Human Rights Defense Center
DEDICATED TO PROTECTING HUMAN RIGHTS

October 18, 2019

Dear HRDC Supporter,
Every year we conduct an annual fundraiser in the fall because the income we receive
from subscriptions and book sales alone do not cover the expenses of our advocacy
work on behalf of prisoners, their families and the victims of police state violence and
exploitation. We receive very little in the way of foundation funding and rely on
individual donors – people like you – who can and do make a difference by donating
to the Human Rights Defense Center (HRDC).

HRDC Director Paul Wright

We have had a very busy year. In addition to publishing Prison Legal News and Criminal Legal News, we filed
a number of First Amendment censorship lawsuits around the nation; we continued to advocate for low phone
rates for prisoners and their families; we sued the Palm Beach County jail in Florida and ended the practice of
confining children in solitary confinement and depriving them of an education; we are publishing a new selfhelp book on prosecutorial misconduct and much, much more. Our social media presence on Facebook and
Twitter, as well as our daily e-newsletter, continues to grow as we expand our advocacy. We continue to run
the Campaign for Prison Phone Justice, Stop Prison Profiteering campaign and Prison Ecology Project.
But we still need to do more. We want to make sure that all our readers, especially those in prisons and jails,
can receive and read the magazines and books we publish and distribute. Since the very first issue of PLN was
published in May 1990, we have faced censorship by detention officials who are not pleased with our news
coverage of the criminal justice system. HRDC has consistently been in the vanguard fighting prison and jail
censorship to ensure that prisoners can receive our publications and reading materials from other publishers,
too. No one litigates more around censorship issues than we do, and no one does it more aggressively. Alas, it
is costly and expensive to fight these issues in court. Please make a donation to help support us in this struggle.
If you cannot make a donation at this time, please consider ordering or extending a PLN or CLN subscription,
or purchasing books from us and encouraging your friends and family to do so, too.
In February 2019, the HRDC litigation team went to trial in Arkansas in a lawsuit against the Baxter County
jail over a policy that banned all books, magazines, newspapers and letters sent to prisoners, at a facility where
there was no access to TV or books. The federal district court ruled against us and held that isolating prisoners
to a degree not even seen in countries like North Korea is constitutional. We have since appealed to the Eighth
Circuit Court of Appeals. HRDC will stand up for free speech anywhere in the U.S., whether we are suing jails
in Cook County, Chicago or in Los Angeles – some of the largest in the world – or the Baxter County jail in
Arkansas. We are currently suing the prison systems in Michigan, Illinois, Arizona and Florida, too. Everyone
has a right to read, including prisoners, and we consistently advocate for that right.
P.O. Box 1151, Lake Worth, FL 33460
(561) 360-2523
Email: pwright@prisonlegalnews.org

But we are doing a lot more than just fight for freedom of the press and the First Amendment. Earlier this year,
HRDC attorneys won a lawsuit against Palm Beach County officials for placing developmentally disabled
juvenile prisoners in solitary confinement cells for up to 22 hours a day and depriving them of educational
programs. All of the children being subjected to such horrific conditions of confinement had some degree of
intellectual or developmental disability. All were racial minorities. HRDC ended that practice. Further, we
continue to litigate a wrongful death suit on behalf of Vincent Gaines, a mentally disabled African American
prisoner who was starved to death in a Florida state prison. We are also suing private health care company
Corizon for its role in allowing Mr. Gaines to die in his isolation cell.
HRDC’s attorneys are known for filing cutting-edge lawsuits that challenge unconstitutional censorship and
lack of transparency by law enforcement agencies. Further, our advocacy and litigation have long targeted
industries that profit from mass incarceration. Class-action suits filed by HRDC against debit card companies
that prey on prisoners and arrestees being released from prisons and jails seek to bring accountability to an
unscrupulous industry that exists solely to exploit poor people enmeshed in the criminal justice system.
We are able to challenge these abuses due to the donations we receive from people like you. HRDC is a lean,
efficient operation. Every dollar you donate to HRDC will go further and get more bang for the buck than with
any other criminal justice reform organization. With your support, we have been able to build a formidable legal
and advocacy team that can take on large, complex campaigns and litigation on a variety of criminal justice
issues. The next time the impoverished mother of a developmentally disabled child calls us and asks for help
because her son is in solitary confinement, we want to be able to do something about it and not say “sorry, we
lack the resources to help you.” Your contributions allow us to take those calls and swing into action.
So just how much does HRDC do with its limited resources? Our annual report for 2018 is enclosed and gives
a detailed overview of the depth and breadth of our activities. We don’t have room to include every time we are
mentioned in the media, and only list the conferences where HRDC staff are speakers. What do your donations
help support? Any time a reporter or a media outlet contacts HRDC for a quote, background information or an
interview, one of our staff members knowledgeable about criminal justice reform issues will promptly respond.
When conferences or events need speakers, we are there. In short, supporting HRDC helps change the media
narrative on the American police state and our nation’s dysfunctional criminal justice system.
Our publishing activities are self-explanatory. You are receiving this because you subscribe to PLN and/or CLN.
We don’t need to tell you about the quality of our reporting, which brings you news that no one else does or
can. Your support helps to make that happen. For 29 years, we have consistently invested the funding we
received into building HRDC from an all-volunteer operation when it started in my Washington state prison
cell in 1990 to the professional organization it is today. The support and donations that readers like you have
provided to HRDC are readily apparent in our annual reports, which show how far we’ve come since we
published the first hand-typed, 10-page issue of Prison Legal News.
In addition to our advocacy activities, our litigation docket is included in our annual report. From our First
Amendment censorship cases to our public records and FOIA litigation, we are fighting for free speech and
government transparency everywhere – from Florida to California, and from Arizona to Illinois. Our lawsuits
against debit card companies seek to end the financial exploitation of prisoners upon their release.
Please donate whatever you can today, and consider becoming an HRDC sustaining donor. We are in this fight
for the long haul (almost three decades so far), and need your support to continue fighting! We leverage our
limited resources by working with other organizations and attorneys to be able to successfully take on important
criminal justice issues. Your support makes this possible; no one else does so much with so little. Please donate
to help us continue fighting for justice on every level. If you don’t, who will?
In Struggle,
Paul Wright
Executive Director, HRDC

HRDC 2019 ANNUAL FUNDRAISER
Please Help Support
the
Human Rights Defense Center!
The Human Rights Defense Center (HRDC), which publishes Prison Legal News and Criminal Legal News, cannot
fund its operations through subscriptions and book sales alone. We rely on donations from our supporters!
HRDC conducts only one annual fundraiser; we don’t bombard our readers with donation requests, we only
ask that if you are able to contribute something to our vital work, then please do so. Every dollar counts and
is greatly appreciated and will be put to good use. No donation is too small (or too big)!

Where does your donation go? Here’s some of what we’ve done in the past year:


We prevailed in a lawsuit against the Palm Beach County Sheriff’s Office in Florida for holding
juvenile offenders in solitary confinement and denying them educational programs. The case settled
in November 2018, and resulted in a number of reforms at the jail.



HRDC filed First Amendment censorship lawsuits against the Michigan DOC, the Marshall County
Jail in Tennessee and the Forrest County Jail in Mississippi; we also settled a censorship case against
the Cook County Jail in Chicago, and a federal court ruled in our favor on liability in a suit against
the Southwest Virginia Regional Jail Authority in Virginia.



As part of the Campaign for Prison Phone Justice, we submitted comments to the FCC opposing a
proposed merger between two of the nation’s largest prison telecoms, Securus and ICSolutions. The
FCC then recommended denial of the merger, and it was withdrawn in April 2019.

With your help we can do much more! Please send your donation to:
Human Rights Defense Center, P.O. Box 1151, Lake Worth Beach, FL 33460
Or call HRDC’s office at 561-360-2523 and use your credit card to donate.
Or visit our websites at prisonlegalnews.org or criminallegalnews.org, and click on the “Donate” link.

You can mail a check or money order to:
Human Rights Defense Center, P.O. Box 1151, Lake Worth Beach, FL 33460
Or call HRDC’s office at 561-360-2523 and use your credit card,
Or visit HRDC online at www.humanrightsdefensecenter.org and click on the donation link.
Remember — the Human Rights Defense Center (HRDC) is a
Section 501(c)(3) non-profit organization, and donations are tax deductible!

Yes! I want to help support HRDC — here is my special donation of:
_____$25 _____$50 _____$100 _____$250 ____$500 _____$1,000 _____ Other
Note: If you don’t want a book premium for your donation of $100 or more, we’ll donate a copy of
The Habeas Citebook or Prison Education Guide to a prison library on your behalf.

♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦

Credit card donors please fill out the following form
 I want to make a one-time contribution of $____________ to HRDC, charged to my credit card!
 I want to contribute a fixed amount to HRDC each month! I authorize the Human Rights Defense
Center to charge $______________ on my credit card every month until I give notice to stop, or until my
total donation amount of $______________ has been charged to my card, whichever comes first.
Print Name on Card: ______________________________________________________
Card Number: ___ ___ ___ ___ - ___ ___ ___ ___ - ___ ___ ___ ___ - ___ ___ ___ ___
Expiration Date: ____/____/____

Billing Zip Code for Card: _________

Security Code: ______

I authorize the Human Rights Defense Center to charge a total of $______________to my credit card,
which matches the instructions indicated above.
Cardholder Signature: _________________________________________ Date: ___________________
HRDC is a 501(c)(3) non-profit, and your donation is tax deductible to the extent allowed by law.
HRDC protects the privacy of its donors, and their names are not reported in our publication or on
our website.
♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦♦
Please complete all applicable information to ensure delivery of any donation gifts. Thank you!
Name _____________________________________________________ Title _____________________
Organization __________________________________________________________________________
Address ____________________________________________________ Suite ____________________
Address ______________________________________________________________________________
City _______________________________ State _____________ Zip __________________________
______________________________________________________________________________________________
Human Rights Defense Center, P.O. Box 1151, Lake Worth Beach, FL 33460 • (561) 360-2523 • fax (866) 735-7136
www.humanrightsdefensecenter.org • www.prisonlegalnews.org

HUMAN
RIGHTS
DEFENSE
CENTER

2018 Annual Report
__________________________________________________________

CONTENTS
NOTABLE DEVELOPMENTS

1

THE MAGAZINES
PRISON LEGAL NEWS
CRIMINAL LEGAL NEWS

1
1
3

BOOK DISTRIBUTION

4

BOOK SALES
BOOK PUBLISHING

4
4

HRDC WEBSITES

5

HRDC STAFF

5

HRDC BOARD OF DIRECTORS

5

FUNDING IN 2018

7

ACTIVISM & ADVOCACY

7

MEDIA OUTREACH

11

LITIGATION PROJECT

15

FIRST AMENDMENT CENSORSHIP CASES
PUBLIC RECORDS AND FOIA CASES
CONSUMER CLASS-ACTIONS
PRISON CONDITIONS / DEATH CASES
AMICUS BRIEFS
OTHER ACTIVITIES
CAMPAIGN FOR PRISON PHONE JUSTICE
STOP PRISON PROFITEERING CAMPAIGN
PRISON ECOLOGY PROJECT
CORECIVIC / GEO GROUP RESOLUTIONS
FOIA PROJECT
HRDC SOCIAL MEDIA
COLLABORATIONS & AFFILIATIONS
LOOKING FORWARD: GOALS FOR 2019

15
21
23
25
26
27
27
27
28
28
29
29
29
30

Human Rights Defense Center - Annual Report 2018

[1]

NOTABLE DEVELOPMENTS
The Human Rights Defense Center, a non-profit 501(c)(3) organization founded in 1990, is the
parent organization of Prison Legal News (PLN) – our award-winning 72-page monthly
publication that covers prison and jail-related news and court rulings – and Criminal Legal News
(CLN), a 48-page monthly publication focused on policing and criminal law, which celebrated
its first full year of publishing in December 2018.
During the past year, HRDC continued to lead the Stop Prison Profiteering campaign and
Campaign for Prison Phone Justice, two national projects that seek to stop the financial
exploitation of prisoners and their families, as well as the Prison Ecology Project. We also
launched a new Freedom of Information Act project, headed by staff attorney Deb Golden, to file
and litigate FOIA and public records requests nationwide.
HRDC had several notable litigation successes during 2018, including settlements in First
Amendment censorship cases against jails in Columbus County, North Carolina; Greene County,
Ohio; Los Angeles County, California; and Knox County, Tennessee. HRDC also settled a FOIA
case against the federal Bureau of Prisons. Further, we filed our first conditions of confinement
lawsuit on behalf of juvenile offenders at a jail in Palm Beach County, Florida who were placed
in solitary confinement and denied educational programs, and HRDC is representing the mother
of a mentally ill Florida state prisoner who starved to death in a wrongful death suit.

THE MAGAZINES

PRISON LEGAL NEWS
HRDC’s flagship monthly print publication, Prison Legal News, reports on
prison, jail and criminal justice-related news and court rulings. PLN
celebrated its 28th anniversary on May 1, 2018, continuing its distinction
of being the longest-running independent magazine produced by and for
prisoners. PLN’s contributing writers are all current or former prisoners,
including Kevin Bliss, Dale Chappell, Matt Clarke, Derek Gilna, Gary
Hunter, Ed Lyon, David Reutter, Joe Watson, Mark Wilson and Christopher
Zoukis. PLN published the following cover stories in 2018:


January: “They Thought They were Going to Rehab. They Ended up in Chicken Plants,”
by Amy Julia Harris and Shoshana Walter with Reveal, exposed the exploitation of a
substance abuse rehab facility that served as an alternative to prison but required forced
labor for the benefit of private companies.



February: In an article originally appearing in The Pitch, “Prison Broke: The Missouri
Department of Corrections Can’t Escape its Own Worst Habits,” Karen Dillon outlined
the sexual and racial harassment that many Missouri DOC workers have been forced to
endure from their colleagues.



March: “From Cages to the Community: Prison Profiteers and the Treatment Industrial
Complex,” by Christopher Zoukis, examined private prison companies that are seeking to
rebrand and expand into community corrections and reentry services.

Human Rights Defense Center - Annual Report 2018

[2]



April: Candice Bernd, Zoe Loftus-Farren and Maureen Nandini Mitr addressed harmful
environmental conditions in correctional facilities in “America’s Toxic Prisons: The
Environmental Injustices of Mass Incarceration,” originally published as a collaborative
project by Earth First Journal and Truthout.



May: Matt Clarke’s article, “In the Eye of the Storm: When Hurricanes Impact Prisons
and Jails,” described the extent to which prisoners are affected by hurricanes, and how
corrections officials often neglect to ensure their safety.



June: In “While in Custody: The Fight to Stop Jail Deaths in Washington State,” Ciara
O’Rourke with the Seattle Met reported on the death of one of many Washington
prisoners – a frustratingly preventable death caused by medical negligence and neglect.



July: Matt Clarke and Christopher Zoukis cited multiple incidents of human rights abuses
in “Litigation Heats Up Over Extreme Temperatures in Prisons, Jails,” in regard to
prisoners’ suffering and in some cases dying due to extremely hot temperatures in
unconditioned correctional facilities.



August: In “Prison Food and Commissary Services: A Recipe for Disaster,” David M.
Reutter examined the privatization of prison food services, which has led to poor quality
meals, protests by prisoners and other problems.



