The Online Resource for Massachusetts Poverty Law Advocates

Prisoners Rights

All Colorado Jails Now Reject Federal Immigration Detainers

ACLU -- Criminal Justice News - Thu, 09/18/2014 - 12:00am

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
CONTACT: 212-549-2666, media@aclu.org

DENVER, Colo. – All of Colorado’s county jails have now confirmed to the ACLU of Colorado that they no longer honor detainer requests from federal Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE). 

ICE routinely issues detainer requests, or "ICE holds," to local jails. They ask sheriffs to continue holding a person in jail for up to five days past the time when the person would otherwise be released, so that ICE can decide whether to take that person into federal custody for a possible immigration violation. 

Between October 2011 and August 2013, ICE issued over 8,700 detainer requests to Colorado jails.

Last April, the ACLU of Colorado wrote to every sheriff in the state explaining that the additional detention amounts to a new arrest, which Colorado sheriffs lack the authority under Colorado law to make.  

Several sheriffs responded within days to the ACLU letter by announcing that they would no longer honor the holds. Over the following months, the ACLU of Colorado advocated through letters and phone calls to the remaining sheriffs to convince them to change their policies and stop imprisoning persons on the basis of ICE detainers.   

According to the ACLU, Colorado is now the first state in the country in which all county jailers have individually decided to reject detainer requests from ICE.  (See note below)

"Colorado sheriffs now agree that they have no legal authority to deprive persons of liberty—even for a few days—simply because ICE suspects an immigration violation," said Mark Silverstein, Legal Director of the ACLU of Colorado. 

"Nevertheless, some sheriffs are continuing to go out of their way to notify ICE of the upcoming release of a suspected immigration violator, in the hope that ICE will take custody as the person leaves the county jail,"  Silverstein added. "By doing so, these sheriffs  violate the spirit and intent of last year’s SB 90 repeal, which recognized that when local police get involved in enforcing federal immigration law, they risk undermining the trust between police and the large immigrant populations that they serve."

In its repeal of SB 90 during the 2013 legislative session, the Colorado legislature lifted requirements of local law enforcement to participate in enforcing federal immigration law in order to “enhance public safety by building trust between immigrant communities and local police” and to “ensure that local resources are focused on public safety issues instead of on immigration issues that are the responsibility of the federal government.”

In June, the ACLU of Colorado successfully negotiated a $30,000 settlement with Arapahoe County on behalf of Claudia Valdez, a woman who called for help in 2012 following a domestic violence incident, was arrested herself, and held for three days in the Arapahoe County Jail after a judge had ordered her release, due to a detainer request from ICE.  

[Note: The El Paso County Sheriff’s Office is an exception.  Pursuant to Section 287(g) of the Immigration and Nationality Act, ICE has trained certain deputies of the El Paso County Sheriff’s Office and delegated to them the authority to exercise the powers of federal immigration officers.] 

Additional Resources:

Visit the ACLU of Colorado’s End Immigration Detainers campaign page:
aclu-co.org/campaigns/end-immigration-detainers/

Read the ACLU letter sent to all Colorado sheriffs in April:
static.aclu-co.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/05/ACLU-Letter-to-Colorado-Sheriffs.pdf

Read Claudia’s Story: How a Domestic Violence Victim’s Call for Help Resulted in Three Days in Jail and Deportation Proceedings

Categories: Prisoners Rights

Court Sides with ACLU-NJ for Public to Have Access to Footage of Man Who Died in Custody in Monmouth Jail

ACLU -- Criminal Justice News - Tue, 09/02/2014 - 12:00am

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
CONTACT: 212-549-2666, media@aclu.org

The ACLU-NJ saw a victory for transparency in a federal court decision issued last week that rejected Monmouth County’s rationale for trying to seal a video recording of a man who died after being restrained at Monmouth County Correctional Institution. The United States District Court for the District of New Jersey sided with the position the ACLU-NJ put forth in an amicus brief for the case, Bornstein v. County of Monmouth.

