Sign Isolated Confinement Bill
We urge Gov. Murphy to sign Assembly Bill 314, which would restrict the use of isolated confinement (commonly referred to as “solitary confinement”) in New Jersey prisons and jails, without delay.
July 05, 2019 at 10:00 AM
4 minute read
The Legislature has passed and presented to the governor Assembly Bill 314, which would restrict the use of isolated confinement (commonly referred to as “solitary confinement”) in New Jersey prisons and jails. We urge Gov. Murphy to sign the bill without delay.
There is a developing (and some might say developed) consensus among medical, psychological and legal experts that prolonged isolated confinement amounts to a form of torture. Whether or not it is judicially found to violate the cruel and unusual punishment clause of the Eighth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution, the Legislature wisely found that restrictions on its use were “consistent with the New Jersey Constitution, the laws and public policies of this State, the mission of the correctional system, evolving medical knowledge, and human rights standards of decency.”
The bill prohibits the use of isolated confinement unless there is reasonable cause to believe that the inmate or others would be at substantial risk of immediate, serious harm as evidenced by recent threats or conduct, and any less restrictive intervention would be insufficient to reduce that risk. With some exceptions, the bill provides that the correctional facility shall bear the burden of establishing this standard by clear and convincing evidence.
Inmates placed in isolated confinement are not to be held there for more than 20 consecutive days, or for more than 30 days during any 60-day period. The bill also prohibits the use of isolated confinement for members of vulnerable populations, including juveniles, those age 65 or older, persons with mental, developmental or physical disabilities, and pregnant women or those who have recently given birth, and perceived LGBT persons.
The bill defines isolated confinement as “confinement of an inmate in a correctional facility, pursuant to disciplinary, administrative, protective, investigative, medical, or other classification, in a cell or similarly confined holding or living space, alone or with other inmates, for approximately 20 hours or more per day with severely restricted activity, movement, and social interaction.” (It is therefore not limited to the literal definition of “solitary.”)
In 2016, Gov. Christie vetoed an essentially identical bill, in a veto statement that was regrettably short on fact and reason and long on political diatribe. Gov. Christie's claim was that “This bill seeks to resolve a problem that does not exist in New Jersey, because the Department of Corrections in this Administration does not utilize isolated confinement, as contemplated by the bill.” Gov. Christie further complained that “This is not a bill; it is ill-informed, politically motivated press release by a prime sponsor [former Sen. Ray Lesniak] who proves once again, that he has no idea about law enforcement or what is being done by the very department he proposes to further regulate.” We hope that Gov. Murphy takes a less jaundiced view of the Legislature's motives.
The contention that New Jersey's institutions do not currently make use of a form of segregation that would meet the definition of isolated confinement contained in the bill is, quite frankly, incredible. Whether one calls it “restrictive housing” (as the current DOC acting commissioner has somewhat defensively labelled it) or “administrative segregation,” “protective custody,” “temporary closed custody,” or “management control unit,” or some other euphemism, is simply an exercise in semantics. Prolonged use of isolation is a current fact of life in New Jersey institutions. While this bill would not eliminate the use of such techniques, it at least would hold corrections officials accountable to enforceable standards that protect against abuse. Such official accountability is a necessary component of any government restrictions on liberty, even when, and indeed perhaps especially when, the intended subjects are incarcerated inmates.
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2024 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllMeet the Judges: Senate Confirms 7 Superior Court Nominees in Final 2024 Session
3 minute readAG Had No Authority to Take Control of Paterson PD, Appellate Division Says
4 minute readTrending Stories
Who Got The Work
Michael G. Bongiorno, Andrew Scott Dulberg and Elizabeth E. Driscoll from Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr have stepped in to represent Symbotic Inc., an A.I.-enabled technology platform that focuses on increasing supply chain efficiency, and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The case, filed Oct. 2 in Massachusetts District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of Stephen Austen, accuses certain officers and directors of misleading investors in regard to Symbotic's potential for margin growth by failing to disclose that the company was not equipped to timely deploy its systems or manage expenses through project delays. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton, is 1:24-cv-12522, Austen v. Cohen et al.
Who Got The Work
Edmund Polubinski and Marie Killmond of Davis Polk & Wardwell have entered appearances for data platform software development company MongoDB and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The action, filed Oct. 7 in New York Southern District Court by the Brown Law Firm, accuses the company's directors and/or officers of falsely expressing confidence in the company’s restructuring of its sales incentive plan and downplaying the severity of decreases in its upfront commitments. The case is 1:24-cv-07594, Roy v. Ittycheria et al.
Who Got The Work
Amy O. Bruchs and Kurt F. Ellison of Michael Best & Friedrich have entered appearances for Epic Systems Corp. in a pending employment discrimination lawsuit. The suit was filed Sept. 7 in Wisconsin Western District Court by Levine Eisberner LLC and Siri & Glimstad on behalf of a project manager who claims that he was wrongfully terminated after applying for a religious exemption to the defendant's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The case, assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor, is 3:24-cv-00630, Secker, Nathan v. Epic Systems Corporation.
Who Got The Work
David X. Sullivan, Thomas J. Finn and Gregory A. Hall from McCarter & English have entered appearances for Sunrun Installation Services in a pending civil rights lawsuit. The complaint was filed Sept. 4 in Connecticut District Court by attorney Robert M. Berke on behalf of former employee George Edward Steins, who was arrested and charged with employing an unregistered home improvement salesperson. The complaint alleges that had Sunrun informed the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection that the plaintiff's employment had ended in 2017 and that he no longer held Sunrun's home improvement contractor license, he would not have been hit with charges, which were dismissed in May 2024. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer, is 3:24-cv-01423, Steins v. Sunrun, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Greenberg Traurig shareholder Joshua L. Raskin has entered an appearance for boohoo.com UK Ltd. in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The suit, filed Sept. 3 in Texas Eastern District Court by Rozier Hardt McDonough on behalf of Alto Dynamics, asserts five patents related to an online shopping platform. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, is 2:24-cv-00719, Alto Dynamics, LLC v. boohoo.com UK Limited.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250