September: Alan Prendergast with Westword looked at H Unit, the most restrictive unit
in the Bureau of Prison’s ADX facility in Colorado, in “At the Federal Supermax, When
Does Isolation Become Torture?”



October: In “Washington State: Jail Phone Rates Increase as Video Replaces In-Person
Visits,” Steve Horn and Iris Wagner extensively analyzed the high cost of phone calls
and video calls in Washington State jails, with a detailed review of county-by-county
rates and “commission” kickbacks from telecom companies.



November: Jimmy Jenkins with KJZZ.org discussed persistent problems with medical
care within the Arizona Department of Corrections in his article, “On the Inside: The
Chaos of Arizona Prison Health Care.”



December: In “Censorship in Prisons and Jails: A War on the Written Word,”
Christopher Zoukis reported on often arbitrary restrictions on books and other reading
materials faced by prisoners, contrary to their First Amendment rights.

PLN works hard to maintain first-rate advertisers that offer quality products and services of
interest to prisoners and their families. We have a target of around 25% advertising content to
75% news, legal and editorial content.
Prison Legal News has thousands of subscribers in all 50 states and approximately 70%
of our subscribers are incarcerated. PLN’s readership is much higher than the number of
subscribers; our most recent reader survey, conducted in August 2016, indicated that over 90
percent of subscribers share their issues of PLN – most often with more than 10 other people.

Human Rights Defense Center - Annual Report 2018

[3]

PLN continued to receive a substantial amount of mail throughout 2018, mostly from
prisoners, with many requesting legal assistance or sending news clippings, court documents and
other items of interest. Regretfully, due to this large amount of mail, PLN is unable to respond to
the vast majority of people who contact us.

CRIMINAL LEGAL NEWS
HRDC launched a new monthly publication in December 2017, Criminal
Legal News. CLN focuses on criminal law and the persistent expansion of
the police state in America; it covers issues that include police and
prosecutorial misconduct, habeas corpus relief, ineffective assistance of
counsel, sentencing, the militarization of police, the surveillance state,
junk science and wrongful convictions, false confessions, eyewitness misidentification, paid/incentivized informants, Fourth Amendment search
and seizure violations, Miranda warnings and due process rights, as well
as criminal case law and court rulings. CLN had its first full year of
publication in 2018, and published the following cover stories:


January: Matt Clarke reported on corruption in forensic testing in criminal cases and the
daunting reality of evidence tampering in “Faulty Forensics and Lab Scandals Highlight
Urgent Need for Enforceable Scientific Standards.”



February: Derek Gilna probed the outcomes of misguided drug policies in the United
States in his article, “Have the Wars on Drugs and Terror Transformed the U.S. into a
Police State?”



March: “Civil Asset Forfeiture: Unfair, Unjust, Un-American,” by Christopher Zoukis,
focused on the growing problem of state and federal agencies being incentivized to seize
(and pocket) assets from private citizens under the pretense of criminal activity.



April: In his article “Indigent Defense in America: An Affront to Justice,” Christopher
Zoukis examined the highly variable quality of – and access to – legal representation for
poor defendants.



May: Iris Wagner reviewed the deliberate concealment of the origins of evidence in
“Parallel Construction: Building Criminal Cases Using Secret, Unconstitutional
Surveillance,” and called for increased accountability to reform the norms that currently
facilitate these unconstitutional practices.



June: “Sex Offender Registries: Common Sense or Nonsense?” by Christopher Zoukis
examined the ineffectiveness of sex offender registration databases and the necessity of
creating a new system to better serve both the public and sex offenders.



July: In his article “Cell-Site Simulators: Police Use Military Technology to Reach out
and Spy on You,” Christopher Zoukis explained how the police can track cell phones and
obtain information without the permission of the user, an increasingly common (and
unregulated) practice with chilling implications for privacy.

Human Rights Defense Center - Annual Report 2018

[4]



August: “Courts Have Made Social Media a Landmine for Defendants. Could it Change
Soon?” by Steve Horn addressed the divergent expectations and realities of privacy on
social media platforms, and described cases where information from social media
platforms has been used as evidence in criminal cases.



September: Christopher Zoukis highlighted discrepancies in DNA tests in “Secondary
DNA Transfer: The Rarely Discussed Phenomenon That Can Place the Innocent (and the
Dead) at a Crime Scene They’ve Never Been To.”



October: In “From Abuse of the Body to Abuse of the Mind: Police Use Psychologically
Coercive Interrogation Techniques to Produce False Confessions,” Christopher Zoukis
examined wrongful convictions and the corrupt tactics that police investigators use to
manipulate defendants into making false confessions.



November: Steve Horn scrutinized infringements on First Amendment rights in his
article, “Documents Reveal How Law Enforcement Partners with Private Companies to
Surveil Schools.”



December: “Eyewitness (Mis)Identification in the Criminal Justice System: Powerful,
Persuasive, and Problematic,” by Christopher Zoukis, reviewed the prevalence and bases
for eyewitness misidentification, as well as recommendations for reform.

BOOK DISTRIBUTION
BOOK SALES
HRDC offers a wide variety of books of interest to prisoners, including hard-to-find titles on
criminal justice topics as well as self-help legal resources designed to help prisoners who are
litigating their own appeals and lawsuits. HRDC distributed 4,595 books in 2018, including over
1,000 books sent to prisoners at no cost.
BOOK PUBLISHING
PLN Publishing seeks to produce quality, nonfiction reference books that
provide prisoners and their advocates with reliable, timely and accurate
information they can use to help themselves and improve their lives. We
offer the highest author royalties in the publishing industry. Thus far, PLN
Publishing has published five titles, including the Prisoners’ Guerrilla
Handbook to Correspondence Programs in the U.S. & Canada, 3rd Ed.;
The Habeas Citebook: Ineffective Assistance of Counsel, 1st and 2nd Eds.;
the Prison Education Guide; and the Disciplinary Self-Help Litigation
Manual.
PLN Publishing began work on two new book projects in 2018 that were still pending at
the end of the year, including The Habeas Citebook: Prosecutorial Misconduct and a revised
version of With Liberty for Some: 500 Years of Imprisonment in America.

Human Rights Defense Center - Annual Report 2018

[5]

HRDC WEBSITES
We continued to expand HRDC’s online presence in 2018 by increasing our content, including
articles, court pleadings and publications. PLN’s website (www.prisonlegalnews.org) receives
over 100,000 visitors each month and is a significant resource for media and community outreach and public education on criminal justice-related issues.
At the end of 2018, PLN’s site had over 22,000 articles and 16,000 cases in its searchable
database. The publications section had more than 7,000 reports, audits and other documents,
while our brief bank contained over 9,500 legal pleadings – including complaints, motions,
briefs, verdicts, judgments and settlements. Some content was shared with CLN’s website,
www.criminallegalnews.org.
HRDC also maintains an organizational site, www.humanrightsdefensecenter.org, as well
as separate websites for our various projects, including www.stopprisonprofiteering.org,
www.prisonphonejustice.org, www.prisonecology.org, www.privateprisonnews.org and a new
site on wrongful convictions that we created in 2018, www.wronglyconvicted.org.

HRDC STAFF
HRDC’s executive team during 2018 included Paul Wright, executive director and editor of PLN
and CLN; Alex Friedmann, associate director and PLN’s managing editor; chief financial officer
and advertising director Susan Schwartzkopf; and our general counsel and litigation director
Sabarish Neelakanta.
Additional staff included Richard Resch, managing editor of CLN; staff attorneys Daniel
Marshall, Masimba Mutamba and Deb Golden; Frances Sauceda, office manager; Judith Cohen,
advertising coordinator; Panagioti Tsolkas, special projects coordinator; Robert Pew, legal
assistant; paralegals Kathy Moses and Tina Livingston; public records manager/development
coordinator Michelle Dillon; and office assistants Shauna Coolican and Latoria Bowers.
Several new employees joined HRDC in 2018, including office assistant Alexis Montag,
editorial assistant Betty Nelander and social media specialist Julia Ragsdale (who previously
volunteered for HRDC in our Seattle office).
We also want to recognize our valued and dedicated volunteers and interns, including
Janet Callis, Melanie Campbell, Mackenzie Russell, Connor Whitney, Manola Secaira, Isabel
Place, Madison Meuler and Tessa Aiken, as well as our work study students: Iris Wagner, Sara
Molaie, Eugene Choi, Kyla Evans, Nikita Minkin, Alexandra Portillo and Courtney Jackson.

HRDC BOARD OF DIRECTORS
Michael Avery – Professor Michael Avery has practiced as a civil rights and criminal defense
attorney, representing clients in jury trials and arguing cases in federal and state appellate courts,
including the U.S. Supreme Court. He joined the Suffolk Law faculty in 1998, where he was a
tenured professor teaching Constitutional Law, Evidence and related courses. He retired from
Suffolk in 2014 and is now a professor emeritus. He graduated from Yale College in 1966 and
Yale Law School in 1970. He received an M.F.A. from Bennington College in January 2017.
Prof. Avery was President of the National Lawyers Guild from 2003 to 2006. He was the editor
and a contributing author to We Dissent, a critical review of civil liberties and civil rights cases
from the Rehnquist Court, and co-author of The Federalist Society: How Conservatives Took the

Human Rights Defense Center - Annual Report 2018

[6]

Law Back from Liberals. He is co-author of Police Misconduct: Law and Litigation, a leading
treatise on civil rights law, co-author of the Handbook of Massachusetts Evidence, the leading
treatise on that subject, and the author of the Glannon Guide to Evidence, as well as several law
review articles.
Dan Axtell (Vice President) – Mr. Axtell is a computer professional and human rights activist.
Rick Best (Treasurer) – Rick Best is a not-for-profit consultant working primarily in financial
management. He also practices law and was part of the legal team that litigated civil rights
violations arising out of mass arrests during the 2004 Republican National Convention in New
York City. He served two years in federal prison for draft resistance during the Vietnam War and
was executive director of the National Lawyers Guild from 1992 to 1995.
Bell Chevigny – Bell Chevigny is professor emerita of literature at Purchase College, SUNY.
She has served on the PEN Prison Writing Program for around twenty years, three of them as
chair. The Prison Writing Program offers an annual literary competition to incarcerated men and
women nationwide. With the support of a Soros Senior Justice Fellowship, she compiled Doing
Time: 25 Years of Prison Writing, a PEN American Center Prize anthology. She has written
extensively about incarcerated authors and their literary works.
Howard Friedman (Board Chairman) – Howard Friedman is the principal in the Law Offices of
Howard Friedman P.C., a civil litigation firm in Boston, Massachusetts. Howard’s practice
emphasizes representing plaintiffs in civil rights cases, particularly those involving law
enforcement, including police misconduct and prisoners’ rights litigation. Howard began his
career in 1977 as a staff attorney at the Prisoners’ Rights Project in Boston. He is the past
President of the National Police Accountability Project of the National Lawyers Guild and
served as chair of the Civil Rights Section of the Association of Trial Lawyers of America (now
the American Association for Justice). He is a graduate of Northeastern University School of
Law and Goddard College.
Judy Greene – Judy Greene is a criminal justice policy analyst and the founding director of
Justice Strategies. Previously she was the recipient of a Soros Senior Justice Fellowship. She has
served as a research associate for the RAND Corporation, as a senior research fellow at the
University of Minnesota Law School and as director of the State-Centered Program for the Edna
McConnell Clark Foundation. From 1985 to 1993, she was Director of Court Programs at the
Vera Institute of Justice.
Sheila Rule – Sheila Rule is co-founder of the Think Outside the Cell Foundation, which works
to end the stigma of incarceration and offers programs for those who live in the long shadow of
prison. She began working with this population in 2001 when she joined the Riverside Church
Prison Ministry in New York City and was asked to correspond with incarcerated men and
women. Inspired by their potential, she started the publishing company Resilience Multimedia
to publish books that present a fairer image of those who have spent time behind bars. She is also
on the board of Good Shepherd Services, a leading New York social services agency serving
vulnerable children and families. She was a journalist at The New York Times for more than 30

Human Rights Defense Center - Annual Report 2018

[7]

years, including seven years as a foreign correspondent in Africa and Europe, before retiring so
she could embrace her current work.
Peter Sussman – Peter Sussman is an author and freelance journalist, and was a longtime editor
at the San Francisco Chronicle. He has received numerous awards for his advocacy of media
access to prisoners. He is the co-author, with prison writer Dannie M. Martin, of Committing
Journalism: The Prison Writings of Red Hog, and wrote a chapter on the media and prisons in
Invisible Punishment: The Collateral Consequences of Mass Imprisonment, edited by Marc
Mauer and Meda Chesney-Lind.
Bill Trine – Bill Trine has been a trial lawyer for the people for 50 years, and a past president
and founder of Trial Lawyers for Public Justice (TLPJ), past president of the Colorado Trial
Lawyers Association and on the board of other trial lawyer groups. Bill was the senior partner in
his own law firm for many years until his retirement. He started a national prison project through
TLPJ in 2005 and has been plaintiffs’ counsel in prison-related cases for several years, including
numerous lawsuits arising out of a riot at a privately-operated prison in Crowley County,
Colorado. Bill helped start the Gerry Spence Trial Lawyers College in 1994 and has been on the
faculty and a member of the College’s board since its beginning.
Paul Wright (President) – Paul Wright is the editor of Prison Legal News and Criminal Legal
News, and founder of the Human Rights Defense Center. He is responsible for editorial content
and HRDC’s advocacy, outreach and fundraising efforts. Paul was incarcerated for 17 years in
Washington State and released in 2003.
Ethan Zuckerman – Ethan Zuckerman directs the MIT Center for Civic Media, and is an
Associate Professor of the Practice in Media Arts and Sciences at MIT. He is the author of
Rewire: Digital Cosmopolitans in the Age of Connection.

FUNDING IN 2018
In 2018, HRDC was funded primarily through earned revenue from its publishing and litigation
projects, as well as book sales and individual donations. We also received grant funding from
Borealis Philanthropy, the Sonya Staff Foundation, and the Laura and John Arnold Foundation.
HRDC performs annual financial audits, and our Form 990s are available for review.

ACTIVISM & ADVOCACY
HRDC staff engaged in a number of activism and advocacy efforts in 2018, to effect reform in
our nation’s justice system and to educate the public, policymakers and the mainstream media
about criminal justice and prison-related issues. Those efforts included:


HRDC signed on in support of a report by Face To Face Knox, released on January 29,
2018, concerning the end of in-person visitation at the jail in Knoxville, Tennessee,
which was replaced by video calling. The report was titled “To What End?: Assessing the
Impact of the Knox County Jail’s Ban on In-Person Visits.”

Human Rights Defense Center - Annual Report 2018

[8]



On February 3, 2018, HRDC executive director Paul Wright spoke at Temple L’Dor VaDor in Boynton Beach, Florida about the Human Rights Defense Center and the Florida
Department of Corrections. The gathering was for local area progressives, and presided
over by Rabbi Barry Silver.



HRDC staff attorney Deb Golden spoke at the William & Mary Journal of Women and
the Law Symposium on February 9, 2018. She presented on a panel titled “Women and
Prison,” along with Gail Deady and Behailu Weldeyohannes.



On February 12, 2018, Deb Golden met with officials at the National Center for Youth
Law to advise them on issues related to federally-contracted child immigration detention.



