In the 1973 case of O'Shea, Magistrate, Circuit Court of Alexander County, Illinois v. Littleton et al., a group of African American residents in Cairo, Illinois filed a class-action lawsuit against local judicial officers alleging racial discrimination in setting bond amounts and sentencing for similar offenses compared to white defendants. The plaintiffs sought an injunction to prevent this alleged discriminatory conduct. However, the Supreme Court ruled that federal courts did not have jurisdiction over such cases as they involved ongoing state proceedings which should be addressed within the state court system first before seeking federal intervention under principles of equity and comity (respect between different jurisdictions). Furthermore, it was held that there was no standing because potential future injuries were speculative rather than imminent or concrete. Thus while acknowledging systemic racism may exist within certain institutions like judiciary at times; however individual instances need to be challenged on their own merits through appropriate channels.

In the dissenting opinion for O'Shea v. Littleton, Justice Douglas argued that the majority's decision was a departure from established precedent regarding federal court jurisdiction over constitutional claims. He contended that plaintiffs had sufficiently demonstrated a pattern of racial discrimination in bond-setting and sentencing practices to warrant federal intervention. The majority's insistence on specific instances of harm ignored systemic issues at play, he said, effectively denying relief to those who suffered most under discriminatory systems but could not point to an immediate injury. Furthermore, he disagreed with the majority’s view that abstention principles should apply because they would essentially force victims of ongoing civil rights violations into state courts where their complaints originated and were likely to be dismissed or overlooked.