Chapter 8 Prisoners’ Rights

Era of Hands Off Litigation Ruffin v. Commonwealth (1871): slave of the state argument Coffin v. Reichard (1944): retention of rights argument (but limited effect) Hands off doctrine (4 reasons) Activist era Due deference era

Mechanics of Litigation (1 of 2) Damages (monies – punitive, actual) Injunctions Section 1983 Monroe v. Pape (1961) Person, under color of law, violates a constitutional right can be sued States and state agencies are immune Cities are not immune Negligence is not enough, must be deliberate indifference or intent Monetary damages, injunctive relief, declaratory

Mechanics of Litigation (2 of 2) Habeas Corpus Challenges the legality of confinement and conditions “The Great Writ” – “produce the body” Restricted by Stone v. Powell: Court held that those issues already fully considered by a state court could not be evaluated by a federal court Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act also limited petitions Criminal Remedies Difficult to employ

Americans With Disability Act Supreme Court said it did apply to prisoners Seek access and accommodation for disabilities

Prison Litigation Reform Act (1996) (1 of 2) Features include Specific requirements for findings Diminished authority of judges to order release of overcrowded prisons Short time limits on remedial orders Requires exhausting administrative remedies Granting state officials role in appointing special masters Requires that special master be paid for by court Requires that prisoners make partial payment of court costs

Prison Litigation Reform Act (1996) (2 of 2) Diminishes scope of available injunctive relief and restricts consent decrees Changed awarding of attorney fees Drastically reduced flow of inmate petitions

The Eighth Amendment: Corporal Punishment and the Use of Force Corporal punishment: Jackson v. Bishop (1968) Totality of circumstances cases Violence as part of list of conditions Use of force cases Deliberate infliction of gratuitous force is prohibited Other Application of the 8th Amendment Therapy: Knecht v. Gillman (1973) Involuntary administration of drugs: Washington v. Harper (1990)

Access to the Legal System Due process: protects against governmental error in the deprivation of life, liberty, or property Jailhouse Lawyers and Law Libraries Johnson v. Avery Bounds v. Smith Legal Correspondence Wolff v. McDonnell

First Amendment Rights (1 of 5) Press and Media Access Pell v. Procunier and Saxbe v. Washington Post Press have no greater right than anyone Houchins v. KQED Ability to restrict newspaper reporters extended to electronic media

First Amendment Rights (2 of 5) Correspondence and Censorship Procunier v. Martinez Looked at right of free person, must further governmental interest and be least restrictive Pell v. Procunier Relaxed standard, rational relationship test Turner v. Safley Allowed complete restriction of inmate-to-inmate, rational relationship test

First Amendment Rights (3 of 5) Correspondence and Censorship (cont.) Bell v. Wolfish Restricted publications Thornburgh v. Abbot Used Turner v. Safley test to determine if prohibition was allowable Simon and Schuster v. Members of New York State Crime Victims Board Son of Sam laws

First Amendment Rights (4 of 5) Visitation Some cases have categorized visitation as a privilege rather than right Prison officials can regulate visitation No right to conjugal visits

First Amendment Rights (5 of 5) Religious Practices O’Lone v. Shabazz – rational relationship standard RFRA, RLUIPA – government can’t impose “substantial burden” on one’s exercise of religion  Personal Appearance Courts typically do not interfere with prison regulations unless related to religion

The Right to Privacy The Right to Privacy Penumbral right Turner v. Safley – right to choose marriage protected No or few privacy rights; strip or body cavity search might be 8th amendment violation if harassment and excessive No right of privacy recognized to prevent cross sex supervision Dothard v. Rawlinson – held that sex was a bfoq because of conditions of the prison

Medical Treatment in Correctional Institutions 8th amendment is the source Lack of medical care can create unnecessary pain Test is deliberate indifference Estelle v. Gamble

Equal Protection Glover v. Johnson Lee v. Washington Women deserve equal vocational opportunities Lee v. Washington Court held there had to be immediate danger to justify racial segregation in prison

Procedural Due Process Wolff v. McDonnell Inmates deserved some due process before segregation and deprivation of good time Meachum v. Fano No right to any due process before transfer Sandin v. Conner Segregation not atypical, therefore no right to due process