Federal Civil rights injunctions SHOULD BE available, and if you can present your case properly they MAY BE available…. this is a theory that I have been working on for almost 7 years now…. because the laws (statutory and common law) are there on the books, but somehow Younger v. Harris has been twisted beyond recognition, bent ALL out of shape and perverted. It SHOULD be seen as the middle case between a trilogy of Dombrowski v. Pfister, Younger v. Harris, and Mitchum v. Foster, two of which upheld Federal Court injunctions against State Court proceedings and only one—Younger did not. So why is Younger the one that all Defendants cite and few Plaintiffs know about in Civil Rights cases? Could it be….that the Defendants for the most part run the law schools and print the law books and they want to increase and maximize the abusive power of the State Courts?
DOMBROWSKI v PFISTER 380_US_479
Younger v. Harris, February 23, 1971
Mitchum v. Foster, a case from Bay County, Florida
