Mitchum v. Foster, 407 U.S. 225 (1972)
E403307
Mitchum v. Foster, 407 U.S. 225 (1972), is a U.S. Supreme Court decision holding that 42 U.S.C. § 1983 falls within the “expressly authorized” exception to the Anti-Injunction Act, thereby allowing federal courts in some circumstances to enjoin pending state court proceedings.
All labels observed (2)
| Label | Occurrences |
|---|---|
| Mitchum v. Foster | 1 |
| Mitchum v. Foster, 407 U.S. 225 (1972) canonical | 1 |
How this entity was disambiguated
This entity first appeared as the object of triple T3981301 — resolving that mention is where its identity was fixed. The disambiguator weighed these candidate entities and picked the highlighted one (or “None”, minting a new entity). This is how homonymy is resolved: the same surface form can point to different entities.
NED1
Entity disambiguation (via context triple)
gpt-5-mini-2025-08-07
Target entity: Mitchum v. Foster, 407 U.S. 225 (1972) Context triple: [42 U.S.C. § 1983, interpretedBy, Mitchum v. Foster, 407 U.S. 225 (1972)]
-
A.
Mitchell v. United States
Mitchell v. United States is a U.S. Supreme Court case addressing the scope of Fifth Amendment protections, particularly concerning a defendant’s right against self-incrimination at sentencing.
-
B.
United Public Workers v. Mitchell
United Public Workers v. Mitchell is a 1947 U.S. Supreme Court case that upheld the constitutionality of the Hatch Act’s restrictions on federal employees’ political activities.
-
C.
Katzenbach v. McClung
Katzenbach v. McClung is a 1964 U.S. Supreme Court case that upheld the federal government’s power to prohibit racial discrimination in local restaurants under the Civil Rights Act of 1964.
-
D.
Katzenbach v. Morgan
Katzenbach v. Morgan is a 1966 U.S. Supreme Court case that upheld Congress’s power under the Fourteenth Amendment to prohibit certain state voting restrictions, reinforcing federal authority to protect voting rights.
-
E.
McDonald v. Smith
McDonald v. Smith is a 1985 U.S. Supreme Court case that held the First Amendment’s Petition Clause does not grant absolute immunity from libel suits for statements made in petitions to government officials.
- F. None of above. chosen
- G. Unsure - the case is ambiguous/there is not enough information to decide.
NED2
Entity disambiguation (via description)
gpt-5-mini-2025-08-07
Target entity: Mitchum v. Foster, 407 U.S. 225 (1972) Target entity description: Mitchum v. Foster, 407 U.S. 225 (1972), is a U.S. Supreme Court decision holding that 42 U.S.C. § 1983 falls within the “expressly authorized” exception to the Anti-Injunction Act, thereby allowing federal courts in some circumstances to enjoin pending state court proceedings.
-
A.
Mitchell v. United States
Mitchell v. United States is a U.S. Supreme Court case addressing the scope of Fifth Amendment protections, particularly concerning a defendant’s right against self-incrimination at sentencing.
-
B.
United Public Workers v. Mitchell
United Public Workers v. Mitchell is a 1947 U.S. Supreme Court case that upheld the constitutionality of the Hatch Act’s restrictions on federal employees’ political activities.
-
C.
Katzenbach v. McClung
Katzenbach v. McClung is a 1964 U.S. Supreme Court case that upheld the federal government’s power to prohibit racial discrimination in local restaurants under the Civil Rights Act of 1964.
-
D.
Katzenbach v. Morgan
Katzenbach v. Morgan is a 1966 U.S. Supreme Court case that upheld Congress’s power under the Fourteenth Amendment to prohibit certain state voting restrictions, reinforcing federal authority to protect voting rights.
-
E.
McDonald v. Smith
McDonald v. Smith is a 1985 U.S. Supreme Court case that held the First Amendment’s Petition Clause does not grant absolute immunity from libel suits for statements made in petitions to government officials.
- F. None of above. chosen
Statements (30)
| Predicate | Object |
|---|---|
| instanceOf | United States Supreme Court case ⓘ |
| Anti-InjunctionActCitation | 28 U.S.C. § 2283 ⓘ |
| areaOfLaw |
civil procedure
ⓘ
civil rights law ⓘ federal courts ⓘ federal jurisdiction ⓘ |
| category |
United States Supreme Court case on jurisdiction
ⓘ
United States civil rights case ⓘ United States federal courts case ⓘ |
| citation | 407 U.S. 225 ⓘ |
| clarifies | relationship between § 1983 and the Anti-Injunction Act ⓘ |
| country |
United States of America
ⓘ
surface form:
United States
|
| court | Supreme Court of the United States ⓘ |
| decisionDate | 1972 ⓘ |
| fullCaseName |
Mitchum v. Foster, 407 U.S. 225 (1972)
self-linksurface differs
ⓘ
surface form:
Mitchum v. Foster
|
| holding |
42 U.S.C. § 1983 falls within the "expressly authorized" exception to the Anti-Injunction Act
ⓘ
Federal courts may in some circumstances enjoin pending state court proceedings under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 ⓘ |
| impact |
expanded circumstances in which federal courts may intervene in ongoing state judicial proceedings
ⓘ
strengthened federal judicial enforcement of civil rights against state action ⓘ |
| interprets |
"expressly authorized" exception in 28 U.S.C. § 2283
ⓘ
remedial scope of 42 U.S.C. § 1983 ⓘ |
| jurisdictionTopic | federal court power to enjoin state proceedings ⓘ |
| languageOfDecision | English ⓘ |
| legalIssue |
availability of federal injunctive relief against state court proceedings in § 1983 actions
ⓘ
scope of the "expressly authorized" exception to the Anti-Injunction Act ⓘ |
| principle |
federal courts have a special responsibility to protect federal rights under § 1983
ⓘ
the Anti-Injunction Act is not an absolute bar when Congress has expressly authorized federal injunctive relief ⓘ |
| result | 42 U.S.C. § 1983 actions are exempt from the general prohibition on federal injunctions against state court proceedings ⓘ |
| statuteInterpreted |
42 U.S.C. § 1983
ⓘ
Anti-Injunction Act ⓘ |
How these facts were elicited
The pipeline generated the facts above by prompting gpt-5.1 with this entity's name + description and the instruction below.
Instruction
You are a knowledge base construction expert. Given a subject entity and a description of it, return factual statements that you know for the subject as a JSON list of dictionaries(triples), where keys must be "subject", "predicate" and "object". The number of facts may be very high, between 25 to 50 or more, for very popular subjects. For less popular subjects, the number of facts can be very low, like 5 or 10. # Requirements - If you don't know the subject at all, return an empty list. - If the subject is not a named entity, return an empty list. - Include at least one triple where predicate is "instanceOf". - Do not get too wordy. - Separate several objects into multiple triples with one object.
Input
Subject: Mitchum v. Foster, 407 U.S. 225 (1972) Description of subject: Mitchum v. Foster, 407 U.S. 225 (1972), is a U.S. Supreme Court decision holding that 42 U.S.C. § 1983 falls within the “expressly authorized” exception to the Anti-Injunction Act, thereby allowing federal courts in some circumstances to enjoin pending state court proceedings.
Referenced by (2)
Full triples — surface form annotated when it differs from this entity's canonical label.
Mitchum v. Foster, 407 U.S. 225 (1972)
→
fullCaseName
→
Mitchum v. Foster, 407 U.S. 225 (1972)
self-linksurface differs
ⓘ
this entity surface form:
Mitchum v. Foster