisprudence. His high rate of concurrence with Chief Judge Thomas suggests a shared judicial philosophy on many pivotal issues, while his occasional divergences illustrate independent analytical judgment.

Fletcher’s dual career as a judge and legal educator further amplifies his impact. As a professor emeritus at UC Berkeley, he has mentored generations of law students, imparting insights drawn from decades of appellate experience. His academic contributions complement his judicial work, fostering a deeper understanding of federal courts among scholars and practitioners alike.

In sum, William A. Fletcher’s career reflects a blend of scholarly rigor, pragmatic decision‑making, and sustained engagement with the most pressing constitutional and statutory questions before the Ninth Circuit. His legacy encompasses both the substantive rulings that have shaped law across diverse domains and the pedagogical influence he continues to exert through his teaching and public commentary.