HRDC associate director Alex Friedmann presented at the Volunteer State Community
College in Gallatin, Tennessee on February 21, 2018, as part of a series of speakers on
criminal justice topics. He discussed the private prison industry; HRDC social media
director Monte McCoin also attended and spoke at the event.



On February 22, 2018, Paul Wright appeared via Skype with Michelle Dietche’s law
school class at the University of Texas to discuss public records requests and data
requests that can be used to determine safety levels in prisons and jails.



HRDC submitted a letter to U.S. Senator Patty Murray and Rep. Susan A. Davis on
February 23, 2018, in support of legislation they had introduced that would restore Pell
grant eligibility for incarcerated students (S.1136 and H.R.2451).



In March 2018, Deb Golden spoke to students at the Capital City Public Charter School,
a local D.C. high school, about women in prison and their treatment and conditions of
confinement.



Paul Wright spoke on two panels at the 2018 Free Movement Conference in Wilmington,
North Carolina on March 23, 2018, about prison phone justice and HRDC’s Stop Prison
Profiteering campaign. HRDC was the program track leader for the criminal justice mass
incarceration part of the conference.



On April 10 and 16, 2018, Alex Friedmann provided public
testimony before the Tennessee House Government Subcommittee, concerning the sunset provision for the Tennessee
Department of Correction and issues related to the Trousdale
Turner Correctional Center, operated by CoreCivic (formerly
Corrections Corporation of America).



HRDC submitted comments on April 13, 2018 in opposition to a rule change by the
Florida Department of Corrections that would have curtailed visitation at state prisons.
HRDC also contacted all of our incarcerated Florida subscribers and urged them and their
families to file comments, and we filed a renewed comment on the same topic on May
30, 2018. The FDOC’s rule change was subsequently withdrawn.

Human Rights Defense Center - Annual Report 2018

[9]



On April 24, 2018, Alex Friedmann attended GEO Group’s annual shareholder meeting
by phone, presented his shareholder resolution (see page 28), and questioned GEO board
members about the huge disparity in CEO vs. average worker pay and the $1.00/day
wages paid to immigrant detainees at GEO-operated ICE facilities.



From April 25 to 27, 2018, HRDC general counsel and litigation director Sabarish
Neelakanta participated in the Ninth Circuit Corrections Summit Working Group in Santa
Ana, California, and discussed improvements to policies and procedures within the
California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation.



Monte McCoin and Alex Friedmann attended CoreCivic’s annual shareholder meeting in Nashville on
May 10, 2018, and questioned the company’s board
members. Monte asked how prisoners’ families can get
answers or responses from CoreCivic, while Alex asked
about the disparity in wages for CoreCivic employees
vs. prison guards in the public sector, as well as the
62:1 ratio for the company’s CEO executive compensation to median employee wages.



On May 18, 2018, Alex Friedmann presented on a panel at Detention Watch Network’s
12th National Member Conference in Aurora, Colorado. He spoke about privatization
of services at the Eloy Detention Center in Arizona, including medical care, food,
transportation, money transfers and phone services, plus ACA accreditation. The other
panelists were Grassroots Leadership director Bob Libal and Jamie Trinkle with Enlace.



HRDC signed on to a June 27, 2018 joint letter to U.S. Senators in support of the Private
Prison Information Act (S.1728).



Alex Friedmann contributed an article on the private prison industry to the Verdict, a
publication of the National Coalition of Concerned Legal Professionals, that ran in the
July 2018 issue.



On July 17, 2018, Alex Friedmann contacted all members of the Metro Council in
Nashville, Tennessee in support of a resolution to divest Metro pension funds from
private prison stock. The resolution subsequently passed.



Monte McCoin presented at the National Council for Incarcerated and Formerly
Incarcerated Women and Girls’ Town Hall convergence in Nashville, Tennessee on July
21, 2018. She discussed the expanding impact of the school-to-prison pipeline on young
girls and their communities, as well as the impact of disenfranchisement and prison
gerrymandering on the nation’s larger electoral picture.



On September 8, 2018, Sabarish Neelakanta spoke on a panel at the 2018 ACLU Lawyers
Conference titled “Prevailing over Prisons: Litigation and Policy Strategies for Reform,”
held in Delray Beach, Florida.

Human Rights Defense Center - Annual Report 2018

[10]



In September 2018, Deb Golden volunteered for a project of the American Constitution
Society and the D.C. Bar for Constitution Day, to teach a 3rd/4th grade class about
governmental separation of powers. She spoke with a class at the Burrville Elementary
School in the District of Columbia.



On September 18, 2018, HRDC staff writer Steve Horn participated in a Q&A session
with the student newspaper staff at Palomar College in San Diego, California as part of
one of their journalism classes. Horn, a guest speaker, also took part in a dialogue with
students in the class regarding prison conditions.



Alex Friedmann hosted an author tour/book signing event at the
Parnasus Book store in Nashville, Tennessee on September 22,
2018 for Mother Jones senior reporter Shane Bauer, for his newlyreleased book “American Prison.”



On September 25, 2018, HRDC’s William A. Trine Law Fellow &
staff attorney Masimba Mutamba participated as a roundtable
mentor at the Florida Association for Women Lawyers’ annual
Constitution Day event at Florida Atlantic University.



Alex Friedmann provided input for a report by Arabella Advisors, “Understanding and
Confronting the Prison-Industrial Complex: An Overview for Philanthropists,” that was
released in October 2018. He was thanked in the credits.



From Oct. 4 to 7, 2018, Deb Golden spoke at the Prisoners’ Advocates Conference at the
Sturm College of Law in Denver. She was on panels titled “Starting Out as a Prisoners’
Rights Lawyer: What You Need to Know” and “Prisoners’ Rights Litigation 101.”



HRDC signed on to an October 5, 2018 letter to members of the U.S. Senate in support of
the Inmate Calling Technical Corrections Act (S.2520), which would grant authority to
the FCC to ensure just and reasonable charges for prison and jail phone calls and
advanced communications services.



On October 12, 2018, Deb Golden presented at the 5th Annual Lara D. Gass Symposium
on Women in the Law at the Washington and Lee School of Law. She spoke on a panel
titled “On the Inside: Efforts to Improve Women’s Prison Conditions.”



HRDC signed on to an October 15, 2018 letter to the D.C. Council in favor of the Fare
Evasion Decriminalization Act (Bill 22-408), which would make subway fare evasion a
civil offense punishable by a fine rather than a criminal offense.



Alex Friedmann contributed to an October 19, 2018 report on private prisons by CQ
Researcher, published by SAGE Publications, and was quoted throughout the report.



Alex Friedmann contributed to a Prison Policy Initiative report on how to shorten
excessive prison sentences, titled “Eight Keys to Mercy.” The report, released in
November 2018, mentioned him in the credits.

Human Rights Defense Center - Annual Report 2018

[11]



On November 4, 2018, Alex Friedmann participated in a podcast, Decarceration Nation,
produced by Josh Hoe; he spoke about tablets, phone calls and video visits in jails.



Alex Friedmann took part in a video conference with a journalism class at Ohio
Wesleyan University on November 7, 2018, by invitation of Prof. Shari Stone-Mediatore,
and spoke about prison censorship, prisoners’ rights and the justice system. The class was
on “Free Speech in Theory & Practice: Mobilizing Voices across Prison Walls.”



On November 8, 2018, Paul Wright and HRDC staff attorney Daniel Marshall spoke at
Yale Law School and gave a presentation on prisoners’ First Amendment rights.



Deb Golden was a speaker at an American Constitution Society symposium at William &
Mary Law School on November 9, 2018; she spoke on a panel titled “The Dawn of a
New Jurisprudence? Jails, Prisons, and Equal Rights.”



Deb Golden participated in a November 15, 2018 roundtable discussion convened by the U.S. Attorney’s Office for
the Eastern District of Virginia, about the civil rights of
people with disabilities. She discussed HRDC’s lawsuit
filed on behalf of juveniles held in solitary confinement at
the jail in Palm Beach County, Florida.



On November 27, 2018, Sabarish Neelakanta was a panelist on an ACLU Juvenile Justice
Campaign webinar titled “Advocating for Youth Charged as Adults,” which was broadcast to ACLU members across the country. He highlighted the legal issues and facts in
the juvenile solitary confinement case filed by HRDC in Palm Beach County, Florida.



On December 15, 2018, Monte McCoin spoke at an event hosted by the No Exceptions
Prison Collective in Nashville, Tennessee on the motivation to move from concerned
citizen to advocate. She offered tips for effective communication strategies at a
Community Lobbyist Training to discuss criminal justice reform bills, prisoners’ rights
litigation and advocacy at both legislative and administrative levels.

MEDIA OUTREACH
HRDC’s efforts to educate, advocate and litigate around prisoners’ rights continued to receive
national and international media attention in 2018. Coverage included newspapers, magazines,
television, radio and online news outlets. HRDC staff members were interviewed and quoted, our
advocacy work was profiled and our award-winning publications were cited. HRDC also issued
seven press releases during 2018. The following is a partial list of the media coverage that
HRDC, Prison Legal News and Criminal Legal News received in 2018, excluding articles about
our litigation. Links to these articles and many others are on our website under “In the News.”


Throughout 2018, HRDC executive director Paul Wright, and occasionally associate
director Alex Friedmann and staff attorney Deb Golden, appeared on “Loud and Clear,”
a program of Sputnik News radio hosted by Brian Becker and John Kiriakou.

Human Rights Defense Center - Annual Report 2018

[12]



Paul Wright was quoted in a January 9, 2018 article in The New Yorker regarding book
restrictions imposed on New York state prisoners, and related issues over censorship by
prison officials.



Alex Friedmann was quoted on January 18, 2018 in an article published by the Metro
Times about Michigan’s problematic experience with privatized prison food services.
“The emphasis is not on safety or security. It’s not on adequate, nutritious meals. It’s on
how to make a profit for the company,” he said.



Paul Wright was included in a January 19, 2018 article by The Guardian titled, “The
book that changed my life ... in prison.” He discussed reading The State and Revolution
by Vladimir Lenin while incarcerated in Washington State.



On February 2, 2018, Paul Wright appeared on a CBS12 news report about a federal
court ruling in a lawsuit over voting rights for ex-prisoners in Florida.



A February 6, 2018 Forbes article repeatedly quoted Paul Wright on problems with
telecom companies providing prison video and phone services.



Alex Friedmann was interviewed by a Spanish language radio station, Catalunya Radio,
about private prisons on February 19, 2018.



The Washington Post quoted Paul Wright in a March 16, 2018 article about immigrant
detainees being forced to work for $1.00 a day.



Paul Wright was quoted several times by CBS News in an April 19, 2018 article about
violence and contraband cell phones in South Carolina prisons.



Alex Friedmann was quoted in an Associated Press article about private prisoner transportation services, on April 24, 2018.



Paul Wright was quoted by the ABA Journal in a
May 2018 article concerning the excessive costs
of prison phone calls.



Paul Wright was interviewed by Spanish language
station Univision on June 8, 2018, concerning the
placement of asylum seekers in prison.



On June 12, 2018, The Crime Report reported on the censorship of PLN by the Florida
Department of Corrections in an article titled, “The Silencing of Prison Legal News.”



A letter to the editor by Alex Friedmann, in rebuttal to an editorial extolling the virtues of
private prisons, was published by the Daily Collegian, a publication of Pennsylvania
State University, on June 19, 2018.

Human Rights Defense Center - Annual Report 2018

[13]



Alex Friedmann was quoted in a June 22, 2018 article by CNBC on privately-operated
immigrant detention centers.



Reason included Prison Legal News in its July 2018 review of “controversial and oftcensored publications.”



Paul Wright appeared in the CNN documentary “American Jail,” produced by Roger
Ross Williams, on July 1, 2018.



Paul Wright appeared on American Freedom Radio and spoke about mass incarceration
on July 3, 2018.



Correctional News quoted Alex Friedmann on July 11, 2018 in an article on the private
prison industry, titled “Is ‘Doing Time’ Money for Private Prisons?”



On July 17, 2018, Alex Friedmann was quoted in a Healthline.com article on hepatitis C
treatment for prisoners. “While the cost of treatment is expensive, the cost of
nontreatment, which not only results in prisoner deaths but also in the spread of the
disease both within prisons and outside, is also expensive,” he noted.



A July 18, 2018 article in U.S. News and World Report quoted Paul Wright about tablet
computers being made available to prisoners, with fee-based content. “This is just a
means to monetize human contact,” he said.



On July 23, 2018, Paul Wright participated in a
panel discussion on radio show Felony Miami
and spoke about problems with private prisons.



Paul Wright appeared on the Washington, D.C.
WPFW radio show “Crossroads” on July 24,
2018, and discussed the financial exploitation of
prisoners and their families.



Oxygen.com mentioned PLN in a July 24, 2018 article about prison overcrowding and
the differences between minimum- and maximum-security facilities.



Paul Wright was interviewed by Spanish language channel Univision on August 2, 2018,
concerning the sexual abuse of immigrant children held in U.S. detention centers.



On August 12, 2018, HRDC staff attorney Daniel Marshall was interviewed by radio
station Felony Miami about medical care in prisons and jails.



Paul Wright was interviewed by RT (Russian Television) on August 23, 2018, regarding
a national prison strike in the U.S. over inhumane conditions and slave labor.

Human Rights Defense Center - Annual Report 2018

[14]



Paul Wright was quoted by The New York Times on August 26, 2018 concerning the
national prison work strike. “Prisoners aren’t oblivious to their reality,” he said. “They
see people dying around them. They see the financial exploitation. They see the injustice.”



Newsweek quoted Alex Friedmann on August 28, 2018 in an article about prison slave
labor. “Prisons cannot operate without prison labor,” he noted. “They would simply be
unaffordable.”



An August 28, 2018 article by the Freedom of the Press Foundation profiled PLN, HRDC
and our censorship litigation against the Florida Department of Corrections.



A September 11, 2018 article in The Crime Report quoted Paul Wright regarding the
national prison work strike that occurred that month.



HRDC staff attorney Deb Golden was quoted by The Virginian-Pilot on September 18,
2018 in an article about the increasing number of women prisoners in Virginia.



An editorial by Paul Wright, in opposition to a Florida ballot
initiative called Amendment 4 to restore voting rights to exprisoners after they serve their sentences, was published by the
Tallahassee Democrat on September 19, 2018. HRDC opposed
Amendment 4 because it excluded former prisoners convicted of
homicide and sex offenses, and since the ballot initiative would
amend Florida’s constitution, it would be almost impossible to
restore voting rights in the future to those who were excluded.
“All the talk of Amendment 4 being about second chances,
redemption and reintegration into the community rings hollow
when it excludes certain former prisoners,” Paul wrote.
Amendment 4 was approved by voters in November 2018.



Criminal Legal News was mentioned in a September 28, 2018 article by Courthouse
News on criminalization and draconian sentencing laws.



Talking Points Memo profiled HRDC’s opposition to Amendment 4 in Florida in an
October 1, 2018 article that quoted Paul Wright.



On October 13, 2018, Deb Golden was quoted by the Virginian-Pilot in an article about a
prisoner’s death due to the flu and MRSA at the Virginia Correctional Center. “She
shouldn’t have died of that,” Deb said. “That’s totally treatable.... That’s outrageous.”