"The court was correct to recognize that when a person dies while in the care of a public agency, the public deserves an explanation, not secrecy," said ACLU-NJ Deputy Legal Director Jeanne LoCicero, who wrote the ACLU-NJ’s amicus brief in the case. "The public’s interest in understanding the circumstances surrounding a person’s death in county custody far outweighs what the court identified as vague speculation about the potential harms that could come from releasing the footage."

In July 2010, Amit Bornstein died in Monmouth County Jail after having been booked for failure to appear in court. In the course of a wrongful death lawsuit following his death, Monmouth County sought to seal the previously publicly available security camera footage from the incident only after a third party tried to obtain copies. The footage showed the jail’s booking area and constant-watch area. In his ruling, U.S. Magistrate Judge Douglas E. Arpert pointed out the insufficiency of Monmouth County’s arguments that releasing the tape would jeopardize public safety generally, especially in contrast to the many arguments in favor of leaning toward public disclosure.

"Here, defendants have failed to identify the particularized harm that would result from the public disclosure of the security footage," said Judge Arpert’s Aug. 27 opinion, which also mentioned less restrictive alternatives Monmouth County could have sought to sealing the entire tape.

Categories: Prisoners Rights

ACLU of Louisiana Statement in Response to MCC Report on Orleans Parish Jail Size

ACLU -- Criminal Justice News - Wed, 08/27/2014 - 12:00am

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
CONTACT: 212-549-2666, media@aclu.org

NEW ORLEANS — Today the New Orleans Metropolitan Crime Commission has released a report advocating for building a larger Orleans Parish jail, recommending a final capacity of 2,500 beds. The ACLU of Louisiana is strongly opposed to such an increase, and remains in support of the cap of 1438 beds as adopted by the New Orleans City Council.    The inmate data from the MCC report, covering the first six months of 2014, shows a population of 1679 pretrial inmates. Over 400 of those are being held for minor, nonviolent offenses such as drug possession, probation and parole violations, and traffic offenses, and could easily be released with no risk to public safety. Many of the remaining pretrial detainees are only being held because of their inability to make bail. If they had been ruled a danger to public safety, bail would not have been set in the first place.    The practice of incarcerating nonviolent offenders is wasteful and senseless.  All of the evidence shows that incarcerating nonviolent offenders actually increases crime, by giving people criminal records and making it harder for them to obtain employment, and by forcing them into situations with more dangerous people.  It also destabilizes families, costs taxpayer funds in incarceration and in public assistance for the families while the person is incarcerated. The jail should be reserved for people who truly pose a threat to the community, rather than nonviolent offenders or people who are simply too poor to post bail.    The MCC report data was gathered over too short a period to be of real use in making recommendations on future jail  population trends. Instead of looking for ways to increase the jail size, what the parish should be doing is finding ways to reduce the jail population — as the ACLU and dozens of other advocacy groups have recommended all along. 
Categories: Prisoners Rights

Arizona Botches Execution, Imposes Cruel and Unusual Punishment on Joseph Wood

ACLU -- Death Penalty News - Wed, 07/23/2014 - 7:29pm

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
CONTACT: 212-549-2666, media@aclu.org

NEW YORK – At 3:49 PM MST, the state of Arizona executed Joseph Wood by lethal injection. This was the fifth execution in the United States since Clayton Lockett's horrific death in Oklahoma in April. Says Cassandra Stubbs, Director of the ACLU's Capital Punishment Project:

Today the state of Arizona broke the Eighth Amendment, the First Amendment, and the bounds of basic decency. Joseph Wood suffered cruel and unusual punishment when he was apparently left conscious long after the drugs were administered. According to his emergency papers filed by his attorneys, he was choking and snorting over an hour into the process. In its rush to put Mr. Wood to death in secret, Arizona ignored the dire and clear warnings from the botched executions of Oklahoma and Ohio. It's time for Arizona and the other states still using lethal injection to admit that this experiment with unreliable drugs is a failure. Instead of hiding lethal injection under layers of foolish secrecy, these states need to show us where the drugs are coming from. Until they can give assurances that the drugs will work as intended, they must stop future executions.

