# SAMUELS Et Al. v. MACKELL, DISTRICT ATTORNEY OF QUEENS COUNTY, Et Al.

> Supreme Court of the United States · February 23, 1971 · 401 U.S. 66

URL: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9424441

## Case

- **Full name:** George Samuels v. Thomas J. MacKell District Attorney Fred Fernandez v. Thomas J. MacKell District Attorney
- **Court:** Supreme Court of the United States
- **Decided:** February 23, 1971
- **Citations:** 401 U.S. 66; 91 S. Ct. 764; 27 L. Ed. 2d 688; 1971 U.S. LEXIS 83
- **Precedential status:** Published
- **Opinion:** Concurrence by Brennan
- **Judges:** Black, Burger, Harlan, Stewart, Blackmun, Douglas, Brennan, White, Marshall
- **Cited by:** 1,019 later opinions in the Frix Law Library

## Citator (automated)

- No negative treatment found by the automated citator. That is not the same as a confirmation that the case is good law; read the citing cases.
- Full citator and citing cases: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9424441

## How later opinions describe it (automated extraction)

- holding that declaratory relief is improper when a prosecution involving the challenged state statute is pending in state court at the time the federal suit is initiated, and the same principles that govern the propriety of federal injunctions of State criminal proceedings gov…
- holding that the Younger doctrine requires dismissal of claims for both injunctive and declaratory relief because “the basic policy against federal interference with pending state [proceedings] will be frustrated as much by a declaratory judgment as it would be by an injunction”
- holding that “ordinarily a declaratory judgment will result in precisely the same interference with and disruption of state proceedings that the longstanding policy limiting injunctions was designed to avoid”
- explaining that when “the practical effect of the two forms of relief will be virtually identical,” the “propriety of declaratory and injunc-tive relief should be judged by essentially the same standards”
- holding that, in the context of state prosecutions begun prior to the federal suit, where the declaratory relief would have the same effect as injunctive, the same equitable principles must be considered

## Opinion text

Mr. Justice Brennan,
with whom Mr. Justice White and Mr. Justice Marshall join, concurring in the result.
I agree that the judgment of the District Court should be affirmed. All the appellants had been indicted for violation of the New York Criminal Anarchy Law before *76 their suit in federal court was filed. They have not alleged facts amounting to bad-faith harassment. Therefore, neither a declaratory judgment nor an injunction would be proper. Perez v. Ledesma, post, p. 93 (separate opinion of Brennan, J.).

---

Source: Frix Law Library, https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9424441. Public record. Not legal advice.