Skip to main content
Unpublished Paper
Federal-State Judicial Comity: A One-Way or Two-Way Street?
ExpressO (2012)
  • Russell M Coombs, Rutgers University-Camden
  • Denise Johnson-Steinert (secretary), Rutgers University-Camden
Abstract

Federal-State Judicial Comity: A One-Way or Two-Way Street? By Russell M. Coombs Abstract This article explains how a recent decision of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, purportedly relying on the doctrine of “comity,” violated federal statutory law by requiring federal district courts to respect state-court decisions, favoring persons convicted of both state and federal crimes, where the state-court decisions not only had denied comity to pending federal judicial proceedings, but also had violated the state’s own law and practices. The article identifies predictable, important, and undesirable consequences of this precedent, applauds the U.S. Justice Department’s continuing efforts to obtain reversal of this decision, and proposes enactment of a federal statute requiring federal courts to apply traditional standards for comity instead of the novel and unwise standard approved and applied by the Ninth Circuit.

Disciplines
Publication Date
February 22, 2012
Citation Information
Russell M Coombs and Denise Johnson-Steinert (secretary). "Federal-State Judicial Comity: A One-Way or Two-Way Street?" ExpressO (2012)
Available at: http://works.bepress.com/denise_johnson-steinert/1/