Categories: Prisoners Rights

ACLU-NJ Calls on New Jersey to Stop Sentencing Adolescents to Die in Prison

ACLU -- Criminal Justice News - Mon, 06/16/2014 - 12:00am

Motion Challenges De Facto Life Sentence Without Possibility of Parole for Man Convicted as Teenager

June 16, 2014

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
CONTACT: 212-549-2666, media@aclu.org

NEWARK – The ACLU-NJ on Thursday, June 12, called for the state of New Jersey to end the practice of giving what amounts to life sentences without the possibility of parole to children who have committed crimes. The filing asked the court to reduce the sentence for James Comer, who at age 17 was sentenced to serve 75 years in prison. Because Comer will be 86, well past the average lifespan for a person in his situation, when he will be eligible for his first parole hearing, he effectively has been sentenced to die in prison.

"It’s unconstitutional to sentence children to die in prison, but for untold numbers of people, this sentence is still a daily reality," said Lawrence S. Lustberg, of Gibbons P.C., who is representing Comer on behalf of the ACLU-NJ. "Certainly, not everyone who is sentenced to a prison sentence as a teenager should be released, but that’s not what we’re asking for. We’re asking that New Jersey recognize that every person sentenced for a crime committed as a child deserves a chance to show that he or she has changed and ultimately deserves to be released."

As a result of recent United States Supreme Court decisions, courts throughout the country, including in New Jersey, can no longer sentence minors to life imprisonment without the possibility of parole. However, James Comer was effectively sentenced to life in prison. Given the average American male lifespan of 77, and the even shorter lifespan of men serving time in prison, he most likely will not live to see his first parole hearing. 

Mr. Comer, now 31 years old, received his sentence in 2003 for his role in four robberies and a felony murder as a juvenile, with no consideration given to his youth at the time. Felony murder differs from murder in that if a murder is committed during the commission of a crime, everyone involved in that crime is deemed responsible for the murder. Although he was not the one who pulled the trigger, Comer received a longer sentence than his two accomplices, the person who was charged with the murder and the other who was an adult at the time. U.S. Supreme Court decisions have dictated that courts cannot give juveniles the harshest jail sentences, and indeed, they mandate states give people convicted of crimes as minors a "meaningful opportunity to obtain release," even if they never ultimately leave incarceration.

The ACLU-NJ's motion applies three U.S. Supreme Court decisions issued over the last 10 years that, combined, transformed the legal system’s treatment of young people. Together, those three cases established that the biological and psychological differences between childhood and adulthood entitle young people to treatment in sentencing that takes into account their unique capacity for change and rehabilitation. According to dozens of studies, the vast majority of adolescents who commit antisocial acts grow out of those inclinations; only five to ten percent of troubled adolescents become chronic offenders as adults. Further, it is impossible to predict which juvenile offenders will develop into relatively stable adults.

"Courts have finally recognized what parents have known for years: adolescents are fundamentally different than adults," said ACLU-NJ Senior Staff Attorney Alexander Shalom. "As such, the Constitution demands that they be treated differently. Whether New Jersey calls it life without parole or 75 years, the result is the same: children are being condemned to die in prison. The Constitution and common sense both demand an end to this cruel and unusual punishment."

The motion, captioned State of New Jersey v. James Comer, was filed June 12, 2014, in Essex County Superior Court. A hearing has yet to be scheduled.

Categories: Prisoners Rights

N.C. Has Little-Known For-Profit Prison for Immigrants; ACLU Investigation of Similar Prisons Reveals Abuse, Inhumane Conditions

ACLU -- Criminal Justice News - Tue, 06/10/2014 - 12:00am

Report Shows Federal Bureau of Prisons Incentivizes Mistreatment, Shields Immigrant Prisons from Scrutiny

June 10, 2014

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
CONTACT: 212-549-2666, media@aclu.org

