Document: 401 U.S. 37 91 S.Ct. 746 27 L.Ed.2d 669 Evelle J. YOUNGER, Appellant,v.John HARRIS, Jr., et al. No. 2. Reargued Nov. 16, 1970. Decided Feb. 23, 1971. Clifford K. Thompson, San Francisco, Cal., for appellant. A. L. Wirin, Los Angeles, appellees. Mr. Justice BLACK delivered the opinion of Court. 1 Appellee, John Harris, was indicted in a California state court, charged with violation Penal Code §§ 11400 and 11401, known as Criminal Syndicalism Act, set out below.1 He then filed complaint Federal District Court, asking that court to enjoin appellant, Younger, Attorney Angeles County, from prosecuting him, alleging prosecution even presence Act inhibited him exercise his rights free speech press, guaranteed by First Fourteenth Amendments. Appellees Jim Dan Diane Hirsch intervened plaintiffs suit, claiming Harris would inhibit them members Progressive Labor Party peacefully advocating program their party, which replace capitalism socialism abolish profit system production this country. Appellee Farrell Broslawsky, an instructor history at Valley College, also made uncertain whether he could teach about doctrines Karl Marx or read Communist Manifesto part classwork. All claimed unless United States restrained each suffer immediate irreparable injury. A three-judge convened pursuant 28 U.S.C. § 2284, held it had jurisdiction power restrain Attornney prosecuting, State's void vagueness overbreadth Amendments, accordingly 'further currently pending action against plaintiff alleged Act.' 281 F.Supp. 507, 517 (1968). 2 The case is before us on appeal 1253. In notice jurisdictional statement appellant presented two questions: (1) decision Court Whitney v. California, 274 357, 47 641, 71 L.Ed. 1095, holding California's law constitutional 1927 binding (2) its face. brief State our request, argues only who indicted, has standing challenge law, issuance injunction longstanding judicial policy 2283, provides: 3 'A may not grant stay proceedings except expressly authorized Congress, where necessary aid jurisdiction, protect effectuate judgments.' 4 See, e.g., Atlantic Coast Line R. Co. Engineers, 398 281, 285—286, 90 1739, 1742—1743, 26 234 (1970). Without regard questions raised supra, since overruled Brandenburg Ohio, 395 444, 89 1827, 23 430 (1969), constitutionality we have concluded judgment enjoining Younger under these statutes, must be reversed national forbidding federal courts special circumstances.2 We express no view circumstances act when there time proceeding begun. 5 * been actually being prosecuted suit filed. thus acute, live controversy prosecutor. But none other parties Dan, Hirsch, such controversy. None arrested, threatened About three said: 6 'Plaintiffs allege they are Party, advocates change industrial ownership political change, feel advocation party through peaceful, nonviolent means, because 'on books', criminal Harris. Plaintiff Broslawsky instructor, alleges normal practice teaching students reading revolutionary works subject F.Supp., 509. 7 Whatever right syndicalism have, cannot share him. If conduct planned engage in, if found allegation true—either admission district attorney any evidence—then genuine might said exist. here appellees do claim ever prosecution, likely, remotely possible. They bring solely because, language complaint, 'feel inhibited.' think true, sufficient equitable into play prosecution. lawsuit stop serious matter. And persons having fears those imaginary speculative, accepted appropriate cases. See Golden Zwickler, 394 103, 956, 22 113 (1969). Since challenged laws, however, proceed proper party. II 8 beginning country's Congress has, few exceptions, manifested desire permit try cases interference courts. 