What are the constitutional implications of a motion to restrain a police officer?

Before considering the constitutional aspects of the present controversy this court must direct its attention to the question of its jurisdiction to decide the matter. Plaintiffs have asserted two bases for the founding of jurisdiction in this court: first, federal question jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. 1331; and second, jurisdiction under the Civil Rights Act, 28 U.S.C. 1343 and 42 U.S.C. 1983. The request for a statutory three-judge court pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 2281 et seq. is inapposite in this case, since no action of either a state or local officer is sought to be restrained, and thus the specific requirements of

[338 F. Supp. 617]

that statute are not met. See Klim v. Jones, 315 F.Supp. 109 (N.D.Cal.1970).

[338 F. Supp. 617]