MBE Rules · Civil Procedure
Anti-Injunction Act
28 U.S.C. §2283
The rule
Federal courts may not enjoin state proceedings except as expressly authorized by statute, when necessary in aid of jurisdiction, or to protect or effectuate a federal judgment (relitigation exception).
In plain English
The Anti-Injunction Act restricts federal courts from stopping state court proceedings unless there is a specific law that allows it, it's necessary to support federal jurisdiction, or it's needed to enforce a federal judgment. This means federal courts generally respect state court processes and only intervene in limited circumstances.
Worked example
A federal court is asked to stop a state court from hearing a case involving the same parties and issues. The federal court finds that there is no statute allowing such an injunction, and the case does not involve enforcing a federal judgment. Therefore, the federal court denies the request and allows the state court to proceed.
Memory hook
Federal courts can't stop state courts unless the law says so or it's to enforce a federal judgment.
The trap
Exams may present scenarios where students assume federal courts can intervene in state matters without recognizing the specific exceptions outlined in the Anti-Injunction Act. Students often overlook the need for statutory authorization or the relitigation exception.
How examiners test it
Questions typically involve a conflict between federal and state court proceedings, testing the candidate's understanding of when federal courts can issue injunctions against state actions under the Anti-Injunction Act.
Drill this rule until it can't fail you.
Vrenberg generates unlimited questions on this exact rule, tracks your mastery of it, and brings it back until it sticks.