🤤
Civil Procedure • Abstention
CIVPRO#037
Legal Definition
Under the abstention doctrine, a federal court retains jurisdiction over a constitutional challenge to a state law, but will refrain from deciding the question until the state court has interpreted its own state law. However, where there is (1) potential for great and immediate irreparable injury, (2) bad faith in the prosecution of an action, or (3) harassment, a federal court will intervene.
Plain English Explanation
US Constitution issues are always within the jurisdiction of federal courts (under federal question subject matter jurisdiction), however, sometimes a federal court will decide to wait and see how a state court handles the issue before jumping in and undermining the state court's sovereignty, and embarrassing the state in front of the other states in the union. Consider the fact that laws are inherently an evolving process between three branches of government. The legislative branch creates the laws, the executive branch enforces the laws, and the judicial branch is to interpret the laws and evaluate their application. So just because a state's legislative branch creates a law that is arguably unconstitutional doesn't mean it's necessarily time to call in the federal government to assist -- there are other checks and balances that can be performed to self-correct the error.
In other words, imagine that State X's legislative branch creates a law that appears to infringe on the rights of minorities. As a result, citizens attempt to sue the state in federal court. The federal court may abstain from the case until a state court has the opportunity to evaluate the law. After all, the state's judiciary may be completely capable on its own to identify the error in the law and deal with it, without ever having to involve the federal government. However, if the state's court upholds the law in a way that still causes concern, then the federal government may choose to weigh-in and hear the case.
Put simply, the federal government doesn't want to meddle with state affairs unless it is absolutely necessary and, without the government intervening, some sort of harm will happen.
In other words, imagine that State X's legislative branch creates a law that appears to infringe on the rights of minorities. As a result, citizens attempt to sue the state in federal court. The federal court may abstain from the case until a state court has the opportunity to evaluate the law. After all, the state's judiciary may be completely capable on its own to identify the error in the law and deal with it, without ever having to involve the federal government. However, if the state's court upholds the law in a way that still causes concern, then the federal government may choose to weigh-in and hear the case.
Put simply, the federal government doesn't want to meddle with state affairs unless it is absolutely necessary and, without the government intervening, some sort of harm will happen.
Visual Aids
