T. M. v. University of Md. Medical System Corporation · ¶38

To start, allowing federal district courts to review state- court judgments while they are on appeal in the state-court system would undermine the “[c]ooperation and comity” on which our federal system is built. Ruhrgas AG v. Marathon Oil Co., 526 U. S. 574, 586 (1999). Indeed, that is the reason why, “ever since 1789, Congress has granted this Court the power to intervene in State litigation only after ‘the highest court of a State in which a decision in the suit could be had’ has rendered a ‘final judgment.’” Radio Station WOW, Inc. v. Johnson, 326 U. S. 120, 124 (1945); see North Dakota Bd. of Pharmacy v. Snyder’s Drug Stores, Inc., 414 U. S. 156, 159 (1973) (explaining that one of §1257’s purposes is to “limi[t] review of state court determinations of federal constitutional issues to leave at a minimum federal intrusion in state affairs”). It is difficult to see why Congress would…

preliminary print (page proof)
Source edition
Passage preview. Read in context for the complete text, notes and references.