1793 unconditionally provided: '(N)or shall writ granted *.' Stat. 335, c. 22, 5. comparison present-day successor, graphically illustrates how minor exceptions flat, prohibitory old Act. During all lapse years 1970 statutory congressional enactment three; 'except Congress'; 'where jurisdiction'; (3) 'to addition, exception evidenced statute person can show will, enjoined, damages. Ex parte Young, 209 123, 441, 52 714 (1908).3 9 precise reasons public never specifically identified but primary sources plain. One basic doctrine equity jurisprudence should act, particularly moving adequate remedy will injury denied relief. originally grown peculiar English applicable country, fundamental purpose restraining within narrow limits equally important Constitution, order prevent erosion role jury avoid duplication legal sanctions single asserted. This underlying reason interfering prosecutions reinforced more vital consideration, notion 'comity,' is, respect functions, recognition fact entire country up Union separate governments, continuance belief National Government fare best institutions left perform functions ways. This, perhaps lack better clearer way describe it, referred many 'Our Federalism,' one familiar profound debates ushered Constitution existence bound remain loyal ideals dreams Federalism.' concept does mean blind deference 'States' Rights' than means centralization control over every issue Framers rejected both courses. What represent sensitivity legitimate interests Governments, Government, anxious though vindicate interests, always endeavors so ways unduly interfere activities States. It forgotten slogan, born early struggling days States, occupies highly place Nation's future. 10 discussion enough suggest some why perfectly natural repeat again thing asked injunctions. Fenner Boykin, 271 240, 46 492, 70 927 (1926), brought seeking recently enacted allegedly interfered flow interstate commerce. unanimous clear yet formally instituted, very circumstances: 11 'Ex 714, following established that, absolutely protection rights, officers instituting actions. done, extraordinary circumstances, danger loss great immediate. Ordinarily, officers; primarily, duty offenders laws state, decide done. accused first rely unon defense courts, involves validity statute, plainly appears course afford protection.' Id., 243—244, 493. 12 These principles, case, repeatedly followed reaffirmed involving prosecutions. Spielman Motor Sales Dodge, 295 89, 55 678, 79 1322 (1935); Beal Missouri Pac. Co., 312 45, 61 418, 85 577 (1941); Watson Buck, 313 387, 962, 1416 Williams Miller, 317 599, 63 258, 87 489 (1942); Douglas City Jeannette, 319 157, 877, 1324 (1943). 13 stressed importance showing injury, traditional prerequisite obtaining injunction. prosecutions, insufficient 'both immediate.' Fenner, supra. Certain types particular, cost, anxiety, inconvenience defend themselves considered 'irreparable' sense term. Instead, threat plaintiff's federally protected eliminated 145—147, 447—449. Thus, Buck U.S., 400, S.Ct., 966, stressed: 14 'Federal injunctions either entirety distinct prohibitions, matter course, statutes unconstitutional. 'No citizen member community immune good faith, acts. imminence unauthorized hence unlawful alone ground relief exerts powers seeks aid.' Pacific Railroad Corp., 49, 420, 577.' similarly, Douglas, clear, after reaffirming rule, that: 15 'It appear record petitioners incidental lawfully faith 164, 881. 16 stood decided Dombrowski Pfister, 380 479, 1116, (1965), enforcement certain properly case.4 Dombrowski, unlike earlier denying injunctions, substantial allegations 17 'the threats enforce appellants expectation securing valid convictions, rather plan employ arrests, seizures, color harass discourage supporters asserting attempting Negro citizens Louisiana,' 482, 1118—1119. 18 offered prove offices raided files records seized search arrest warrants were later summarily vacated judge probable cause. despite quashing suppressing evidence seized, prosecutor continuing threaten initiate new same hearings photostatic copies illegally documents used, threatening use obtain grand indictments charges violating statutes. viewed sufficiently establish kind above beyond associated justify intervention. Beal, 50, 421. Indeed, quoting Court's concerning restricted justified, went say: 19 'But depict situation assure vindication rights. impairment freedoms expression occur await court's disposition ultimate review adverse determination. allegations, clearly injury.' 485—486, 1120. 