{"id":2480,"date":"2008-12-04T15:45:25","date_gmt":"2008-09-23T07:35:43","guid":{"rendered":""},"modified":"-0001-11-30T00:00:00","modified_gmt":"2008-09-23T07:35:43","slug":"en-US","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"http:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/?p=2480","title":{"rendered":"Younger<\/em> bars injunction in preemptive strike in federal court over state investigation"},"content":{"rendered":"

Preemptive civil suit against a criminal investigation to enjoin it is barred under Younger v. Harris<\/em>. The defendant was charged with a crime after the suit was brought. Bernegger v. Haney, 2008 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 70740 (N.D. Miss. September 18, 2008):<\/p>\n

Certain types of injury, such as the cost, anxiety, and inconvenience of having to defend against a single criminal prosecution, could not by themselves be considered “irreparable” in the special legal sense of the term. Younger<\/em>, 401 U.S. at 46. Rather, “the threat to the plaintiff’s federally protected rights must be one that cannot be eliminated by his defense against a single criminal prosecution.” Id<\/em>. “No citizen or member of the community is immune from prosecution, in good faith, for his alleged criminal acts. The imminence of such a prosecution even though alleged to be unauthorized and hence unlawful is not alone ground for relief in equity which exerts its extraordinary powers only to prevent irreparable injury to the plaintiff who seeks its aid.” Id<\/em>. (citations omitted).<\/p>\n

Indeed, it would produce illogical and untoward results, if a criminal defendant or suspect were allowed to interfere with or halt criminal proceedings by preemptively filing a civil suit. Like Younger<\/em> and the long line of cases to follow, there “does not appear from the record that [the Plaintiff has] been threatened with any injury other than that incidental to every criminal proceeding brought lawfully and in good faith.” Douglas v. City of Jeanette<\/em>, 319 U.S. 157, 164, 63 S.Ct. 877, 881, 87 L.Ed. 1324 (1943). There are no extraordinary circumstances present in this matter which would warrant enjoining the criminal proceedings. Compare Dombrowski v. Pfister<\/em>, 380 U.S. 479, 85 S.Ct. 1116, 14 L.Ed.2d 22 (1965).<\/p><\/blockquote>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

b2evALnk.b2WPAutP Continue reading →<\/span><\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":3,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"","ping_status":"pingsdone","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-2480","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"http:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/2480","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"http:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"http:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"http:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/users\/3"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"http:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcomments&post=2480"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"http:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/2480\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"http:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fmedia&parent=2480"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"http:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcategories&post=2480"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"http:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Ftags&post=2480"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}