Taylor Morgan Dant petitioned the Fourth Circuit for an extraordinary writ under the All Writs Act, seeking to stop the enforcement of a North Carolina state court preliminary injunction. This state order prohibited her from practicing law until she satisfied certain conditions. Dant also asked the federal court to declare Chapter 84 of the North Carolina General Statutes unconstitutional and to prevent the North Carolina State Bar from enforcing those statutes outside North Carolina. She had previously filed a separate motion for a stay and had unsuccessfully challenged the injunction's enforcement in the United States District Court for the Middle District of North Carolina. Additionally, she had filed a lawsuit in the Eastern District of North Carolina, which she argued had not been unduly delayed.
The court began by clarifying that the All Writs Act is not a font of jurisdiction but rather a mechanism to issue writs necessary or appropriate in aid of the court's existing appellate jurisdiction. The court cited precedent establishing that it lacks jurisdiction to review state court preliminary injunctions directly. Because Dant's request to enjoin the state court order was not tied to any specific exercise of the Fourth Circuit's appellate jurisdiction, the court could not grant the relief. Furthermore, the court noted that Dant had other adequate means to obtain the relief she sought. Specifically, she could contest the application of the preliminary injunction in federal court through reciprocal disciplinary proceedings. The court also addressed her request to declare the state statute unconstitutional, noting that she failed to tether that request to any exercise of appellate jurisdiction and that the All Writs Act cannot serve as a basis for federal subject matter jurisdiction. Finally, the court independently concluded that Dant failed to show a clear and indisputable right to the requested relief, a necessary showing for mandamus or prohibition.
The petition for an extraordinary writ is denied, meaning the state court preliminary injunction prohibiting Dant from practicing law remains in effect. The Fourth Circuit did not rule on the merits of the constitutional challenges to North Carolina's attorney licensure statutes. Dant must pursue her challenges through other avenues, specifically by contesting the injunction's enforcement in federal district courts via reciprocal disciplinary proceedings or in the pending lawsuit in the Eastern District of North Carolina. The decision reinforces the limitation that the All Writs Act cannot be used to create jurisdiction where none exists or to bypass adequate alternative remedies.