T. M. v. University of Md. Medical System Corporation · ¶44

Finally, the animating force behind many of T. M.’s and the dissent’s arguments appears to be the belief that Rooker and Feldman were wrongly decided and so should be cabined whenever possible, if not outright overruled. Cf. post, at 2–5 (raising doubts about Rooker-Feldman’s conceptual basis). This issue is not fairly included in the question presented and was not pressed at the certiorari stage. See this Court’s Rule 14.1(a).

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