Page:United States Reports, Volume 209.djvu/206

 forbid him from appSng to the courts of W in name of the State to tet the validity of the act in question? And why nmy not the Fedend court lay its hands even upon the jud of the state court itseft, whn,,ver it prooeed  the railway company ,ndr the stz law? The subject nmtter of these queoos has evklently been condered by this court, and the startlingo comequenc would result from ,m mmmtive answer to them have not been overlooked; for, in its opinion, I find thee obeervatiom: "It is proper to add that time right to enjoin an individual, even though & state official, from comrnnoJng Itits ulgier cumstance already stated, does not include the power to restrain a court from acting in any ce brought before it, either of a civil or crimin,d nature, nor does it incJude power to prevent any investigation or action by a grand jury. The latter body is part of the machinery of a orlmin! court, an injunction against a st&te court would he a violation o! whole scheme o! our government. If an injunction gainst an individuaJ is disobeyed, and he commence proceedin before , grand jury or in a court, such disobedience is persouaJ only, and the court or. jury can proceed without incurring any pen- alty on that account. The differehce between the power to enjoin an individual from doing certain things, and the power to enjoin courts from proceeding in their own wy to exercise jurisdiction is plain, and no pwer to do the latter exists be- cause of a power to do the former." If an order of the Fed- eral urt forbidding a state court or its grand jury from attempting to enforce a state enactment would be "a viola- tion of the .whole scheme of our government," it is difficult to perceive why an order of that court, forbidding the chief law officer and all the district attorneys of a State to represent it in the courts, in a particul case, and practically, in that way, closing the doors of the state court against the State, would not also be inconsistent with the whole scheme of our govemme,t, and, therefore, beyond the power of the court to make.