On December 7, 2018, Paul Wright was interviewed by “The Big Picture” program on
RT (Russian Television), about the for-profit prison industry; he was on the show again
on December 21, and spoke about the First Step Act after it was signed into law by
President Trump.

 Alex Friedmann was quoted by The Intercept in a December 22, 2018 article about how
the First Step Act could benefit private, for-profit prison companies.

Human Rights Defense Center - Annual Report 2018

[15]

Litigation Project
HRDC’s legal team in 2018 consisted of general counsel and litigation
director Sabarish Neelakanta, staff attorneys Masimba Mutamba, Daniel
Marshall and Deb Golden, paralegals Kathy Moses and Tina Livingston,
and legal assistant Robert Pew. HRDC litigates censorship cases, public
records lawsuits, prison conditions and wrongful death cases, as well as
class-action suits against correctional facilities nationwide. HRDC
remains at the forefront of prisoners’ civil rights litigation in the United
States. Additionally, all of HRDC’s cases have a public education and
media component to complement our criminal justice reform advocacy
work.
Our litigation continued to generate news media coverage in
2018, including articles in the Dayton Daily News, The Palm Beach
HRDC general counsel
Post, The Crime Report, Bloomberg, Courthouse News, the Tallahassee
Sabarish Neelakanta
Democrat, Reason, The Seattle Times, Associated Press, Miami New
Times, Orlando Sentinel, Charlotte Observer, Santa Fe New Mexican, CBS and USA Today.
HRDC’s litigation docket included the following cases; those that were both filed and
resolved during 2018 are listed in the “Cases Resolved” sections. HRDC captions some of its
censorship cases under the name of its flagship monthly publication, Prison Legal News.
I. FIRST AMENDMENT CENSORSHIP CASES
HRDC’s First Amendment litigation seeks to protect the rights of prisoners and their
correspondents to receive books, magazines and letters free from government censorship. The
first issue of Prison Legal News was banned by corrections officials on the pretext that it posed a
security risk. In fact, PLN and many of HRDC’s publications and books have been targeted for
censorship because they highlight constitutional abuses, misconduct and corruption within
prisons and jails. However, these unconstitutional attempts to thwart HRDC’s mission to inform
and educate prisoners about their legal rights have largely been unsuccessful when challenged in
court. HRDC has a lengthy track record of prevailing in First Amendment cases.
The determined effort by HRDC’s legal team to challenge such censorship and ensure
that corrections officials do not violate the First Amendment has been one of the hallmarks of
our litigation project. Even though prisons and jails have adopted new and creative ways to
hinder access to constitutionally-protected publications, HRDC continues to fight censorship and
expand the jurisprudence on the First Amendment rights of prisoners and those who correspond
with them.
A. New Cases Filed in 2018
1. Human Rights Defense Center v. Director John R. Baldwin (Illinois DOC) – On Feb.
2, 2018, HRDC filed suit against the Illinois Department of Corrections for censorship
of Prison Legal News and the failure to provide due process notice of the censorship
decisions. In late March 2018, HRDC also filed a motion for a preliminary injunction
seeking to end the censorship of Prison Legal News while the case is pending. On April
19, 2018, the district court initiated a settlement conference to resolve the issues raised in
HRDC’s complaint and preliminary injunction motion, and to schedule periodic status

Human Rights Defense Center - Annual Report 2018

[16]

conferences throughout the remainder of 2018 to allow the parties to identify and correct
problems at various prison mailrooms concerning the delivery of HRDC publications. In
November 2018, another lawsuit brought on behalf of the publication Black and Pink,
based on similar censorship and due process violations, was re-assigned to the same
district court. As of the end of 2018, counsel for HRDC and Black and Pink have been
investigating censorship at prison mailrooms and providing reports to the court. HRDC is
represented by general counsel and litigation director Sabarish Neelakanta, and staff
attorneys Daniel Marshall and Masimba Mutamba, as well as attorneys Marc Zubick,
Malorie Medellin, Jason Greenhut, Kristopher Jensen and Sarah Wang with the law firm
of Latham & Watkins, LLP, and Nicole Schult, Elizabeth Mazur and Alan Mills with the
Uptown People’s Law Center.
2. Human Rights Defense Center v. Board of County Commissioners of the County of
Santa Fe (NM) – On April 2, 2018, HRDC filed suit in federal court against Santa Fe
County for the unlawful censorship of Prison Legal News and several books distributed
by HRDC, including The Habeas Citebook: Ineffective Assistance of Counsel, Protecting
Your Health and Safety, and the Prisoners’ Guerilla Handbook: A Guide to
Correspondence Programs in the United States & Canada. Further, the censorship of
the publications at the county jail was implemented without any due process notice or
opportunity to appeal, prompting HRDC to seek a preliminary injunction. After the filing
of the lawsuit, the jail revised its policies to allow receipt of HRDC publications and
ensure that any censored mail provides due process protections. The defendants then
moved to dismiss HRDC’s injunctive and declaratory claims on grounds of mootness,
which was granted by the district court on June 21, 2018. The court then dismissed the
individual defendants in August 2018. At the end of the year, the parties were engaged in
settlement discussions concerning the remaining claims for damages and attorneys’ fees.
HRDC is represented by general counsel and litigation director Sabarish Neelakanta, and
staff attorneys Daniel Marshall and Masimba Mutamba; by Laura S. Ives of Kennedy
Kennedy Ives; and by Bruce E.H. Johnson with Davis Wright Tremaine, LLP.
3. Human Rights Defense Center v. Board of County Commissioners of the County of
San Miguel (NM) – On April 17, 2018, HRDC filed suit against San Miguel County for
censoring books and magazines mailed to prisoners at the county jail, and sought a
preliminary injunction to prevent future censorship and provide for due process
protections. The jail immediately changed its mail policy to allow for the receipt of all
HRDC publications and ensure due process in the event that mail is censored. On August
20, 2018, the court found that the policy revisions mooted HRDC’s claims for injunctive
and declaratory relief, and dismissed those claims and granted qualified immunity to
the individual defendants. At the close of 2018, the parties were involved in settlement
negotiations over attorneys’ fees, costs and damages. HRDC is represented by general
counsel and litigation director Sabarish Neelakanta, and staff attorneys Daniel Marshall
and Masimba Mutamba; by Laura S. Ives of Kennedy Kennedy Ives; and by Bruce E.H.
Johnson with Davis Wright Tremaine, LLP.
4. Human Rights Defense Center v. Sheriff Irwin Carmichael (Mecklenburg County,
NC) – On April 24, 2018, HRDC sued the Sheriff of Mecklenburg County for the
unlawful censorship of HRDC’s magazines, books and correspondence, and for failing to
provide due process notice of censorship decisions. HRDC further sought a preliminary

Human Rights Defense Center - Annual Report 2018

[17]

injunction preventing the jail from continuing to censor HRDC’s mail without due
process. Prior to a hearing on the preliminary injunction, in June 2018, Sheriff Irwin
Carmichael entered into a consent decree that required explicit due process notice for
censorship of any mail, and allowed the delivery of HRDC publications. At the end of
2018, the defendants had filed a motion primarily seeking to dismiss the individual
claims against Sheriff Carmichael, which remained pending. HRDC is represented by
general counsel and litigation director Sabarish Neelakanta, and staff attorneys Daniel
Marshall and Masimba Mutamba; by Paul Cox and Jonathan Sasser with Ellis & Winters
LLP; and by Bruce E.H. Johnson with Davis Wright Tremaine, LLP.
5. Human Rights Defense Center v. Board of County Commissioners (Pontotoc, OK) –
On May 9, 2018, HRDC filed suit over the censorship of books at the Pontotoc County
Jail in Oklahoma. HRDC had sent 30 books to prisoners at the jail, which were all
censored without due process notice. HRDC also sought preliminary injunctive relief.
The defendants changed their mail policy to ensure that HRDC and other publishers can
send books to prisoners at the jail without censorship or lack of due process notice.
Consequently, the preliminary injunction motion was withdrawn and the parties entered
into settlement negotiations. As of the close of 2018, the parties were working on the
final contours of a settlement agreement. HRDC is represented by general counsel and
litigation director Sabarish Neelakanta, and staff attorneys Daniel Marshall and Masimba
Mutamba, and by Robert D. Nelon with the law firm of Hall Estill.
6. Human Rights Defense Center v. Southwest Virginia
Regional Jail Authority (VA) – On March 28, 2018, HRDC
filed suit and sought a preliminary injunction against the
Southwest Regional Authority, which consists of four
detention facilities, for censoring HRDC’s books, magazines
and correspondence without due process. The parties fully
briefed the preliminary injunction motion and an evidentiary
hearing was scheduled for June 25, 2018. The district court
took testimony from jail officials and HRDC’s expert, John
Clark, concerning the defendants’ claims that HRDC’s mail
was a security threat. Following that hearing, the court issued
an order and preliminary injunction requiring delivery of
HRDC’s publications and the implementation of due process
HRDC staff attorney
Daniel Marshall
protocols. The parties then filed a joint Rule 26(f) report and
a scheduling order was entered by the court. As of the end of
2018, the parties were engaged in discovery. HRDC is represented by general counsel
and litigation director Sabarish Neelakanta, and staff attorneys Masimba Mutamba and
Daniel Marshall; by Thomas Hentoff, Sean Douglass and Chelsea Kelly with Williams &
Connolly; and by Bruce E.H. Johnson with Davis Wright Tremaine, LLP.
7. Human Rights Defense Center v. Forrest County (MS) – HRDC and the Mississippi
Center for Justice filed suit in federal court on October 24, 2018 against Forrest County,
Mississippi, Sheriff Billy McGee and staff members at the Forrest County jail. The
complaint noted that “most books and most publications are banned” at the facility, and
“For the most part, prisoners are allowed to read only the Bible and sometimes other

Human Rights Defense Center - Annual Report 2018

[18]

Christian publications.” Jail officials censored issues of PLN as well as books and copies
of court rulings sent to prisoners, and did not provide due process notice or any
opportunity for HRDC to appeal or challenge the censorship. The case remained pending
at the end of the year. HRDC is represented by general counsel and litigation director
Sabarish Neelakanta, and staff attorneys Masimba Mutamba and Daniel Marshall; by
Beth L. Orlansky, advocacy director with the Mississippi Center for Justice; and by Rob
McDuff, who directs MCJ’s George Riley Impact Litigation Initiative.
B. Cases Still Pending in 2018
1. Human Rights Defense Center v. Sheriff Brad Lewis (Baxter County, AR) – On
August 21, 2017, HRDC filed suit challenging a postcard-only policy at the Baxter
County Jail in Arkansas. After briefing on both sides concerning HRDC’s motion for a
preliminary injunction and the defendants’ motion to dismiss, the court denied the
preliminary injunction, denied dismissal on grounds of standing and granted the dismissal
of certain individual defendants. The parties continued engaging in discovery in 2018,
including an inspection of the jail’s mailroom and operations. By the end of the year, the
parties had filed cross-motions for summary judgment and pre-trial disclosures. HRDC is
represented by general counsel and litigation director Sabarish Neelakanta, and staff
attorneys Daniel Marshall and Masimba Mutamba; by Paul J. James with James, Carter
& Priebe, LLP; and by Bruce E.H. Johnson with Davis Wright Tremaine, LLP.
2. Human Rights Defense Center v. Sheriff Ricky Roberts (Union County, AR) – On
October 30, 2017, HRDC filed a lawsuit challenging a postcard-only policy at the jail in
Union County, Arkansas. After initial discovery and due to changes to the jail’s mail
policy, HRDC withdrew its motion for a preliminary injunction without prejudice to
bring a subsequent motion seeking permanent injunctive relief. The defendants moved for
dismissal of claims against the individual defendants based upon qualified immunity,
which was granted by the court. As of the close of 2018, a final scheduling order was
issued by the court and the parties were engaged in discovery. HRDC is represented by
general counsel and litigation director Sabarish Neelakanta, and staff attorneys Masimba
Mutamba and Daniel Marshall; by local counsel Paul J. James with James, Carter &
Priebe, LLP; and by Bruce E.H. Johnson with Davis Wright Tremaine, LLP.
3. Prison Legal News v. Sheriff Thomas Dart (Cook County, IL) – Since June 2016,
HRDC has pursued a federal lawsuit over the censorship of books and magazines sent to
prisoners at the Cook County jail in Chicago, and the jail’s failure to provide due process
notice of such censorship. In January 2018, the parties attended a settlement conference
but no settlement was reached. After further discovery the parties agreed to a tentative
injunctive and damages settlement agreement. As part of the agreement, HRDC will
submit a brief to the court for attorneys’ fees and costs. As of the close of 2018, the
parties were finalizing the terms of the settlement and the court set a briefing schedule in
early 2019. HRDC is represented by general counsel and litigation director Sabarish
Neelakanta, and staff attorneys Masimba Mutamba and Daniel Marshall, and by local
counsel Matthew Topic with the law firm of Loevy & Loevy.

Human Rights Defense Center - Annual Report 2018

[19]

4. Prison Legal News v. Director Charles Ryan (Arizona DOC) – HRDC filed suit against
the Arizona DOC in 2015 over the censorship of certain issues of Prison Legal News on
the spurious basis that they contained sexually explicit content, and the DOC’s failure to
provide due process notice. After numerous discovery disputes that extended into early
2018, the parties filed cross motions for summary judgment. As of the end of the year,
both motions were fully briefed and remained pending. HRDC is represented by general
counsel and litigation director Sabarish Neelakanta, and staff attorneys Masimba
Mutamba and Daniel Marshall; by attorneys Lisa Ells, Jenny Yelin, Krista Stone-Manista
and Andrew Pope with Rosen Bien Galvan & Grunfeld, LLP; and by David Bodney and
Michael A. DiGiacomo with Ballard Spahr, LLP in Phoenix, Arizona.
5. Prison Legal News v. Federal Bureau of Prisons (ADX) –
HRDC’s lawsuit against the federal Bureau of Prisons’ highestsecurity facility, ADX Florence in Colorado, due to censorship
of Prison Legal News and lack of adequate due process notice,
entered its final phase in 2018. HRDC filed a motion for
summary judgment seeking injunctive and declaratory relief,
while the defendants sought summary judgment on the grounds
that a December 2017 policy change, which they claimed
allows for delivery of HRDC publications, effectively mooted
the requested injunctive relief. HRDC opposed the motion,
arguing that the policy change did not prevent prison officials
from censoring HRDC publications in the future. In October
HRDC staff attorney
2018, the court granted summary judgment to the defendants
Masimba Mutamba
and denied HRDC’s motion. A notice of appeal to the Tenth
Circuit was filed in December 2018. HRDC is represented by
general counsel and litigation director Sabarish Neelakanta, and staff attorneys Masimba
Mutamba and Daniel Marshall; by Peter Swanson, Matthew Shapanka and Stephen Kiehl
with Covington & Burling, LLP in Washington, D.C.; by Steven Zansberg with Levine
Sullivan Koch & Schulz, LLP in Denver; by Professor David Shapiro with the
Northwestern University Pritzker School of Law; and by Elliot Mincberg with the
Washington Lawyers’ Committee for Civil Rights & Urban Affairs in Washington, D.C.
6. Prison Legal News v. Northwestern Virginia Regional Adult Detention Center (VA) –
After the district court granted partial summary judgment, the parties appeared before
Judge Elizabeth Dillon for a bench trial in November 2018 as to the defendants’ liability
on HRDC’s First Amendment claim and compensatory damages on both its First and
Fourteenth Amendment claims. As of the end of 2018, the court had taken the evidence
presented at trial under advisement and a decision was pending. HRDC is represented by
general counsel and litigation director Sabarish Neelakanta, and staff attorneys Masimba
Mutamba and Daniel Marshall; and by local counsel Jeff Fogel and Steve Rosenfield.
7. Human Rights Defense Center v. Commissioner Rodney Ballard (Kentucky DOC) –
HRDC filed suit against the Kentucky Dept. of Corrections in July 2017 for censoring
books mailed to prisoners. The defendants denied any constitutional violations, and the
parties engaged in discovery throughout 2018. HRDC is represented by general counsel
and litigation director Sabarish Neelakanta, and staff attorneys Masimba Mutamba and
Daniel Marshall; and by Gregory Belzley with the law firm of Belzley Bathurst.

