William O. Douglas

“ Judge Fairchild, concurring, believed that 28 U.S.C. § 2283 [2] prohibited the issuance of an injunction; Judge Doyle, dissenting, was of the contrary opinion. Judge Gordon found it unnecessary to reach that question, deciding rather to abstain in favor of the state criminal proceedings. ”

“ Appellants were protesting against American policy in Vietnam. The arrests were made in various buildings of the University of Wisconsin in which appellants and others had gathered to object to a chemical manufacturer of napalm being permitted to conduct employment interviews in the buildings. Appellants were arrested under a 'disorderly conduct' statute. We know that such statutes historically have been used in reprisal against unpopular groups or persons who espouse unpopular causes. ”

“ Appellants have alleged in their complaint facts surrounding their arrests which suggest harassment solely on account of the nature of appellants' protest. [5] Moreover, the criminal complaints filed against several of the appellants in the state court, and appended to the appellees' answer in this case, raise a strong suspicion that the arrests and prosecutions were carried out in bad faith. [6]
Where there are allegations of bad faith, harassment, and discrimination, critical evidence on the matter can only be drawn out upon cross-examination of the officials involved. ”