Skip to main content
This work is funded by people like you. Donate ↗
Doctrine

Younger Abstention

If you have a pending state criminal case, the federal court will almost certainly refuse to hear your § 1983 case until it's over — a trap that catches many pro se plaintiffs.

Younger abstention is one of the most common ways pro se § 1983 cases get dismissed early. The rule is simple: if you have a pending state court criminal case, the federal court will refuse to interfere with it. Your § 1983 case will be dismissed or stayed until the state case is finished.

This comes from Younger v. Harris, 401 U.S. 37 (1971), where the Supreme Court held that federal courts should not enjoin ongoing state criminal proceedings except in extraordinary circumstances.

Why This Matters for You

Here’s the scenario that catches people: You get arrested. You believe the arrest violated your rights. You’re charged with a crime (resisting arrest, assault on an officer, disorderly conduct — the usual retaliatory charges). While the criminal case is pending, you file a § 1983 lawsuit.

The federal court will almost certainly dismiss or stay your § 1983 case. Not because your claims are bad — but because the criminal case is still going.

When Younger Abstention Applies

A federal court will abstain when three conditions are met:

  1. There’s an ongoing state proceeding — Your criminal case is still pending (not yet resolved by trial, plea, or dismissal).

  2. The state proceeding involves important state interests — Criminal prosecutions almost always qualify. So do some civil enforcement proceedings and certain administrative proceedings.

  3. You have an adequate opportunity to raise your federal claims in the state proceeding — You can raise constitutional defenses (like an illegal arrest or coerced confession) in the criminal case itself.

The Timing Trap

The critical question is: was the state case pending when you filed the federal case?

What to Do

Wait for the criminal case to finish

This is the safest approach. Once the criminal case is resolved — whether by acquittal, dismissal, or even conviction — Younger no longer blocks your § 1983 case.

Watch the statute of limitations

The danger of waiting is that the statute of limitations keeps running. In most states, § 1983 claims have a two- or three-year limitations period (borrowed from the state’s personal injury statute). If your criminal case drags on for years, your § 1983 claims could expire.

Some states toll the limitations period while criminal charges are pending. Others don’t. Research your state’s rule — this is critical.

File and accept a stay

If the statute of limitations is about to expire, you can file the § 1983 case to preserve your claims and accept that the court will likely stay (pause) it until the criminal case resolves. This protects your claims without running afoul of Younger. Make sure to tell the court you understand Younger may apply and request a stay rather than dismissal.

The narrow exceptions

Younger has exceptions, but they’re rarely successful:

Connection to Heck

Younger and the Heck doctrine are related but different:

Together they create a one-two punch: Younger blocks you while the case is active, and Heck can block you after a conviction. The path through is acquittal or dismissal of the criminal charges — which is why fighting the criminal case matters for your civil rights claims too.

Practical Advice

Don’t file your § 1983 case while criminal charges are pending unless you’re about to lose your statute of limitations. It wastes filing fees, and a dismissal — even one based on Younger — can be demoralizing and confusing.

Instead, use the time while the criminal case is pending to prepare. Gather evidence, file FOIA requests, research the officers’ history, study your circuit’s case law, and build your war room. When the criminal case resolves, you’ll be ready to file a strong § 1983 complaint immediately.

Have corrections or want to suggest a change? Let us know ↗