20 issuing lift remit warranted. 491, 1123, 1124. Similarly, Cameron Johnson, 390 611, 88 1335, 182 (1968), divided finding did bad harassment; dissenting Justices limited allowed differed question particular facts faith. 21 background principles propriety present case. Here already affording opportunity raise claims. There suggestion series repeated subjected. words, faces 'that faith,' therefore settled described entitled 'even unconstitutional,' thought substantially broadened availability give relief, without harassment, whenever face' vague overly broad, Amendment. recognize statements seem support argument. But, seen, unnecessary basis long-established standards. adduced position departure regarding injunctive undoubtedly stated '(a) regulating usually imponderables contingencies full Amendment freedoms.' 486, sort 'chilling effect,' called itself place, chilling effect satisfactorily issued lifted obtained 'acceptable limiting construction' once occurring narrowing construction made, convictions stand long defendants deprived fair warning. 491 n. 7, 1123. effectively eliminate uncertainty coverage leaves most virtually doubts eventually subjected sanctions. can, prohibit whatever prior satisfactory rewriting statute. stripped prosecute socially dangerous constitutionally unprotected covered until passed legislature approved potentially lengthy trial appellate proceedings. carefully principle direct own applied date absence warning problems. Moreover, area basis, itself, prohibiting action. Where directly abridge speech, but—while power—tends inhibiting well upheld relation need alternative doing so. Schneider State, 308 147, 60 146, 84 155 (1939); Cantwell Connecticut, 310 296, 900, 1213 (1940); Mine Workers America, Dist. Illinois Bar Assn., 389 217, 353, 426 (1967). Just effect' automatically render unconstitutional, admittedly result books carrying task enforcing harmful believes punishable Constitution. 24 Beyond another, consideration. Procedures testing manner apparently contemplated approval modified version, fundamentally odds function plan. judiciary declare unconstitutional final analysis derived responsibility resolving concrete disputes decision; governing dispute judges, consistently obligations Supremacy Clause, application conflict Marbury Madison, (1 Cranch) 137, (1803). responsibility, broad amount unlimited survey pass upon them. Ever Constitutional Convention proposal Supreme advice legislation5 suits involve 'case controversy' satisfy requirements Article III analyzing proposed pinpointing deficiencies, requiring correction deficiencies put effect, rarely judiciary. combination relative remoteness controversy, impact legislative process sought, speculative amorphous nature required line-by-line detailed see, Landry Daley, 280 938 (N.D.Ill.1968), rev'd sub nom. Boyle Landry, 77, 758, 696, ordinarily results wholly unsatisfactory deciding questions, whichever decided. light conception governmental processes passing seldom veto process. 25 For reasons, Judicial Branch hold regarded upset confined narrowly stands proposition abridges may, shown usual prerequisites harassment. example, ago indicated: conceivable flagrantly patently violative prohibitions clause, sentence paragraph, whomever effort apply it.' 402, 967. Other unusual situations calling intervention arise, point now specify what be. purposes hold, do, possible unconstitutionality good-faith attempts appellee failed make circumstance call Because rests factors intervention, occasion consider prohibits Congress' controlling reversed, remanded further inconsistent opinion. 29 Reversed. 30 STEWART, whom HARLAN joins, concurring.* 31 decides today ones. Perhaps important, areas today's holdings necessarily extend. cases, deals intervene declaratory contemporaneously court. 