Tuesday audio. Procedure papers due start of class next Tuesday. I will collect information on argument roles at the beginning of class Monday; please confer with opposing counsel and co-justice before you enter class that day.
Here is the en banc Ninth Circuit opinion in Yoshikawa v. Seguirant rejecting the stand-alone § 1981(c) cause of action and holding that plaintiffs must bring § 1981 violations as § 1983 and laws claims. The court agrees on that result; there is disagreement as to what happens next.
We continue with Statutory Abstention, then move to Pullman. How does history and purpose show § 1983 to be an "expressly authorized" exception, given the general language of "suit in equity?" Why have the tax injunction acts (§§ 1341 and 7421) and what do they require and exclude? What are the two circumstances in which a federal court might abstain under Pullman? What is the connection between Pullman and certification?
