Marcus & Millichap Real Estate Investment Services of Nevada, Inc., et al. v. Sharath Chandra, et al.

Sua sponte decision-making marks a departure from the normal adversarial process. For that reason, this Court has limited the federal courts’ discretion to resurrect unraised, nonjurisdictional defenses. Ordinarily, the courts have no power to raise such defenses on their own motion. But when a defense implicates comity interests, the courts have a measure of discretion. They can raise a comity-based defense sua sponte—but only if the defense was “‘inadverten[tly]’ overlooked” and, even then, only “when extraordinary circumstances so warrant.” Wood v. Milyard, 566 U.S. 463, 471 (2012). Like the defenses the Court canvassed in Wood, Younger abstention is a comity-based, nonjurisdictional doctrine. The question presented is: whether any standard should guide the courts of appeals’ discretion to raise Younger abstention sua sponte.