32 basing decisions grounds, reach independent force anti-injunction 2283. Thus word 'injunction' 2283 interpreted include judgment, 'expressly authorized' Civil Rights 1871, 42 1983.1 deal considerations govern civil proceedings, where, various balance struck differently.2 Finally, resolve problems involved future 33 confines prevail Within area, not, save exceptional extremely declaration existing prosecution.3 Such exist face, 53 54, 755; cf. Evers Dwyer, 358 202, 178, 222, harassment official lawlessness—in statute's enforcement, 47—49, 752—753. deferring adjudication outweighed flowing bringing perversion supposed provide vindication, speedy effective Cf. Georgia Rachel, 384 780, 86 1783, 925. 34 BRENNAN WHITE MARSHALL join, concurring result. 35 I agree reversed. violations sued His contentions adequately adjudicated proceeding, instance improper.* 36 inhibited' Party. 'is uncertain' college instruction relating similar works. reasonable taking actions contemplated. below declined stand(s) (State), ascribed 516. pointed out, '(w)ell-intentioned prosecutors safeguards neutralize vice law,' Baggett Bullitt, 377 360, 373, 1316, 1323, (1964), still Art. III. No alleged. Although advocate asserted advocacy genre short, ripe (1969); Perez Ledesma, 82, p. 93, 674, 681, 701 (Brennan, J., dissenting). DOUGLAS, dissenting. 38 period enormous extrajudicial imposed assert unpopular causes emphasizes wisdom 22. recognized times repression, powerful spokesmen generate symbolic pogroms nonconformists, judiciary, vigilance responsibilities individual's 39 represents general rule arise merely proffered defense. governs blunderbuss used en masse—those 'overbroad' sweep. 'If otherwise, contours regulation hammered case—and tested hardy risk determine scope regulation.' 487, 1121. context overbroad spoke rights' caused Ibid. 40 As respects least 1940 dealing insist 'narrowly drawn evil.' 307, 905, 1213. 41 permissible officials multiple enforced Bulter, writing Terrace 263 197, 214, 44 15, 17, 68 255; 'Equity exercised contravenes wherever essential effectually property injuries otherwise irremediable; person, officer clothed threatens commence criminal, affected, enjoined equity.' 43 Our another facet problem. 'criminal syndicalism' defined broadly jeopardize 'teaching' preferable enterprise. 45 Harris' 'crime' distributing leaflets 449, 1830, 430.1 'advocacy' attempt persuasion bullets, bombs, arson, different toward objective. tried unsuccessfully dismiss indictment grounds. resorted writs prohibition trial, avail. last resort keep saddled 'anti-injunction' 2283,2 bar circumstances. That adopted 1793, 5, 335,3 reflected American federalism. 48 pressures localism nationalism War, altered war. War Amendments concern. Those especially Amendment, cemented federalism immediately commenced legislation. Judiciary 73, represented views federalism, Reconstruction including enlargement jurisdiction,4 49 jurisdiction-enlarging during April 20, 1871. 13. provision codified 1983 50 'Every who, ordinance, regulation, custom, usage, Territory, subjects, subjected, thereof deprivation privileges, immunities secured liable injured equity, redress.' (Emphasis added.) 51 someone acting 'color law' misusing authority. Monroe Pape, 365 167, 81 473, 492. 'deprivation Constitution.' 'Suit(s) equity' obviously includes injunctions.5 included 2283,6 much-discussed 1324. allowing end 18th century almost 80 later, conclude concepts changed War. Judge Will D.C., 288 200, 223. speaking 'a revolution federalism's 54 'This revolution, turn, historical judgment. overwhelming concern Congresses newly won freedmen. By interposing government between states inhabitants, sought nullification states. With subsequent passage implement expanding power. Section therefore, protecting infringement also, necessary, citizens.' makes 'intimidation' 'commit offense' offense. 56 following: dissentient groups disorderly conduct, residents high-crime neighborhood carry concealed weapons protection, mothers block highway demonstrate increased safety measures. phrase commit misdemeanors fine only. evils state's interest outweighs giving wide berth.' 938, 964. 57 others class challenging five sections arrests sections. abandoned remaining 'mob action' Appellants appealed determination section 58 dismisses describes 'flimsy allegations.' 