Human Rights Defense Center - Annual Report 2018

[20]

8. Prison Legal News v. Julie Jones (Florida DOC) – On November 17, 2011, HRDC
filed suit challenging a ban on Prison Legal News by the Florida Dept. of Corrections
(FDOC). The statewide ban was purportedly based on PLN’s advertising content,
including pen pal and phone service ads. A bench trial was held in January 2015, and in
August 2015 the district court held that FDOC’s censorship of PLN was permissible but
prison officials had violated HRDC’s due process rights; the court issued an injunction
against the FDOC on the latter grounds. HRDC filed an appeal with the Eleventh Circuit,
and oral argument was held on June 10, 2016. In May 2018, the Court of Appeals
affirmed the district court’s finding that the FDOC had violated HRDC’s due process
rights, warranting injunctive relief, but that the censorship did not violate its First
Amendment rights. HRDC then filed a petition for writ of certiorari with the U.S.
Supreme Court. The petition was supported by eight separate amicus briefs from faith
organizations, law professors, civil rights advocates, conservative and libertarian
organizations, prison book clubs, advertisers, press organizations and former corrections
officials. As of the end of the year, HRDC’s petition remained pending before the
Supreme Court. HRDC is represented by general counsel and litigation director Sabarish
Neelakanta, and staff attorneys Masimba Mutamba and Daniel Marshall; by Randall Berg
and Dante Trevisani with the Florida Justice Institute; by Benjamin Stevenson and Nancy
Abudu with the ACLU of Florida; and on appeal by Paul Clement and Michael McGinley
with the law firm of Bancroft PLLC.
C. Cases Resolved in 2018
1. Human Rights Defense Center v. Sheriff Lewis Hatcher (Columbus County, NC) – On
August 15, 2017, HRDC filed a lawsuit challenging the mail policies at the Columbus
County jail in North Carolina over the censorship of HRDC books, magazines and
correspondence. The defendants immediately changed their mail policy and revised their
practices to allow prisoners to receive publications, and to provide proper due process
notice of censorship decisions. In 2018, HRDC accepted the defendants’ Rule 68 offer
for damages, attorneys’ fees and costs. HRDC was represented by general counsel and
litigation director Sabarish Neelakanta, and staff attorneys Masimba Mutamba and Daniel
Marshall; by local counsel Paul Cox and Jonathan D. Sasser with the law firm of Ellis &
Winters, LLP in Raleigh; and by Bruce E.H. Johnson with Davis Wright Tremaine, LLP.
2. Human Rights Defense Center v. Sheriff Gene Fisher (Greene County, OH) – HRDC
filed suit on October 31, 2017, challenging censorship policies at the Greene County jail
in Ohio for censorship of books, magazines and letters, and denial of due process. After
extensive negotiations, a settlement agreement enjoining the defendants from further
censorship of HRDC publications was filed with the district court in late November 2017.
In 2018, the parties entered into a final settlement as to the court’s continued jurisdiction
to enforce the injunctive terms, as well as payment of damages, attorneys’ fees and costs.
HRDC was represented by general counsel and litigation director Sabarish Neelakanta,
and staff attorneys Masimba Mutamba and Daniel Marshall; by local counsel Robert
Newman with Newman & Meeks Co., LPA in Cincinnati; and by Bruce E.H. Johnson
with Davis Wright Tremaine, LLP.

Human Rights Defense Center - Annual Report 2018

[21]

3. Prison Legal News v. Sheriff James Jones (Knox County, TN) – At the start of 2017,
the defendants in this First Amendment censorship case had already conceded liability for
rejecting HRDC’s publications and other mail at the Knox County jail, as well as their
lack of due process notice in violation of the Fourteenth Amendment. Accordingly, the
parties entered into settlement negotiations that were finalized in 2018. Under the terms
of the settlement, HRDC received $25,000 in damages as well as the ability to distribute
its publications to prisoners at the Knox County jail. The defendants also agreed to pay
$62,000 in attorneys’ fees and costs. Because the case settled, the legal merits of the jail’s
postcard-only mail policy were not reached. HRDC was represented by general counsel
and litigation director Sabarish Neelakanta, and staff attorneys Masimba Mutamba and
Daniel Marshall; and by Tricia Herzfeld with the law firm of Branstetter, Stranch &
Jennings, PLLC in Nashville, Tennessee.
4. Human Rights Defense Center v. County of Los Angeles (CA) – On July 3, 2017,
HRDC filed suit against Los Angeles County’s jail system for censorship of Prison Legal
News and correspondence from HRDC without due process. After the court’s denial of
HRDC’s motion for a preliminary injunction, dismissal of claims against the individual
defendants and dismissal of a claim brought pursuant to California’s Bane Act, HRDC
appealed to the Ninth Circuit. Following further settlement discussions in 2018, the
parties agreed to an injunctive settlement requiring delivery of HRDC publications and
payment of $253,000 in damages, attorneys’ fees and costs. HRDC was represented by
general counsel and litigation director Sabarish Neelakanta, and staff attorneys Masimba
Mutamba and Daniel Marshall; by local counsel Sanford Rosen, Jeffrey Bornstein and
Christopher Hu with Rosen Bien Galvan & Grunfeld, LLP; and by Brian Vogel with the
law office of Brian A. Vogel, P.C.
II. PUBLIC RECORDS AND FOIA CASES
HRDC also litigates public records and Freedom of Information Act
(FOIA) cases across the country related to prisons, jails and other
detention centers, seeking information on such issues as government
contracts with private companies engaged in correctional services, and
settlements and verdicts in lawsuits involving corrections and law
enforcement agencies. HRDC uses this information to ensure government transparency and accountability, while engaging in news
reporting and research on issues related to the criminal justice system.
During 2018, HRDC’s FOIA Project was headed by staff attorney Deb
Golden in Washington, D.C.
A. New Cases Filed in 2018

HRDC staff attorney
Deborah Golden

1. Human Rights Defense Center v. Bureau of Prisons – On May 4, 2018, HRDC filed
suit requesting records related to the BOP’s phone, video visitation and debit card
contracts, as the agency had previously denied our FOIA request. As of the end of 2018,
the district court entered an order setting a briefing schedule and deadlines for filing
dispositive motions, and the parties were in settlement discussions. HRDC is represented
by staff attorney Deb Golden.

Human Rights Defense Center - Annual Report 2018

[22]

2. Human Rights Defense Center v. GEO Group (Vermont) – HRDC filed suit against
private prison operator GEO Group on May 9, 2018, after the company failed to respond
to a public records request related to litigation and claims involving Vermont prisoners
housed at a GEO facility. The complaint, filed in Superior Court under the Vermont
Public Records Act, remained pending at the end of the year. HRDC is represented by
staff attorney Deb Golden and Vermont attorney Robert Appel.
3. Human Rights Defense Center v. Corizon (FL) – On July 26, 2018, HRDC filed a
lawsuit against Corizon Health, Inc. – the former medical provider for the Florida Dept.
of Corrections – seeking disclosure of verdicts and settlements involving the company
over a six-year period. Corizon failed to produce the documents or admit that it was
subject to the public records law in Florida. The case remained pending in Circuit Court
at the close of 2018. HRDC is represented by general counsel and litigation director
Sabarish Neelakanta, and staff attorneys Masimba Mutamba and Daniel Marshall; and by
local counsel Deanna Shullman and Giselle M. Girones with Shullman Fugate, PLLC.
4. Human Rights Defense Center and Michelle Dillon v. Dept. of Homeland Security &
Immigration and Customs Enforcement – On August 3, 2018, HRDC requested records
related to litigation against ICE and its employees or agents created since January 1,
2010. Because ICE failed to produce responsive documents, HRDC filed suit in the
Western District of Washington alleging that the non-disclosure violated the Freedom
of Information Act. By the end of the year, the defendants had responded to HRDC’s
complaint by claiming the requested records were protected under the Privacy Act and
FOIA exclusions. HRDC is represented by general counsel Sabarish Neelakanta and staff
attorney Deb Golden, and by Eric M. Stahl with Davis Wright Tremaine, LLP.
5. Human Rights Defense Center v. Otero County (NM) – On August 31, 2018, HRDC
filed suit seeking disclosure of records concerning claims and lawsuits against the Otero
County Detention Center, after the county failed to produce the documents in violation of
New Mexico’s Inspection of Public Records Act. As of the close of 2018, the defendants
had moved to dismiss arguing mootness, as the records were provided to HRDC prior to
the filing of the lawsuit. HRDC is represented by staff attorney Deb Golden, and by Mark
Donatelli and Caroline Manierre with the law firm of Rothstein Donatelli, LLP.
6. Human Rights Defense Center and Michelle Dillon v. U.S. Dept. of Health and
Human Services & Office of Refugee Resettlement – HRDC filed suit on October 1,
2018, seeking records related to litigation against the U.S. Dept. of Health and Human
Services and Office of Refugee Resettlement. The defendants responded in November
2018, denying that they had any obligation to disclose the records. The court entered a
scheduling order for discovery and the case is pending. HRDC is represented by staff
attorney Deb Golden and by Jeremy E. Roller with Yarmuth Wilsdon, PLLC.
7. Human Rights Defense Center v District of Columbia – On December 4, 2018, HRDC
filed suit against Muriel Bowser, Mayor of the District of Columbia, and Quincy Booth,
director of the District of Columbia Department of Corrections, seeking records and
written statements related to the shackling and confinement of pregnant prisoners. As of
the close of 2018, the parties had reached a tentative agreement to disclose the requested
documents. HRDC is represented by staff attorney Deb Golden.

Human Rights Defense Center - Annual Report 2018

[23]

8. Human Rights Defense Center v. GEO Group (Texas) – HRDC filed suit against the
GEO Group on August 28, 2018, after the company failed to produce records related to
verdicts and settlements involving GEO facilities in Texas. The company filed a motion
to dismiss, which was denied by the court, and the parties were engaged in discovery as
of the end of the year. HRDC is represented by staff attorney Deb Golden, and by
Thomas Leatherbury and Michelle Arishita with the law firm of Vinson and Elkins.
B. Cases Resolved in 2018
1. Prison Legal News v. Bureau of Prisons (Samuels II) – On June 3, 2015, HRDC filed
suit against the federal Bureau of Prisons in U.S. District Court for the District of
Columbia, seeking declaratory, injunctive and other relief over the BOP’s failure to
produce records concerning settlements and verdicts in lawsuits from January 2008
through November 2013, pursuant to the Freedom of Information Act. The BOP subsequently began releasing documents responsive to HRDC’s request, including document
productions that totaled over 18,700 pages in 2016, more than 2,700 pages in a supplemental production in the spring and summer of 2017, and over 2,200 pages in another
production in late summer and fall 2017. In 2018, the parties agreed to the production of
the rest of the documents responsive to HRDC’s FOIA request, and settled attorneys’ fees
and costs for $180,000. HRDC was represented by general counsel and litigation director
Sabarish Neelakanta, and staff attorneys Masimba Mutamba and Daniel Marshall; and by
Ronald London, Will Helmuth and Ashley Vulin with Davis Wright Tremaine, LLP.
C. Cases Still Pending in 2018
1. Prison Legal News v. Corizon Health (NM) – In March 2016, HRDC filed a public
records complaint against private prison medical contractor Corizon Health in New
Mexico, over the company’s failure to produce records related to litigation, settlements
and verdicts in connection with its contract with the New Mexico Department of
Corrections. Corizon argued that it was not subject to the state’s public records law
because it is not a public entity, despite the fact that it performs a core governmental
function of providing healthcare to prisoners. Corizon filed a motion to dismiss and
HRDC submitted a response. Due to an earlier case currently on appeal concerning
whether the company is subject to New Mexico’s public records law, this suit has been
stayed and remains pending until a ruling has been issued in the appeal. HRDC is
represented by general counsel and litigation director Sabarish Neelakanta, and by local
counsel Laura Schauer Ives with Kennedy, Kennedy & Ives in Albuquerque.
III. CONSUMER CLASS-ACTIONS
As part of its Stop Prison Profiteering campaign, HRDC has focused attention on challenging the
exploitive business practices of private companies awarded lucrative monopoly contracts with
prisons and jails to provide services to prisoners, often at exorbitant costs and with hidden fees
and charges. Accordingly, HRDC has spearheaded consumer class-action lawsuits against some
of those companies. Specifically, we have been tackling the practice of issuing fee-laden debit
cards to prisoners upon their release in lieu of a check or cash. Prisoners have no choice but to
accept the cards, and must pay a variety of fees that reduce their available funds.

