Stowe v. United States was a United States Supreme Court case that dealt with the issue of whether a federal court had the power to issue an injunction against a state court. The case arose when the plaintiff, Stowe, sought to enjoin the state court from proceeding with a case against him. Stowe argued that the state court lacked jurisdiction over the matter and that the federal court had the power to issue an injunction against the state court. The Supreme Court held that the federal court did not have the power to issue an injunction against the state court. The Court reasoned that the federal court lacked the power to interfere with the proceedings of a state court, as this would be an unconstitutional interference with the state's sovereignty. The Court further held that the federal court could not issue an injunction against the state court because the state court had jurisdiction over the matter. The Court's decision in Stowe v. United States established that the federal court lacked the power to issue an injunction against a state court. This decision has been cited in numerous cases since then, and it remains an important precedent in the area of federal-state relations.

In Stowe v. United States, the Supreme Court was tasked with determining whether a federal court had jurisdiction to hear a case involving an alleged violation of the Fugitive Slave Act of 1850. The majority opinion held that it did not have such jurisdiction and dismissed the case on those grounds. Justice Field dissented from this decision, arguing that Congress had clearly intended for federal courts to have exclusive jurisdiction over cases brought under the act and thus should be allowed to hear them in order to protect individuals' rights as guaranteed by law. He further argued that if state courts were permitted to decide these matters instead, they would likely be biased against claimants due to their own local laws or prejudices which could lead to unfair outcomes for those seeking justice under federal law. As such, he concluded that allowing only federal courts access was necessary in order ensure proper enforcement of national legislation protecting individual liberties regardless of location or other factors.