81, 760. states: 'There nothing contained infer jeopardy suffering intimidation manner.' associates, using along several them, manner. arresting cause, detaining excessive bail. peaceful demonstrations convictions. sum, group masse lively believe acted finest tradition stay. 59 standards certainty containing higher sanctions, touching freedom areas. Winters New York, 333 515—516, 665, 670, 92 840. ascertainable guilt. Men common intelligence guess meaning enactment. tests ascertain guilt.' stake sedulously enforced. denied. Allegations facially powers. 62 indicate appropriate. stronger. prototype eternal temptation, speaker correct conditions complains. see walk treacherous They, like citizens, umbrella study, analyze, discuss, debate troubles days. When leveled views, society dialogue danger. '§ 11400. Definition "Criminal article precept advocating, aiding abetting commission crime, sabotage (which hereby wilful malicious physical damage property), acts violence methods terrorism accomplishing control, effecting change.' 11401. Offense; punishment 'Any who: '1. spoken written words personal advocates, teaches aids abets duty, necessity committing sabotage, method change; '2. Wilfully deliberately justifies intent approve, syndicalism; '3. Prints, publishes, edits, issues circulates publicly displays book, paper, pamphlet, document, poster printed form, advocacy, teaching, abetment of, advising, '4. Organizes assists organizing, knowingly becomes organization, society, assemblage organized assembled advocate, abet '5. practices commits advised, advocated, taught aided abetted syndicalism, accomplish 'Is guilty felony imprisonment prison less nor years.' explicitly ask complaint. did, 'such just proper,' Samuels Mackell, 66, 764, 688, improper initiated. interesting 1941, Toucey York Life Ins. 314 118, 139, 100 (1941). Neither claims overbreadth, Thornhill Alabama, 88, 736, 1093 (1940), loyalty oath attacks defendant's regulated face'; construed defendant too applied, permissible. discharging employees take oaths. exact promises involved, content association, condition employment. Apart discharged exercising refuse raises problem—an (discharging employees) Records 1787 (Farrand ed. 1911). (This applies Mackell al., 9, Fernandez 688; 41, Dyson Stein, 769, 781, 83, Byrne Karalexis 216, 777, 792.) 613—614, 3, 1336—1337, 182; 484 2, 1119, Courts traditionally greater reluctance 43—44, 750; 163—164, 880—881, offense likely proceeding. classify provides indication prompt unencumbered law. contrast, Law Students Research Council Wadmond, 154, 720, 749; Wisconsin Constantineau, 400 433, 515; Rosado Wyman, 397 397, 1207, 442. sure, distinction ban distinction, unaffected 1983. negative pregnant sentence—that policy, 'exceptional circumstances' found—is limitations placed erroneously Zwickler Koota, 241, 391, 444 (1967), authorizing consideration suffices note attached significant motion petitions prohibition. questioned oral argument procedures invoked suggested denial motions rejection However, interlocutory stage arguments, provided justification intervening renewed requests instructions, conviction modes presentation formers issues. Linde, 'Clear Present Danger' Reexamined: Dissonance Concerto, Stan.L.Rev. 1163 initial form (by States) state.' exceptions. 1874 subsequently insertion Revisers read: 'The bankruptcy.' Rev.Stat. 720. 133—134, 143—144, discussing noted while bankruptcy explicit exception, others. 'Removal Acts qualify pro tanto 1793.' 1851 shipowners' liability '(b)eing 'subsequent statute' 1790 operates implied amendment added Interpleader 1926 (4) Frazier-Lemke 1473. line nonstatutory Shortly thereafter current Code. Reviser's Note '(T)he revised restores generally understood decision.' Both pre-Toucey post-Toucey Porter Dicken, 328 252, 66 1094, 1203; Leiter Minerals, Inc. 352 220, 77 287, 267. 1343(3) 13, federal-question 1331 1875. 470. requires exhaustion remedies. McNeese Board Education, 373 668, 83 1433, 622. accord my Honey Goodman, 432 F.2d (CA6), Cooper Hutchinson, 184 119 (CA3). Opposed Goss Illinois, 257 (CA7), Baines Danville, 337 579 (CA4). Maraist, Injunctive Relief Against Proceedings: Significance Tex.L.Rev. 535, 591 seq.

Category: 8