Locked up: Solitary confinement and prisoners’ rights

Federal judge in California to determine if long-term isolation violates Eighth Amendment protections

June 4, 2014 11:30AM ET

by Inside Story Team @AJInsideStoryAM

The common shorthand is SHU — security housing units — but prisoners call it a kind of "living death."

Solitary confinement is like the way it is in the movies: small, windowless cells, where prisoners are allowed out only an hour a day, in complete isolation from other prisoners. Authorities call it "administrative segregation" and say it's to keep the rest of the confined safe from dangerous prisoners.

Psychiatrists have called a cluster of symptoms that come from this kind of confinement "SHU syndrome." It includes memory loss, paranoia, hallucinations and anxiety.

Today in the U.S., there are a reported 81,000 inmates being held this way. In California, 200 inmates at the Pelican Bay facility have been cleared by a federal judge to bring a class-action lawsuit, alleging that solitary violates their rights under the Constitution. The Eighth Amendment forbids cruel and unusual punishment.

The state of California fought against allowing prisoners to have status as a class, but lost. Now a federal judge's ruling could end, or curtail, the use of solitary confinement.

What is the origin of solitary confinement, and how has it changed over the years?

What does 10 years in solitary confinement do to a prisoner?

Is administrative segregation the only way to keep order in prison?

We consulted a panel of experts for the Inside Story.

Anthony Graves

In 1992, Anthony Graves was wrongfully convicted of murdering a family of six. Initially sentenced to death, Graves spent 18 and a half years in prison -- over 10 of them in solitary confinement. Journalism students at St. Thomas University revealed irregularities in his prosecution that led to his exoneration in 2010. Today Graves has become an advocate for justice. He speaks worldwide about his case and others like it.

Inside Story: What kind of a psychological impact did you go through after spending a decade in solitary confinement?

Anthony Graves: I went through PTSD (Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder). I went through bouts of loneliness, paranoia. You name it: depression, hopelessness, fear. The list goes on and on.

Every one emotion that you go through when dealing with a situation like this -- you have to deal with it every day by yourself. It only breaks a man’s will; doesn’t do nothing to build them up.

Nothing good comes out of solitary confinement.

How did you transition back to normalcy of society?

I walked from solitary to street. I was just lucky to have a great support group around me that I used as my therapists. I was able to realize I had a group of great people around me to talk about my feelings.

I also started going around the country telling my story and encouraging people to get involved in this fight. I learned to use society as my therapist. Every time I go speak to a group of people I’m sharing my story things that I couldn’t tell in solitary confinement. This is my therapy for me. Otherwise, don’t know how I would’ve made a transition. And people opened up and allowed me to have my life back. I’m a lottery ticket here because most of the time guys come out totally damaged and can’t make the transition. I’m blessed. By no means am I the standard; I’m the exception.

Martin Horn

Martin Horn is Distinguished Lecturer in Corrections at the John Jay College, City University of New York and Executive Director of the New York State Sentencing Commission by appointment of the Chief Judge of the State of New York. Horn served as Commissioner of the New York City Department of Probation, beginning in 2002. In 2003, Mayor Bloomberg appointed him to simultaneously serve as Commissioner of the New York City Department of Correction. He held both positions until July 2009.

Inside Story: Your thoughts on the Pelican Bay case?

Martin Horn: This is a procedural decision. If there’s a decision on the class action matter it’ll provide officials around the country some guidance about what the courts think about this issue and what they deem to be constitutional or not. It is an area where the law is still murky. It will be a welcome thing if clarification is given.

Where is the use of solitary confinement heading?

There is no question in my mind that the extent to which it is used will decrease over time both because of the costs and because people recognize the severity of the penalty.

But there will always be some small number of prisoners for whom segregated confinement away from other prisoners is necessary. An example was when I was Secretary of Corrections in Pennsylvania, one inmate raped another one. The one who perpetrated the rape was already serving time for a rape committed 15 years earlierr. This was his second time. So the question then became, what would I tell the mother of the third inmate when it happens again? How do I protect other inmates from predatory individuals while at the same time treating him in humane manner? I think that there are ways to do it. I think our prison systems have not gotten there yet, but are moving in that direction.

I don’t believe in solitary confinement. It is always wrong. When an inmate is really cut off from all human contact, he is deprived of the opportunity to tell between day and night. You can separate an inmate from other inmates, but still ensure that he has compensatory contact with other humans, even if not inmates. Contact with staff, counselors, and therapists. If the inmate isn’t being punished, and is there just because he’s dangerous, there’s no reason why he can’t have radio or TV. No reason why he can’t have access to reading material. The punishment for an inmate’s misbehavior should be short-lived.

David Fathi

David Fathi is the Director of the American Civil Liberties Union National Prison Project, which brings challenges to conditions of confinement in prisons, jails, and other detention facilities and works to end US overreliance on incarceration. From 2007 to 2010 he was Director of the US Program at Human Rights Watch, which works to defend the rights of particularly vulnerable groups in the United States.

Inside Story: What does the Pelican Bay case signify?

David Fathi: Pelican Bay is really the deep end of solitary confinement in this country. The plaintiffs (more than 200) have all been in continuous solitary confinement. They have been living in a windowless concrete box for more than 10 years. They are asserting that those conditions, for that length of time, violate the 8^th amendment to the Constitution prohibiting cruel and usual punishment. If successful, the [case] will have major implications for solitary confinement in the U.S. No court has ever struck down solitary confinement.

Many courts have ruled that you can’t put people with mental illness in Secure Housing Units (they get sicker, mutilate themselves, commit suicide). For everyone else, without preexisting vulnerabilities, courts have upheld solitary confinement and said, yes, it is harsh, difficult to endure, but not unconstitutional.

In this case, if the prisoners were to win, it would cast a legal shadow over this practice that is more widespread in the U.S. than any other country in the world.

You have been litigating challenges to solitary confinement for more than a decade. What changes are you seeing in the use of this practice across the U.S.?

There was a huge growth in 1990s as states were building so-called supermax prisons, which are high-tech, modern, automated prisons built specifically and exclusively to hold prisoners in solitary confinement. In the 90s the use of solitary exploded. In the last few years, we’re seeing significant reform beginning to surface all around the country. As a result of litigation, but also as a result of other types of advocacy and increasing consciousness that this is a major human right issue and it should be taken seriously as such.