WINTON, NC – Rivers Correctional Institution in Hertford County, North Carolina, is one of the 13 little-known CAR (Criminal Alien Requirement) prisons for immigrants in the United States. For a new report, Warehoused and Forgotten: Immigrants Trapped in Our Shadow Private Prison Industry, the American Civil Liberties Union and ACLU of Texas have investigated three CAR prisons in Texas run by GEO Group, the same private prison company that operates Rivers Correction Institution in North Carolina. The report reveals inhumane conditions and egregious mistreatment of immigrants awaiting deportation in prisons removed from the public eye that enrich the for-profit prison industry at tremendous cost to taxpayers.   The culmination of a four-year investigation, the report shows how the federal Bureau of Prisons incentivizes private prison companies to keep CAR prisons overcrowded and understaffed. The companies provide scant medical care that is often administered incorrectly, if delivered at all.   "At the CAR prisons we investigated, the prisoners lived day to day not knowing if their basic human needs would be met, whether they would get medical attention if they were hurt or ill," said Carl Takei, Staff Attorney at the ACLU’s National Prison Project. "The shameful conditions inside CAR prisons come from the government’s decision to allow the suffering inside these for-profit prisons. For instance, ten percent of the bed space in CAR prisons is reserved for extreme isolation — nearly double the rate in normal federal prisons. I spoke to prisoners who spent weeks in isolation cells after being sent there upon intake — simply arriving at prison was the reason why they were locked in a cell and fed through a slot for 23 hours a day."   According to the report, prisoners at the three GEO Group-run CAR prisons in Texas have reported that they are often denied necessary medical treatment, frequently put in isolation cells, and are forced to live in cramped, overcrowded conditions. A prisoner protest during the summer of 2013 at the GEO Group-operated Reeves County Detention Center reportedly ended with guards tear-gassing dormitories, shooting rubber bullets, locking down the entire facility, and punishing prisoners by putting them in extreme isolation. The improvements the prisoners had hoped to achieve – better medical care, more food, and less crowded living conditions – never came.   Read the report: http://www.aclu.org/CARabuse
Categories: Prisoners Rights

ACLU Finds Abuse, Inhumane Conditions, at Little-Known Prisons for Immigrants Run by Private Companies for Federal Government

ACLU -- Criminal Justice News - Tue, 06/10/2014 - 12:00am

Report Shows Federal Bureau of Prisons Incentivizes Mistreatment, Shields Immigrant Prisons from Scrutiny

June 10, 2014

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
CONTACT: 212-549-2666, media@aclu.org

NEW YORK – Today the American Civil Liberties Union and the ACLU of Texas released the report Warehoused and Forgotten: Immigrants Trapped in Our Shadow Private Prison Industry, a devastating look into the secretive "Criminal Alien Requirement" or "CAR" prisons for immigrants. In a four-year investigation of five CAR prisons in Texas, our researchers found pervasive and disturbing patterns of neglect and abuse of the prisoners–all non-citizens, most of whom have been convicted only of immigration offenses (such as unlawfully reentering the country).

"At the CAR prisons we investigated, the prisoners lived day to day not knowing if their basic human needs would be met, whether they would get medical attention if they were hurt or ill," said Carl Takei, Staff Attorney at the ACLU’s National Prison Project. "The Bureau of Prisons creates perverse incentives for the for-profit prison companies to endanger human health and lives."

In total, the 13 CAR prisons across the country hold more than 25,000 immigrants. Terri Burke, executive director of the ACLU of Texas, noted, "Every year we lock away tens of thousands of immigrants simply for unlawfully crossing the border. Why waste hundreds of millions in taxpayer dollars on inhumane prisons when we could use civil proceedings to process these cases? The CAR prisons come with a moral and economic price tag we can’t afford."

The report details the relationship between each of the three companies that run them–CCA, GEO Group, and MTC–and the federal Bureau of Prisons, including the ways that the Bureau and the companies work together to cover up the prisons’ conditions.