Human Rights Defense Center - Annual Report 2018

[24]

A. New Cases Filed in 2018
1. Reyes v. JPay, Inc. – On January 12, 2018, Joe Rudy Reyes filed a class-action lawsuit
against JPay, Inc., Sunrise Bank and Praxell, Inc. for issuing fee-laden debit cards in lieu
of cash or checks to prisoners released from the California Department of Corrections
and Rehabilitation (CDCR). Mr. Reyes, like thousands of other CDCR prisoners, was
given a pre-activated debit card containing the funds from his prison trust account. He
had no choice but to accept the card, and was not provided with any terms and conditions
detailing the numerous fees and surcharges associated with its use and maintenance. Mr.
Reyes filed suit asserting violations under the Electronic Funds Transfer Act, California
consumer protection laws, and common law claims of conversion and unjust enrichment.
The defendants filed a motion to compel arbitration, claiming that by accepting the debit
card, Reyes was subject to its arbitration provisions. In June 2018, the court granted the
defendants’ motion. On December 28, 2018, Mr. Reyes filed a petition for writ of
mandamus and/or prohibition seeking intervention from the Ninth Circuit due to the
improper grant of arbitration. The case remained pending before the Court of Appeals at
the close of 2018. Mr. Reyes is represented by HRDC general counsel and litigation
director Sabarish Neelakanta, and staff attorneys Daniel Marshall and Masimba
Mutamba; and by Lisa Faye Petak, Mark Griffin and Laura Gerber with the law firm of
Keller Rohrback. On the petition for mandamus, he is also represented by Karla Gilbride
with Public Justice, P.C.
B. Cases Still Pending in 2018
1. Reichert v. Keefe Commissary Network, LLC – Jeffrey Reichert was arrested and
booked into the Kitsap County Jail in Washington State in October 2016. When he
entered the jail he had approximately $177.66 in cash. Upon his release a short time later,
he received a prepaid debit card instead of the cash he had surrendered. The card required
Mr. Reichert to pay unreasonable and excessive fees in order to access his own money;
he never consented to receiving the card instead of cash, and never agreed to any contract
with the defendants, including Keefe Commissary Network. A class-action lawsuit was
filed in October 2017, arguing that those practices violated the Takings Clause, the
Electronic Funds Transfer Act, the Washington Consumer Protection Act and common
law claims of conversion and unjust enrichment. The defendants filed a motion to compel
arbitration that was denied by the district court in May 2018. As of the end of the year,
the parties were engaged in discovery. Mr. Reichert is represented by HRDC general
counsel and litigation director Sabarish Neelakanta, and staff attorneys Daniel Marshall
and Masimba Mutamba; and by Mark Griffin and Laura Gerber with the law firm of
Keller Rohrback.
2. Brown v. Stored Value Cards – Danica Brown was charged with interfering with an
officer during a peaceful protest of the 2014 police shooting death of Michael Brown, and
booked into the Multnomah County Detention Center in Portland, Oregon. At the time of
her arrest she had approximately $30 in cash on her person, which the jail confiscated.
After releasing her the next day, Ms. Brown did not receive her cash but instead was
given a preloaded debit card that assessed various exorbitant fees. No one asked her
whether she wanted to receive her money on a debit card, nor did she consent to

Human Rights Defense Center - Annual Report 2018

[25]

receiving the card instead of cash. Ms. Brown also did not receive any cardholder
agreement or terms and conditions, and never agreed to arbitrate claims associated with
the card. She filed a class-action lawsuit alleging the return of her money in the form of a
fee-laden debit card violated the Electronic Funds Transfer Act and the Oregon Unfair
Trade Practices Act, along with claims of conversion and unjust enrichment. The
defendants moved to compel arbitration, which the district court denied in February 2016.
Subsequent motions to dismiss filed by the defendants in 2016 and 2017 also were
denied, and the parties engaged in discovery throughout most of 2017. The defendants
moved for summary judgment, which was granted by the court in August 2018. Ms.
Brown filed a notice of appeal and the case remained pending before the Ninth Circuit at
the close of the year. Ms. Brown is represented by HRDC general counsel and litigation
director Sabarish Neelakanta; by attorneys Mark Griffin and Laura Gerber with Keller
Rohrback; by Benjamin Haile in Portland, Oregon; and by Karla Gilbride with Public
Justice, P.C. on appeal.
IV. PRISON CONDITIONS / DEATH CASES
A. New Cases Filed in 2018
1. H.C. v. Palm Beach County Sheriff’s Office (FL) – After a nearly seven-month
investigation, HRDC, the Legal Aid Society of Palm Beach County and the law firm of
Cohen Milstein filed a class-action lawsuit in June 2018 against the Palm Beach County
Sheriff’s Office and the School Board of Palm Beach County over the placement of
juvenile offenders in solitary confinement at the county jail and the failure to provide
them with educational programming in violation of the Eighth and Fourteenth
Amendments, the Rehabilitation Act, the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) and the
Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA). Along with the complaint, a motion
for a preliminary injunction was filed to end the unconstitutional practices at the jail and
ensure that juveniles received educational services. The district court ordered expedited
discovery, and a hearing on the preliminary injunction was set for October 2018. Prior to
the hearing and after several months of discovery, including a review of over 10,000
documents, 18 depositions, a jail inspection and expert reports, the defendants agreed to a
settlement that will effectively end solitary confinement and ensure educational programming for juvenile offenders held at the jail. Additionally, the settlement calls for five
years of monitoring. The case remained pending final approval of the settlement at the
end of 2018. The class members were represented by HRDC general counsel and
litigation director Sabarish Neelakanta, and HRDC staff attorney Masimba Mutamba; by
Melissa Duncan with the Legal Aid Society of Palm Beach County; and by Theodore
Leopold and Diana Martin with Cohen Milstein Sellers & Toll, PLLC.
2. Lorine Gaines v. Julie Jones (FL) – On August 1, 2018, HRDC filed a wrongful death
lawsuit in federal court on behalf of the mother of a Florida state prisoner, Vincent
Gaines, who died of starvation and inadequate medical and mental health care in
December 2015. Vincent was serving a five-year sentence; he had previously been
hospitalized twice for mental health care, and diagnosed with bipolar disorder and mania
with psychotic features. He was transferred to the Florida Department of Correction’s

Human Rights Defense Center - Annual Report 2018

[26]

(FDOC) Transitional Care Unit at the Dade Correctional Institution in March 2014, due
to hallucinations and delusions. As part of his treatment plan, Vincent was placed on a
“boneless diet” served without utensils. Following a disciplinary report in April 2015 for
trying to enter the facility’s food service area without permission, he was transferred to
the Florida State Prison in Raiford, then to the Union Correctional Institution, where he
was placed in Close Management status (solitary confinement). While held by the FDOC,
his psychotropic medications were discontinued. On December 1, 2015, a Corizon Health
social worker intern wrote that Vincent was “alert, calm and cooperative and his speech
was appropriate.” However, two days later he was found unresponsive in his cell and
pronounced dead. According to the Medical Examiner, at the time of his death Vincent
was 5’9” and weighed just 115 pounds. During his two-and-a-half years in FDOC
custody, while under Corizon’s medical and mental health care, he had lost 75 pounds –
around 40 percent of his body weight. He essentially starved to death. The lawsuit was
brought by Vincent’s mother, Lorine Gaines, and raises claims under the Americans with
Disabilities Act and the Eighth and Fourteenth Amendments. The defendants named in
the complaint include FDOC Secretary Julie Jones, prison employee Kevin D. Jordan,
Corizon Health – the FDOC’s former medical contractor – and a number of unknown
“John Doe” defendants. The case remained pending at the end of the year. Mrs. Gaines is
represented by HRDC general counsel and litigation director Sabarish Neelakanta, and
staff attorneys Daniel Marshall and Masimba Mutamba; and by Edwin Ferguson with
The Ferguson Firm, PLLC.
V. AMICUS BRIEFS
The Human Rights Defense Center joined in the following amicus briefs in 2018:
1. McDonough v. Smith – Edward McDonough was prosecuted on felony charges based on
fabricated evidence. After being acquitted, he sued the prosecutor in his case, who allegedly
forged witness affidavits and falsified other evidence that was used at trial and in preliminary
proceedings. Mr. McDonough brought his claim under 42 U.S.C. § 1983, which allows
individuals to file lawsuits for damages against state officials who violate their constitutional
rights. However, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit held that Mr. McDonough
could not pursue his claims because he filed suit after the statute of limitations had expired.
That limitations period, the appellate court said, began running as soon as Mr. McDonough
knew, or should have known, that fabricated evidence was used against him. In November
2018, HRDC and other criminal defense and civil rights organizations joined an amicus brief
in support of Mr. McDonough’s petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Supreme
Court. The brief was authored by the law firm of Arnold & Porter Kaye Scholer, LLP.
2. Update on In re Simmons – On April 5, 2018, the Washington Supreme Court issued an
opinion in the case of Tarra Simmons, a former prisoner who had gone to law school but was
denied permission to practice law in Washington State because she had been incarcerated.
The state Supreme Court ruled unanimously in favor of allowing Simmons to take the bar
exam, stating, “we affirm this court’s long history of recognizing that one’s past does not
dictate one’s future.” HRDC was among numerous organizations and individuals who joined
in an amicus brief filed on her behalf, which was authored by attorneys with the Seattle law
firm of Keller Rohrback.

Human Rights Defense Center - Annual Report 2018

[27]

OTHER ACTIVITIES
CAMPAIGN FOR PRISON PHONE JUSTICE
HRDC co-founded the national Campaign
for Prison Phone Justice in 2011, with the
goal of reducing the cost of phone calls
between prisoners and their family members. As part of our strategy to achieve this goal, HRDC
worked extensively with the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) from 2011 through
2016, speaking at FCC workshops and filing comments on the docket for the Wright Petition –
an FCC proceeding seeking to reduce the high cost of prison and jail calls.
The FCC initially capped the cost of interstate (long distance) prison and jail phone calls
in 2013 and later capped rates for intrastate (in-state) calls, but on June 13, 2017, the D.C. Circuit
Court of Appeals issued a ruling that vacated the intrastate rate caps. Further, the appellate court
vacated reporting requirements for video calling services, struck down the exclusion of
“commission” kickbacks from call cost calculations and held the “FCC had no authority to
impose ancillary fee caps with respect to intrastate calls.” Under the leadership of Chairman Ajit
Pai, the FCC did not defend its intrastate rate caps before the Court of Appeals.
On July 13, 2018, HRDC filed a comment with the FCC calling for Chairman Pai to
recuse himself from all matters involving prison telecom Securus Technologies, because he had
represented the company while in private practice prior to his appointment to the FCC. HRDC
also objected to Securus’ merger with another prison telecom, ICSolutions, “as that would
further increase the duopoly nature of the ICS industry” and result in “even less competition.”
Additionally, on July 16, 2018, HRDC and several other organizations joined the Wright
petitioners in filing a Petition to Deny on the FCC docket, in opposition to the proposed merger
between Securus Technologies and ICSolutions. The petition noted that “Securus has clearly
demonstrated that it lacks the character qualifications to remain a holder of Commission-issued
authorizations.” The merger remained pending before the FCC at the end of 2018.
STOP PRISON PROFITEERING CAMPAIGN
HRDC’s Stop Prison Profiteering campaign
focuses on the ongoing financial exploitation
of prisoners and their families by both government agencies and private companies that provide
prison and jail-related services. Such exploitation includes the egregious cost of video calling,
commissary items, money transfers, and secure email and tablet services, as well as the growing
practice of releasing prisoners with fee-laden debit cards. Compounding these practices are
monopoly contracts between corrections agencies and private companies, which are frequently
awarded in exchange for “commission” kickbacks.
Our Stop Prison Profiteering activities in 2018 focused on obtaining data and contracts
underlying these exploitive practices through public records requests submitted to corrections
agencies, as well as litigation over the practice of issuing debit release cards.
During 2018 we filed a new lawsuit in California over debit cards issued to prisoners
released from state prisons (Reyes v. JPay), and continued litigating two ongoing cases in
Washington (Reichert v. Keefe Commissary Network, LLC) and Oregon (Brown v. Stored Value
Cards). For details on those cases, see the litigation section above.

Human Rights Defense Center - Annual Report 2018

[28]

PRISON ECOLOGY PROJECT
HRDC’s Prison Ecology Project (PEP) began in the spring of 2015 to
address the intersection of environmental justice and criminal justice,
including the impact of correctional facilities on the environment and the
environment’s impact on prisoners and prison staff.
HRDC special projects coordinator Panagioti Tsolkas continued to
work on prison environmental issues in 2018, including opposition to the
construction of a new federal prison in Letcher County, Kentucky on the site
of a former coal mine. A lawsuit was filed by federal prisoners and the
Abolitionist Law Center in November 2018; the prisoners claimed they had
not been properly informed about the proposed Letcher County prison so they could submit
comments during the Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) process.
As part of the PEP campaign, Prison Legal News ran a cover story in April 2018 titled,
“America’s Toxic Prisons: The Environmental Injustices of Mass Incarceration,” which was
originally published by Earth Island Journal and Truthout. PLN also published an article in
November 2018 about a lawsuit filed by Connecticut prisoners over exposure to radon gas at the
Garner Correctional Institution, as well as a February 2018 article concerning environmental
dangers in Louisiana prisons.
CORECIVIC / GEO GROUP RESOLUTIONS
In November 2017, HRDC associate director Alex Friedmann, who
owns a small amount of stock in both CoreCivic and GEO Group as an
activist investor, submitted shareholder resolutions to both companies.
CoreCivic claimed it did not receive the resolution before the deadline,
thus it did not proceed. The resolution filed with GEO Group would
have required the company to allow proxy access – the ability of
certain large shareholders to make their own nominations to the
company’s board of directors, rather than only the company being able to nominate board
members. The resolution went before shareholders at GEO Group’s annual meeting in May
2018, and failed to pass after receiving around 27% of the voting shares.
Alex submitted shareholder resolutions with both CoreCivic and GEO Group in late
2018, which would have prohibited the companies from housing immigrant children who have
been separated from their parents, or immigrant parents who have been separated from their
children. While both companies have strongly denied holding separated children, they do house
separated parents – thus perpetuating the problem of family separation. Further, the resolutions
noted that CoreCivic and GEO may change their policy “in the future or may enter into future
contracts to house separated immigrant children and/or parents.”
“If CoreCivic’s executives don’t believe they should profit from families being separated,
then they should have no objection to this resolution and should let it go before shareholders for
a vote,” Alex stated. “But detaining immigrant families – including children – has been very
profitable for the company.”
Alex is represented in his shareholder resolutions pro bono by attorney Jeffrey Lowenthal
with the New York law firm of Stroock Stroock Lavan, LLP. The CoreCivic and GEO Group
resolutions related to family separation remained pending at the end of 2018.

Human Rights Defense Center - Annual Report 2018

[29]

FOIA PROJECT
HRDC launched an ambitious national public records project in October
2017 with the help of a generous donor. This initiative aims to expose the
scope of abuses and misconduct in law enforcement agencies, prisons and
jails, and prosecutor’s offices nationwide – including the money paid by
the government to settle lawsuits over such issues. The goal of HRDC’s
Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) Project is to uncover, document and
report wrongdoing by law enforcement agencies and officials to an extent
previously unachieved, providing the public with a comprehensive look at
the true costs of our nation’s criminal justice system. Through this campaign we also hope to
expand our long-standing goal of challenging and improving accessibility to public records.
Throughout 2018, HRDC public records manager and development coordinator Michelle
Dillon continued to submit Freedom of Information Act and public records requests to law
enforcement and corrections agencies nationwide. Our FOIA Project, overseen by staff attorney
Deb Golden in Washington, D.C., filed eight lawsuits in 2018 over denials of our public records
requests. For details on those cases, see the litigation section above.
HRDC SOCIAL MEDIA
HRDC maintains a robust social media presence, including three accounts
on Facebook (PLN, CLN and HRDC), a Twitter account and a free email
newsletter published five days a week. At the end of 2018, HRDC had
3,354 e-newsletter members, 11,921 combined Facebook likes, 15,664
Twitter followers and 224 connections on LinkedIn.
HRDC launched a GoFundMe campaign in August 2018, to raise
funds to support shareholder resolutions filed with private prison companies CoreCivic and GEO
Group that would prohibit them from housing immigrant children and parents who had been
separated by ICE (see the “CoreCivic / GEO Group Resolutions” section, above).
In December 2018, HRDC launched another GoFundMe campaign titled “Bulldozer: The
Prison & Immigration Reform Vehicle.” The campaign stated: “We need heavy equipment to
bulldoze the Prison Industrial Complex, and our equipment comes in the form of funding to
support our mission to advocate for the rights of people held in prisons, jails and other detention
facilities, including immigrant detention centers.”
COLLABORATIONS & AFFILIATIONS
HRDC collaborated with other organizations in 2018 on a variety of advocacy efforts, reports,
campaigns and other projects – including Working Narratives, the Prison Policy Initiative and
the Private Corrections Institute. Additionally, HRDC staff members maintained the following
affiliations with other organizations:


HRDC executive director Paul Wright is a member of the National Lawyers Guild and
serves on the board of the NLG’s National Police Accountability Project. He is also a
member of the American Bar Association, American Correctional Association and
American Jail Association.

