Law Commons^™

Younger Abstention Reaches A Civil Maturity: Pennzoil Co. V. Texaco Inc., Howard B. Stravitz

Fordham Law Review

No abstract provided.

Making Younger Civil: The Consequences Of Federal Court Deference To State Court Proceedings – A Response To Professor Stravitz, Georgene M. Vairo

Fordham Law Review

No abstract provided.

Preclusion Concerns As An Additional Factor When Staying A Federal Suit In Deference To A Concurrent State Proceeding, David J. Mccarthy

Fordham Law Review

No abstract provided.

Note, A Dialogue On The Political Question Doctrine, Thomas B. Mcaffee, Christopher A. Johnson

Scholarly Works

Legal scholars have generally discussed the political question doctrine as part of the larger debate over the legitimacy of judicial review. Points of discordance aside, scholars have agreed that the doctrine is “a classic technique of judicial avoidance, a way of allowing a governmental decision to stand without involving the Court in supporting its legitimacy.” Thus, debate over the objectives, legitimacy and scope of the doctrine has traditionally proceeded from the unquestioned assumption that there exists a body of law which justifies judicial abstention from deciding some types of issues.

In recent years, however, some scholars have challenged the assumption …

The Duty To Decide Vs. The Daedalian Doctrine Of Abstention, Harlan S. Abrahams, Brian E. Mattis

Seattle University Law Review

It is the thesis of this article that the growing trend in the federal courts to refuse to exercise their assigned jurisdiction violates the doctrine of the separation of powers, and that the federal judiciary's excuses for refusing to perform their tasks do not pass constitutional muster. Specifically, this article will demonstrate that those excuses either do not rise to a level of constitutional concern sufficient to justify the trend or are based on a perversion of the admittedly constitutional concept of federalism, a concept affording the individual citizen a structural protection against arbitrary government in additionto the structural protection …

Federal Courts, Injunctions, Declaratory Judgments, And State Law: The Supreme Court Has Finally Fashioned A Workable Abstention Doctrine, Clair E. Dickinson

Cleveland State Law Review

The American judicial system is founded on several policies which act as guideposts for the courts. Among these is the policy that states should be as free from federal control as possible. At the opposite end of the spectrum is the view that federal courts have a duty to protect individuals from violations of their constitutional rights. These policies meet, and seemingly clash, when a plaintiff enters a federal court either to request a declaratory judgment that a state statute is unconstitutional or to seek an injunction against the enforcement of the statute. The balancing of these competing interests has …

Policy And Procedure In Abstention: Is The Pullman Technique Proper?

Indiana Law Journal

No abstract provided.