"Ten percent of the bed space in CAR prisons is contractually reserved for extreme isolation–nearly double the rate of isolation in normal federal prisons. I spoke to prisoners who spent weeks in isolation cells after being sent there upon intake–simply arriving at prison was the reason why they were locked in a cell and fed through a slot for 23 hours a day," said Takei. "The shameful conditions inside CAR prisons are a direct result of the government’s decision to allow suffering inside these for-profit prisons."

In Warehoused and Forgotten: Immigrants Trapped in Our Shadow Private Prison Industry, the ACLU and the ACLU of Texas tell the stories of prisoners who have been torn from their families by the extreme distances (often 1,000 miles or more) between a CAR prison and a prisoner’s hometown and by the high phone rates the private prison companies charge for phone calls.

Among its recommendations to the federal government, the report calls on the Bureau of Prisons to strengthen oversight of CAR prisons, end the use of contractually binding occupancy quotas for CAR prisons, and stop spending taxpayer money to shield basic information about private prisons from public disclosure. It also urges the Departments of Homeland Security and Justice to return immigration enforcement to civil immigration authorities.

The report is available here: www.aclu.org/CARabuse.

Categories: Prisoners Rights

33,000 Arizona Prisoners Now Can Sue State over Health Care, Solitary Confinement

ACLU -- Criminal Justice News - Thu, 06/05/2014 - 12:00am

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
CONTACT: 212-549-2666, media@aclu.org

SAN FRANCISCO – Today the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit unanimously ruled that the American Civil Liberties Union and the Prison Law Office can move forward with a lawsuit against the state of Arizona on behalf of all 33,000 prisoners in the state’s 10 prisons and all future prisoners. The ruling is critical to obtaining necessary systemic changes to conditions of confinement in the Arizona Department of Correction (ADC), and is a key victory for civil rights plaintiffs throughout the country.

"The State of Arizona has long ignored the basic needs of people confined in its prisons, including the constitutional mandate to provide adequate health care. Prisoners have suffered unnecessarily and even died while waiting for basic care," said David Fathi, Director of the National Prison Project at the ACLU, who argued the case for the prisoners in the Court of Appeals. "This ruling brings us closer to requiring the executive and legislative branches to end their neglect and indifference once and for all."

The groups filed the federal lawsuit in 2012, challenging years of inattention to the health needs of state prisoners and improper and excessive use of solitary confinement, resulting in serious harms and unnecessary deaths. Judge Neil V. Wake of the U.S. District Court in Phoenix certified the case as a class action in March 2013; today’s decision affirms that ruling.

The Court of Appeals listed failing to hire enough medical staff, failing to fill prescriptions, denying inmates access to medical specialists, adopting a de facto “extraction only” policy for dental issues, and depriving suicidal and mentally ill inmates access to basic mental health care.

The Court allowed the ACLU and the Prison Law Office to represent the prison population in Arizona as a class because all the prisoners shared a common interest in not being subjected to a "substantial risk of serious harm resulting from exposure to the [ADC’s] policies and practices governing health care." "The Court rejected the state’s arguments that the prisoners don’t have enough in common to warrant class action status, adding that the state had a "fundamental misunderstanding" of the law:

[G]iven that every inmate in ADC custody is likely to require medical, mental health, and dental care, each of the named plaintiffs is similarly positioned to all other ADC inmates with respect to a substantial risk of serious harm resulting from exposure to the defendants’ policies and practices governing health care.

In addition to seeking adequate medical, mental health, and dental care for Arizona’s prisoners, the lawsuit challenges the state prisons’ use of solitary confinement.

"Among our plaintiffs are the seriously mentally ill and other prisoners whose mental health has markedly deteriorated in solitary confinement – weeks, months, sometimes years of extreme isolation and sensory deprivation," said Don Specter, Director of the Prison Law Office. "Sometimes the damage is permanent. Arizona must stop this cruel and unusual punishment."

The case, Parsons v. Ryan, is scheduled to go to trial in October 2014.

In addition to the ACLU and the Prison Law Office, other attorneys on the case are Perkins Coie LLP, Jones Day, and the Arizona Center for Disability Law.

Categories: Prisoners Rights

Subscribe to Mass Legal Services aggregator - Prisoners Rights