Human Rights Defense Center - Annual Report 2018

[30]



HRDC associate director Alex Friedmann serves in a volunteer, non-compensated
capacity as president of the Private Corrections Institute, a non-profit watchdog group
that opposes prison privatization. He also serves on the advisory board of the Prison
Policy Initiative and is a member of National CURE, the Society of Professional
Journalists, and Investigative Reporters and Editors.



HRDC general counsel and litigation director Sabarish Neelakanta is a member of
the First Amendment Lawyers Association, the National Lawyers Guild’s National Police
Accountability Project, the American Constitution Society, the American Civil Liberties
Union, the Trial and Public Interest sections of the Florida Bar, and the Palm Beach
County Bar Association.



HRDC staff attorney Deb Golden is a member of the National Lawyers Guild’s
National Police Accountability Project, the Trial Lawyers Association of Metropolitan
Washington D.C., American Bar Association, Kentucky Bar Association, Washington
Council of Lawyers, D.C. Bar Association and the Criminal Law, DC Affairs, Litigation
and Individual Rights communities of the D.C. Bar.



HRDC staff attorney Daniel Marshall is a member of the National Lawyers Guild’s
National Police Accountability Project, the Florida Association of Criminal Defense
Lawyers and the Palm Beach County Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers.



HRDC staff attorney and William A. Trine Fellow Masimba Mutamba is a Florida
Bar Delegate to the American Bar Association House of Delegates, a representative on
the Florida Bar Young Lawyers Division Board of Governors, and an appointed member
of the Florida Bar’s Standing Committee on Media & Communications Law. He is also a
member of the National Lawyers Guild’s National Police Accountability Project. In his
local community, Masimba is actively involved in the Palm Beach County Judicial
Diversity Initiative, the F. Malcolm Cunningham, Sr. Bar Association, the Palm Beach
County Bar Association’s standing Committee for Diversity and Inclusion, and that Bar’s
Young Lawyers Section.

LOOKING FORWARD: GOALS FOR 2019
HRDC plans to continue our criminal justice reform and public education efforts in 2019 with
respect to our media outreach, litigation project, publishing, advocacy and other activities. Our
websites continue to be important sources of news and research for prisoners’ rights advocates,
policy makers, attorneys, academics, journalists and other people with an interest in criminal
justice-related issues.
HRDC’s litigation project expanded in 2018 due to ongoing censorship of Prison Legal
News, Criminal Legal News and the books we distribute by prison and jail officials, and we
expect that trend to continue in 2019. We plan to file additional legal challenges through our
FOIA Project due to denials of our public records requests, and to pursue additional litigation
through our Stop Prison Profiteering campaign.

Human Rights Defense Center - Annual Report 2018

[31]

While HRDC continues to coordinate the national Campaign for Prison Phone Justice and
advocate for lower prison and jail phone rates, due to the lack of interest in that issue by the FCC
under its current leadership, we intend to focus on state-level reforms and advocacy.
Our Prison Ecology Project will continue to collect data and report on environmental
issues affecting prisoners, and to advocate for prisoners’ environmental health rights and against
prisons and jails located in or near areas with significant ecological hazards. We will report on
issues related to prison environmental concerns in PLN.
Our book publishing plans for 2019 include an updated edition of With Liberty for Some
by Scott Christianson, and The Habeas Citebook: Prosecutorial Misconduct. We continue to
seek self-help books to distribute that are of interest to prisoners, and encourage book ideas and
submissions from qualified authors.
Other ongoing goals include building HRDC’s organizational capacity, expanding our
funding sources and fundraising, increasing the number of PLN and CLN subscribers, and – as
always – continuing to advocate for criminal justice reform and prisoners’ rights.

P.O. Box 1151
Lake Worth, FL 33460
(561) 360-2523
www.humanrightsdefensecenter.org
www.prisonlegalnews.org
www.criminallegalnews.org
www.prisonphonejustice.org
www.stopprisonprofiteering.org
www.prisonecology.org
www.privateprisonnews.org
www.wronglyconvicted.org

News coverage featuring the work of the Human Rights Defense Center
STATE SUED OVER RESTRICTIONS ON MAIL THAT
CAN BE SENT TO PRISON INMATES
by News 10
Aug 26, 2019

A

non-profit group is suing the head of the Michigan
Department of Corrections as well as four current and
former prison wardens.
The federal lawsuit filed in the Eastern District of Michigan
by the Human Rights Defense Center claims the defendants
unconstitutionally censored issues of multiple publications
including Prison Legal News and Criminal Legal News.
The suit also claims the state is not following proper procedures
when censoring or blocking delivery and fails to provide a process
to challenge those decisions. The suit names the following people
as defendants:
•	 Heidi Washington, Director of the MDOC
•	 O'Bell Winn, Warden of the Saginaw Correctional Facility
•	 Bonita Hoffner, former Warden of Lakeland Correctional Facility
•	 Willia Smith, former Warden of the Ionia Correctional Facility
•	 Carmen Palmer, former Warden of the Michigan Reformatory
The Human Rights Defense Center claims state correctional
facilities censored 36 issues of Prison Legal News between August
of 2016 and July of 2019. It also claims books and the monthly
newsletter mailed to inmates were blocked outright.
The suit asks the court to find that the defendants violated the U.S.
Constitution, issue an injunction to stop further censoring or blocking
of publications sent to inmates, and award damages plus attorney fees.
News 10 contacted Department of Corrections spokesman
Chris Gautz who said the department does not comment on

pending litigation. He did include the department's policy directive
covering prisoner mail. The document, which is attached to this
story, details several reasons mail to inmates can be rejected. It
also outlines the appeals process, something the Human Rights
Defense Center claims the state is not following.
News 10 and wilx.com will keep you updated on this lawsuit.
www.wilx.com/content/news/State-sued-over-restrictions-onmail-that-can-be-sent-to-prison-inmates-558324491.html

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

JUDGE: SW VA. REGIONAL JAIL AUTHORITY
IMPROPERLY BANNED BOOKS
by Washington County News
June 12, 2019

T

he Southwest Virginia Regional Jail Authority violated a
nonprofit’s due process rights when it blocked prisoners from
accessing books and magazines the nonprofit sent them, Judge James
P. Jones ruled in the U.S. District Court in Abingdon last week.
The Human Rights Defense Center, a prisoners’ rights
organization, regularly distributes reading material to inmates,
covering legal news, current events and inmates’ rights. Over a million
copies of its monthly magazines have been delivered to inmates since
its founding in 1990.
Although the jail allowed books and other publications to be
collected in a common reading room, from which prisoners could
request up to two books at a time, the jail authority adopted a new
policy in 2016 that banned any books or publications from being
delivered without case-by-case preapproval. Prisoners would be
required to submit requests for each new magazine.
According to the suit, the authority returned hundreds of
magazine issues to the HRDC without clearly stating their policy on
why they were being rejected.
Jones found in his ruling that while the jail authority could
reasonably ban certain materials from inmates, the policies that
prevented prisoners from accessing the HRDC publications were
“inconsistently communicated and applied” and that alternate means
of delivery would place an undue burden on the HRDC.
The jail authority justified banning most of the publications due
to safety concerns, arguing that the staples and glue that make up the
Human Rights Defense Center’s publications could endanger the
safety of guards or prisoners, posing possible fire hazards or providing
materials used for drug or weapon smuggling.
Jones said the jail authority lacked strong evidence to prove that
their preapproval policy would actually diminish the cited safety risks,
and the lack of a written policy made the system too open to abuse.
“Such a policy,” Jones wrote, “invites arbitrary decisions that
are driven by individual officials’ biases and do not bear a rational
relationship to legitimate penological interests.”
The authority’s inability to clearly communicate with HRDC was
also a violation of their rights to publish material for prisoners, said Jones.
The case will proceed to a jury trial to decide damages in the suit.
The HRDC is seeking relief to cover attorney fees.
https://www.swvatoday.com/news/article_590c0317-cfe4-54d0-bcb4-

9d532124b7ca.html

FEDERAL JUDGE FINDS ARIZONA PRISON
POLICY UNCONSTITUTIONAL
by Jimmy Jenkins
March 13, 2019
KJZZ Radio, 91.5 (Maricopa County)

I

n a ruling issued Friday, United States District Court Judge
Roslyn Silver found an Arizona Department of Corrections
(ADC) policy “violates the First Amendment on its face.”
Created in 2010 and amended twice in the years since, ADC’s
regulations prohibiting sexually explicit material have a stated a
purpose: “to assist with rehabilitation and treatment objectives,
reduce sexual harassment and prevent a hostile environment for
inmates, staff and volunteers.”
The most recent version, amended in 2017, states inmates “are
not permitted to send, receive or possess sexually explicit material
or content that is detrimental to the safe, secure, and orderly
operation of the facility.”
The department has cited the policy in several instances where
inmates were denied a legal publication they subscribed to or were
only allowed to receive the magazine after ADC redacted it.
The Arizona Department of Corrections says it is reviewing
the judge's ruling.
“I call it a First Amendment case that happens to be in prison,”
said Paul Wright, executive director of the Human Rights Defense
Center, the publisher of Prison Legal News. “This is about a publishers
right to distribute our magazine to an incarcerated audience.”
Wright says Prison Legal News has “around 9,000 subscribers
nationally” and about 70 percent of them are incarcerated.
He says the publication filed a lawsuit several years ago when
readers informed him copies of Prison Legal News were being
censored by the Arizona Department of Corrections on the basis
that the publication was sexually explicit or pornographic in nature.
“The apparent basis for this has been our reporting of sexual
assaults and rapes that occur in the prison environment,” Wright
said, “oftentimes literally quoting federal and state court opinions
on this assaults.”
Wright says for many of his subscribers, Prison Legal News
is the only way they can get information about cases that may
apply to them.
“When we’re reporting on the cases it’s important to tell our
readers: these are the facts of the case, this is why the court ruled
the way it did,” he said.
Wright says subscribers went for months without getting
copies and other times would receive the magazine after ADC
redacted portions.
“I don’t really think that they, actually, in their heart of hearts,
believe that we are pornographic,” Wright said, “so much as they
are using this as a pretext to try to censor us and prevent prisoners
in Arizona from learning what their rights are in the event that they
are sexually assaulted.”
Wright said the problem had only occurred recently, after
years of dealing with ADC. “Basically for 25 years or so, we didn’t
have any censorship problem in Arizona.”
Lisa Ells, the lead counsel representing Prison Legal News,
said they tried to settle several times with ADC, but the department
insisted their policy was appropriate.
“Whether they have taken out the publication wholesale or
they’re just using the government censor pen and redacting out what

they don’t like, either one is a violation of the First Amendment,”
Ells said. “Because it’s the government deciding what people can
and can’t read inside the prison system.”
Ells represents Prison Legal News in California and reviewed
policies in other states in preparation for Arizona lawsuit. “There
was just nobody in the United States that came anywhere close to
the type of really broad prohibition on any text that even relates to
or mentions sexual intercourse in any way.”
In her ruling, Judge Silver referred to ADC’s “sweeping
definition of sexually explicit material” as “facially overbroad.”
“Prohibited and/or redacted material include articles about
the persecution of the Yazidi people by ISIS, articles about the
Me Too movement, Maya Angelou’s I Know Why the Caged Bird
Sings, a New Yorker book review of a scholarly biography of
Sigmund Freud, a Mayo Clinic newsletter that contained a medical
illustration of a hernia, and self-portraits by former President
George W. Bush,” Silver wrote. “Given the literal reading of ADC’s
policy, these examples properly qualify as prohibited material. No
reasonable trier of fact would conclude that such broad censorship
is rationally related to furthering ADC’s penological interests.”
Silver ordered the parties in the case to submit suggestions for
a change to the policy. Ells says they will be pushing for language
that is much less broad.

“Whether they have taken out the
publication wholesale or they’re just
using the government censor pen and
redacting out what they don’t like, either
one is a violation of the First Amendment
.... Because it’s the government deciding
what people can and can’t read inside
the prison system.”
She says she found the current policy deeply offensive
because it has ended up censoring quotations from Court of Appeal
decisions. “Like verbatim quotations of legal decisions that were
reported in this publication were redacted,” Ells said. “If the
Arizona Department of Corrections feels like it can censor this
publication when it’s quoting court cases, then it also feels like
it can censor what the courts can say or what prisoners can read
about their legal rights in the prison system.”
Ells says they are gratified with Silver’s ruling. “Because
we think it had the potential to really expand censorship in other
prison systems across the country if she hadn’t held firm here.”
Wright noted that Judge Silver quoted the same passage from
a court ruling that prompted Prison Legal News to be banned in
Arizona prisons.
“Of course we plan to send a copy of the ruling to our
subscribers and readers in ADC so that they’ll be aware of
what’s going on in the case,” Wright said. “And I’m wondering
now if ADC is going to censor Judge Silver’s ruling because it
contains the language from another court ruling dealing with
sexual assault.”
kjzz.org/content/812486/federal-judge-finds-arizona-prison-policyunconstitutional

COUNTY JAIL AGREES INMATES CAN RECEIVE
NONRELIGIOUS BOOKS

A south Mississippi county has agreed to allow inmates to
receive non-religious reading materials, ending a lawsuit.
by Jeff Amy
February 15, 2019
Associated Press

A

south Mississippi county has agreed to allow inmates
to receive non-religious reading materials, ending a
lawsuit.
U.S. District Judge Keith Starrett dismissed the case Friday,
after Forrest County and a prisoners' rights group reached a
settlement earlier this month.
Forrest County Sheriff Billy McGee agrees prisoners can
receive books and publications from the Human Rights Defense
Center and other recognized distributors. The center publishes
Prison Legal News.
McGee agrees that he will only turn away publications
"inconsistent" with legitimate interests. The center says McGee
previously only allowed Bibles and Christian religious tracts.
McGee also agrees that if the jail refuses to deliver something,
he will let the sender appeal.
The Mississippi Department of Corrections recently settled
a lawsuit allowing a distributor to mail donated books to state
prisoners.
www . usnews . com / news / best - states / mississippi / articles /2019-02-15/
county-jail-agrees-inmates-can-receive-nonreligious-books

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Sheriff to end solitary confinement for teens at
Palm Beach County jail under settlement
By John Pacenti
November 9, 2018
Palm Beach Post

