Court Opinion

ID: 9426204
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-02 23:17:05.848155+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T17:22:59.602686
License: Public Domain

Me. Justice Douglas,
concurring in the judgment in part and dissenting in part.
While adhering to my position in Younger v. Harris, 401 U. S. 37, 58 (1971) (dissenting opinion), I join the judgment of the Court insofar as it holds that Salem Inn and Tim-Rob were entitled to a preliminary injunction pending disposition of their request for declaratory relief. I do not condone the conduct of M & L in violating the challenged ordinance without awaiting judicial action on its federal complaint, but like the Court of Appeals, I find no compelling reason to distinguish M & L from the other respondents in terms of the relief which is appropriate. I would therefore affirm the judgment below in all respects.