NCJ Number
17865
Journal
Tulane Law Review Volume: 48 Issue: 1 Dated: (DECEMBER 1973) Pages: 173-177
Date Published
1973
Length
5 pages
Annotation
IN BECKER V. THOMPSON, (1972-3), THE FIFTH CIRCUIT HELD THAT WHERE THERE IS PENDING OR THREATENED STATE CRIMINAL PROSECUTION, FEDERAL INJUNCTIVE RELIEF WOULD BE WITHHELD ABSENT SHOWING OF IRREPARABLE HARM.
Abstract
THIS IRREPARABLE HARM WAS TO BE MEASURED BY BAD FAITH HARASSMENT. THE COURT FURTHER CONCLUDED THAT THE EFFECT OF DECLARATORY RELIEF IS SIMILAR TO INJUNCTIVE RELIEF AND HENCE SHOULD REQUIRE THE SAME SHOWING OF IRREPARABLE HARM BEFORE FEDERAL INTERVENTION WOULD BE PROPER. THIS NOTE DISCUSSES THE STANDARDS FOR FEDERAL RELIEF PRESCRIBED BY THE BECKER COURT IN LIGHT OF A GROUP OF 1971 SUPREME COURT DECISIONS REFERRED TO AS THE YOUNGER SEXTET. THESE DECISIONS EXCLUDED THE POSSIBILITY OF OBTAINING DECLARATORY OR INJUNCTIVE RELIEF BECAUSE OF A 'CHILLING EFFECT' UPON FIRST AMENDMENT FREEDOMS IN CASES OF PENDING STATE CRIMINAL PROCEEDINGS. THE AUTHOR MAINTAINS THAT THE REQUIRED SHOWING OF SUCH A HIGH DEGREE OF INJURY AS BAD FAITH HARASSMENT IN 'THREATENED' PROSECUTIONS COULD PLACE AN ENORMOUS DAMPER ON THE ASSERTION OF CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHTS AND DEFEAT THE DOCTRINE OF COMITY. HE ALSO SUGGESTS THAT EQUATING THE STANDARDS FOR DECLARATORY AND INJUNCTIVE RELIEF WORKS AS A DENIAL OF THE LEGISLATIVE PURPOSE IN ENACTING THE 1970 DECLARATORY JUDGEMENT ACT, AND ACTS AS A SEVERE LIMITATION UPON THE SCOPE OF THIS RELIEF. (AUTHOR ABSTRACT MODIFIED)