Batting Zero: A Closer Look at the 4th Circuit’s 100% Reversal Rate This Supreme Court Term
Washington, D.C., August 2, 2025 — The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit, often seen as a judicial bellwether for its balanced docket and diverse bench, faced an unprecedented setback during the Supreme Court’s 2024-2025 term, which concluded on June 30, 2025. All eight cases from the Fourth Circuit reviewed by the Supreme Court were reversed, marking a 100% reversal rate—the highest among federal circuits this term and a rare statistical anomaly in the court’s history. This stark outcome has sparked debate among legal scholars, practitioners, and observers about the Fourth Circuit’s judicial approach, the Supreme Court’s conservative bent, and the broader dynamics of appellate review.
A Record of Reversals
According to data compiled by SCOTUSblog, the Supreme Court decided 67 cases in its 2024-2025 term, reversing lower court decisions in 47 of them (74.6%). The Fourth Circuit, based in Richmond, Virginia, and covering Maryland, Virginia, West Virginia, North Carolina, and South Carolina, contributed eight cases to the docket. Each one was overturned, making it the “biggest loser” in terms of both reversal rate and total number of cases reversed, as noted by legal analyst David Lat in his Substack newsletter. This contrasts with the Fifth Circuit, which saw 10 of its 13 cases reversed but handled a higher volume, and other circuits like the Third, Sixth, Seventh, Eighth, and Eleventh, which were reversed at a lower 50% rate.
The Fourth Circuit’s 0-8 record stands out against historical norms. Since 2007, the Supreme Court has reversed lower court decisions in 71.3% of its 1,250 cases, with the Ninth Circuit (79% reversal rate) and Sixth Circuit (81.1%) typically facing higher scrutiny. The Fourth Circuit, however, has not consistently topped reversal charts. For example, in the 2023-2024 term, it had only one case reversed (100% rate, but a small sample), and in the 2021-2022 term, all three of its cases were reversed. This term’s eight reversals mark a significant spike in both volume and outcome.
Notable Cases and Issues
While specific case names from the Fourth Circuit for the 2024-2025 term are not fully detailed in available data, the types of issues addressed reflect the Supreme Court’s focus on contentious legal questions. One prominent case, Cox Communications v. Sony Music Entertainment, saw the Fourth Circuit’s ruling on internet service provider liability for copyright infringement overturned. The Fourth Circuit had held Cox liable for “materially contributing to copyright infringement” by not cutting off internet access to known infringers. The Supreme Court’s reversal likely clarified the scope of secondary liability under copyright law, a decision with implications for millions of internet users.
Another case, E.M.D. Sales v. Carrera, addressed labor law under the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA). The Fourth Circuit had upheld a higher standard of proof for employers claiming employees were “outside salesmen” exempt from overtime pay. The Supreme Court reversed, potentially easing employer burdens in such disputes, aligning with broader deregulation efforts associated with initiatives like Project 2025. The case drew significant attention, with amicus briefs from groups like the Chamber of Commerce and the Department of Justice supporting the petitioners.
A third case, Fields v. Federal Bureau of Prisons, involved a prisoner’s claim under Bivens v. Six Unknown Named Agents for excessive force by prison officials. The Fourth Circuit reinstated the claim, but the Supreme Court, prompted by the Trump administration’s urging, reversed, signaling continued reluctance to expand Bivens remedies. This decision underscores the Court’s trend of limiting judicial avenues for constitutional claims against federal officials.
Why the Perfect Storm?
Legal experts offer varied explanations for the Fourth Circuit’s 100% reversal rate. Josh Blackman, a professor at South Texas College of Law, suggests that high reversal rates often reflect ideological or interpretive misalignments between lower courts and the Supreme Court’s current composition. “The Supreme Court disagrees on what the Constitution means,” Blackman noted, emphasizing that appellate judges are not tasked with predicting Supreme Court outcomes but with applying their own reasoned interpretations.
The Fourth Circuit, known for its moderate-to-liberal leanings despite a mix of judges appointed by both Democratic and Republican presidents, may have clashed with the Supreme Court’s conservative 6-3 majority. Cases like E.M.D. Sales and Cox Communications involved progressive interpretations of labor and intellectual property law, which the Supreme Court, under Chief Justice John Roberts and Justices Brett Kavanaugh and Amy Coney Barrett, often approaches with a deregulatory or textualist lens.
The small sample size also plays a role. As noted by Vanderbilt law professor Brian T. Fitzpatrick, reversal rates can be skewed when the Supreme Court hears only a handful of cases from a circuit. “The Supreme Court takes only a tiny fraction of cases, usually 100 to 150 per term, and reverses most of them,” Fitzpatrick explained. With only eight cases, the Fourth Circuit’s 100% rate may reflect selective certiorari rather than systemic error.
Implications and Reactions
The Fourth Circuit’s “batting zero” record has raised eyebrows but is unlikely to alter its judicial approach. “The judges of the Fourth Circuit don’t work for the Supreme Court,” Blackman remarked, suggesting that appellate courts will continue to rule based on their understanding of the law, not in anticipation of reversal. This sentiment echoes the broader principle that lower courts must prioritize independent judgment, even if it risks Supreme Court correction.
Critics, however, see the reversals as evidence of the Supreme Court’s conservative shift. Organizations like Democracy Forward argue that the Court’s docket, including Fourth Circuit cases, reflects an agenda influenced by conservative legal movements, such as those tied to Federalist Society leader Leonard Leo. Cases like E.M.D. Sales align with efforts to roll back worker protections, a priority of initiatives like Project 2025.
Conversely, some observers view the reversals as a necessary correction of overreach. A Wall Street Journal editorial cited by Lat suggests that the Supreme Court’s decisions “belie arguments that it’s marching in lockstep toward the right,” noting that only 9% of cases this term followed a strict conservative-liberal 6-3 split. The Fourth Circuit’s reversals, in this view, reflect case-specific errors rather than ideological warfare.
Looking Ahead
The Fourth Circuit’s 100% reversal rate is a statistical outlier but not a definitive indictment of its competence. With the Supreme Court’s 2025-2026 term already underway, cases like A.J.T. v. School Board—concerning religious freedom and public school curricula—will test whether the Fourth Circuit can rebound. Oral arguments scheduled for April 22, 2025, will explore whether schools’ use of gender and sexuality storybooks burdens parents’ religious exercise rights, a case that could further highlight tensions between the Fourth Circuit and the Supreme Court.
For now, the Fourth Circuit’s 0-8 record serves as a reminder of the Supreme Court’s gatekeeping role in shaping federal law. As David Lat observed, this term felt “less heated” than recent years, yet the Fourth Circuit’s reversals underscore the high stakes of appellate review. Whether this streak signals a deeper misalignment or a statistical blip, it has cemented the Fourth Circuit’s place in legal discussions as the Supreme Court’s term of scrutiny draws to a close.
Sources: SCOTUSblog, Ballotpedia, Substack (David Lat), Democracy Forward, Reason.com, The Wall Street Journal