Y

oung offenders called it “the box.” It’s where their world at
the Palm Beach County jail shrank to a 6-by-12 foot cell —
for months. In solitary confinement, no music was allowed. No
television. No human contact.
If they complained, they were subject to verbal and sometimes
physical abuse by sheriff’s deputies.
Some of these teens ‒ often charged as adults with brutal
crimes ‒ even started hallucinating.
All of this was detailed in a federal civil rights lawsuit filed in
June on behalf of two juvenile inmates who spent time in the box
on the 12th floor of the Main Detention Center on Gun Club Road.
Now the box’s brutal reign is over.
After defending its use of solitary confinement for teenage
jail inmates, PBSO is eliminating it in what is being heralded as a
landmark settlement.
A new and extensive “segregated housing” policy replaces
solitary confinement. All juvenile inmates will have access to a
regular school day outside their cell with other juveniles in the
general population.
The sheriff’s department will implement a rotating schedule to

keep these juveniles away from co-defendants where before they
would be put in solitary for administrative, not disciplinary, reasons.
Sheriff Ric Bradshaw and the Palm Beach County School
Board under the settlement vow to make these inmates get
education and mental health treatment.
Only teen defendants in protective custody will be subject to a
more rigorous confinement.
First in Florida
“This proposed settlement is the first of its kind in Florida, and
a good precedent,” said Sabarish P. Neelakanta, general counsel
and litigation director for the Human Rights Defense Center,
a prisoners’ rights group based in Lake Worth that engages in
prisoner rights litigation nationwide. “The Sheriff’s Office and
school board worked hard to address the situation, and it is our hope
that the settlement serves as a framework for reform statewide.”
The sheriff’s office admits no wrongdoing in the settlement
but agreed to the widespread reforms.
Sheriff spokeswoman Teri Barbera said the department under
policy does not comment on legal settlements but added that such
cases are often complex and settled in the “best interest of Palm
Beach County taxpayers.”
A call for comment from the school district was not returned. The
School Board is expected to approve the settlement Wednesday night.
The lawsuit was spearheaded by the Legal Aid Society of Palm
Beach County and the Human Rights Defense Center. The classaction complaint claimed PBSO and the school district violated
the teen inmates’ constitutional rights by subjecting them to cruel
and unusual punishment and lack of due process.
Now both organizations, as well as designated experts, will
oversee implementation of the new policy for a two-year period.
The powerhouse class-action law firm of Cohen Milstein
Sellers also joined the plaintiffs to tackle the issue.
“We have worked hard to protect the constitutional rights

of juveniles whose civil liberties are at risk,” said Theodore J.
Leopold, co-chair of the firm’s Complex Tort Litigation and
Consumer Protection practices.
Many of the teenagers in solitary were developmentally
disabled and were denied assistance guaranteed by the Americans
With Disabilities Act, the lawsuit alleged.
This caught the attention of the U.S. Justice Department,
which in an Oct. 1 “statement of interest” in the lawsuit said that
the fact that the sheriff and school board were pointing fingers at
each other was the root of the problem.
“Under federal law, however, both defendants are responsible
for ensuring that eligible children with disabilities at the jail receive
special education and related services,” the Justice Department
said. “Defendants cannot avoid responsibility by claiming the
other is responsible.”
It was Melissa Duncan of Legal Aid Society who heard from
the Public Defender’s Office that the juvenile inmates in solitary
were not getting a sufficient education.
“We are pleased that the Palm Beach County Sheriff’s Office
and School Board of Palm Beach County are willing to address
the harmful conditions of solitary confinement and ensuing lack
of access to appropriate education,” said Duncan, supervising
attorney of the Legal Aid Society of Palm Beach County’s
Education Advocacy Project.
Duncan discovered that juveniles in solitary often were
provided with packets of educational material, but that the closest
thing to a lesson would be from an instructor outside their cell who
could barely be seen because of scratches through the cell door
windows.
Putrid water to drink
But the situation was far worse than just a lack of education.
The Human Rights Defense Center found that these young inmates
spent nearly 24 hours in their small cell adorned only with a metal
cot, a sink and stainless steel desk and commode bolted to the wall.
Their food was passed on a tray through a slot in their cell.
They were forced to drink the putrid discolored water from
the sink attached to their toilet.
One teen inmate ended up in the box for 16 consecutive
months. Another spent 21 months there. A former 10th grader at
Lake Worth High School, started hallucinating, staring at the blank
wall of his cell, thinking he was watching a TV show.
After the lawsuit was filed, Bradshaw said he was in
compliance with the Florida Model Jail Standards and noted the
lead plaintiff in the lawsuit faced charges of first-degree murder.
“There are legitimate security and inmate safety concerns” his
statement read.
Under the settlement, the sheriff’s office has agreed to send
a team to a weekly segregated review committee on the status of
juvenile inmates in segregated housing. They are bound to confer
within 24 hours after a teenage inmate is placed in solitary.
The lawsuit repeatedly emphasized how mental health
services were used as additional punishment for the juveniles in
solitary who complained too much. Deputies would threaten to
send them to the mental health ward on a suicide watch where they
would be stripped naked and left in a freezing cell, wearing only
a paper gown.
Now the sheriff’s office must refer the juvenile to a mental
health professional for evaluation and to determine whether any
accommodations are necessary.

Nehomie Perceval of West Palm Beach said her son, Jeremy,
had been diagnosed with ADHD and anxiety before he ended up
in solitary. A judge eventually ordered him released from the box.
“I don’t want any other kid to go through that again, being in
solitary confinement,” Perceval said. “A child is a child regardless
of what the child did or did not do. Mentally, it will drive the kid
crazy.”
www . palmbeachpost . com / news /20181109/ sheriff - to - end - solitary confinement-for-teens-at-palm-beach-county-jail-under-settlement

--------------------------------------------

MENTALLY ILL MAN ALLOWED TO STARVE TO
DEATH IN PRISON, LAWSUIT SAYS

The West Palm man had lost lost 75 pounds in 2½ years.
by John Pacenti
August 3, 2018
Palm Beach Post

W

hen Vincent Gaines started serving his five-year prison
sentence for burglary, the West Palm Beach resident weighed
190 pounds. He was also known to be bipolar and psychotic with
borderline intellectual functioning.
In fact, his prison intake information described him as stocky.
When he died, the 5-foot-9 Gaines weighed 115 pounds and
was found naked with what appeared to be feces caked to the
bottoms of his feet. He had lost 75 pounds in 2½ years.
Somehow, under the supervision of prison guards and a
company paid to provide medical care to inmates, the 52-year-old
prisoner starved to death in his cell at Union Correctional Institution,
according to a federal lawsuit filed Wednesday by his family and
initiated by the Human Rights Defense Center in Lake Worth.
The death again put the spotlight on Corizon Health, the forprofit medical health provider that in 2015 walked away from its
$1.2 billion, five-year contract with the Department of Corrections
after an award-winning Palm Beach Post investigation. Corizon
claimed it was losing $1 million a month and it was a fiscal
decision, but it left its contract after reports of inmates dying for
lack of adequate medical care.
Corizon’s spokeswoman, Martha Harbin, said the company

is prohibited by privacy laws to discuss Gaines’ medical condition
and treatment. “But we have fully reviewed his medical record
and feel confident that appropriate evidence-based care was
provided,” she said.
The Department of Corrections, a defendant in the lawsuit
along with Corizon, had yet to be served with the lawsuit to review
it, but spokesman Patrick Manderfield said the “department is
committed to ensuring all inmates have access to appropriate
health services.”
Gaines was survived by his mother, two brothers and a sister
— Lorine, Randolph, Glenn and Sylvia — but they never got word
of his death. DOC buried Gaines on prison property.
“Vincent’s death is yet another tragic tale of a large corporation
valuing its profits more than human life,” his family said in a statement.
“No one deserves to die like Vincent did — starving and alone.”
The Gaineses’ attorney, Edwin Ferguson, said that if Gaines
had received adequate care from DOC and Corizon — both of
which were well-versed in his mental illness — then he would
have served his sentence and be out of prison by now.
“He was sent to prison to serve a five-year term, not to die,” he
said. “Too many people are dying in our prisons. We have to end this.”
FDOC was well aware that Gaines wasn’t able to properly
eat on his own without supervision ensuring that he got enough
nutrition, said attorney Masimba Mutamba of the Human Rights
Defense Center.
“If prisoners go on hunger strikes, there are protocols in place to
initiate force-feedings,” he said. “So it was either gross negligence
to the point that no one was checking on him at all or there was the
deliberate withholding of food or supervision. Either way, there is
no excuse for a mentally ill prisoner starving to death.”
Gaines’ family said his lengthy criminal record was exacerbated
by his mental illness. By the time he caught the burglary charge
in 2012 for breaking into a West Palm Beach apartment, he was
already a repeat offender and served prison time.
A judge recommended he serve time near his family and
Gaines was placed in Dade Correctional Institution near Miami.
Even by that time, Gaines was “exhibiting mood swings, auditory
hallucinations, paranoia, disorganized thinking and was talking to
himself,” according to the lawsuit.
While at Dade, Gaines destabilized further by urinating and
defecating on the floor of his cell and refusing treatment. He was
placed on suicide watch and fed a boneless diet in a Styrofoam
tray, without utensils, according to the complaint.
Gaines then got in trouble in April 2015, when he mouthed
off to a guard after trying to go into the prison cafeteria without
permission. Gaines ended up with a disciplinary report, ironically,
for trying to get some food, Ferguson said.
Shortly thereafter, Gaines was transferred to Florida State
Prison in Raiford and then to UCI nearby. There he was placed in
“close management” to keep him apart from the general population.
Records show that by Sept. 29, 2015, Gaines had largely
stabilized and no longer demonstrated psychosis or bizarre behavior,
the lawsuit says. Less than three months later, he was dead.
How Corizon’s medical staff could not see that Gaines
was wasting away in his cell is one of the questions the lawsuit
hopes to answer. “This is just one more example in a long line
of poor treatment of the mentally ill by Corizon,” Mutamba said.
Ferguson added: “We have not been able to get a straight
answer from Corizon or FDOC, but we certainly expect to get
that answer now.”

Tennessee-based Corizon’s troubling record is welldocumented. Inspectors in September 2015 — shortly before the
company pulled out of Florida — released a blistering report on
the lack of adequate medical care provided by prisoners.
Three prisoners with cancer were misdiagnosed by Corizon
and given ibuprofen for their tumors. Two of the inmates died.
Also, mentally disturbed inmates were inexplicably taken off their
prescribed psychiatric medication, inspectors found.
Corizon settled another federal lawsuit brought on behalf of
mentally ill prisoner Carlo Daniel Laudadio, who in October 20111
had been booked into the Lee County Jail, where the company also
provided medical treatment.
Laudadio — off his medication and never seen by a proper
Corizon doctor — hung himself in the shower after an altercation
with guards, the lawsuit states. It was settled.
In a separate lawsuit filed last week in Palm Beach County
Circuit Court, the Human Rights Defense Center filed a complaint
against Corizon, claiming it is failing to comply with Florida’s
public records law. The center has asked for all administrative and
lawsuit-related payouts involving the company from 2011 to 2017.
“That is when you really discover how abusive the system has
been,” Mutamba said. “That is how you find out all the wrongful
deaths, misdiagnoses — all of those things. And, of course, we
haven’t received any documents from Corizon.”
The Gaines family is hoping for more than just a monetary
settlement in the lawsuit. They want the Florida prison system to
stop just warehousing the mentally ill and start treating them.
“Vincent was a loving son and brother who struggled with
mental illness for most of his adult life. We miss him dearly,” the
Gaines family said in a statement. “We hope that this case will help
to bring about prison reform nationwide.”
www . palmbeachpost . com / news / mentally - ill - man - allowed - starve death-prison-lawsuit-says/lp7eYKYn1wLbZ0VEkL8p9M/

----------------------------------------------------------------------

PRISON LITERACY, BANNED BOOKS, AND THE
RIGHT TO READ
by Magenta Loera, Angela Gonzalez-Curci, and Sophia Marciniak
July 29, 2019
The Washington Library Association Journal

A

ccording to the Bureau of Justice Statistics, the United States
prison population is estimated at nearly 1.5 million as of
2017. Furthermore, the Literacy Project Foundation has found
that three out of five prisoners are illiterate. With these alarming
figures in mind, we believe that raising awareness and support for
incarcerated people in the US is of pressing importance.
The regulation and banning of books are common in many
institutions across the United States, but are the most restrictive in
prisons. Within the last year, new regulations in Washington state
banning nonprofits from donating books to prisoners were quietly
approved. As information professionals, we can play a unique role
in ensuring that incarcerated individuals have equal access to literary
materials. One way that we can fulfill this role is by supporting human
rights organizations like The Human Rights Defense Center (HRDC)
in spreading awareness about these restrictive policies, and the
importance of setting clear criteria and explanations for their creation.

HRDC is a 501(c)(3) non-profit organization dedicated to
equal rights for incarcerated individuals across the country in
prisons, jails, and immigrant and juvenile detention facilities. The
organization was started by a group of volunteers in 1990 as a way
to publish a monthly newsletter, now titled Prison Legal News, to
provide a voice for both prisoners and their families.
In spring 2019, we began work on a collaborative project
with the HRDC that aims to find and request information from the
Department of Corrections (DOCs) in each state regarding which
books are banned by their prison systems, as well as information
about their review committees and processes, if applicable. We are
in the process of creating a publicly accessible list of contacts for
the departments, and are requesting policies that are responsible
for regulating access to books in each states’ prison system.
Due to both our time constraints and monetary constraints of
the HRDC, the scope of this project has thus far been limited to
state adult corrections facilities.
Information on how these facilities are restricting prisoners’
access to print materials is considered a priority for two major
reasons. Firstly, state DOCs are putting out the types of directives

The Literacy Project
Foundation has found that
three out of five prisoners
are illiterate.
like the one in Washington state that galvanized this project into
being. Secondly, state DOCs are more likely to have publicly
requestable material and policies for their adult corrections
facilities, for which the states can be held accountable. If a state
facility with a list of rejected print publications and a policy on
how to vet them is found to be violating its own procedures, an
organization like the HRDC can hold that state accountable
through its own documentation.
Book regulation lists are updated yearly, and thus need
to be requested on an annual schedule to avoid being out of
date. So far, we have received banned book lists from eight
states: Illinois, Iowa, Kansas, Michigan, Montana, New
Hampshire, Utah, and Vermont. We have also found or received
policy documentation about restriction information on banned
materials or outdated banned book lists from Connecticut,
Idaho, Louisiana, Maine, Massachusetts, Michigan, Nevada,
Rhode Island, and Vermont.
We have already received national attention from online
news sources. Among them, Newsweek wrote an article that
highlighted the work we are doing and challenged readers to
think critically about the types of books that are being banned.
We are heartened by these responses, and we hope that the
increased visibility for the work we are doing will encourage
more information professionals to collaborate on similar prison
literacy projects in need of further attention, such as obtaining
banned books lists for state juvenile facilities and immigration
detention centers. We also hope that our work will lead to greater
transparency and information regarding governmental criteria
for banning specific reading materials for prisoners.

MORE TENNESSEE PRIVATE PRISON
HOMICIDES THAN PUBLIC
By Jonathan Mattise
July 10, 2019
Associated Press

A

majority of Tennessee’s prisoners are held in state-run
facilities, yet the state’s privately run prisons have more
inmate homicides, according to a new report by prisoner
advocacy groups.
There have been 10 homicides in the privately run state
prisons from March 2014 through this June, versus five in state-run
lockups, according to the report released Wednesday by the Human
Rights Defense Center and No Exceptions Prison Collective.
Tennessee-based private prison operator CoreCivic’s state
facilities had a homicide rate more than four times higher than
public state facilities, the report says.
The company, in response, called the report misleading.
CoreCivic, formerly known as Corrections Corporation of
America, runs four Tennessee state prisons, while the state operates
10. The state spent about $160 million on the four private facilities in
2017-18, according to budget documents. The company says it moved
its headquarters from Nashville to nearby Brentwood this week.
On average, public prisons held 70% of Tennessee’s prisoners
during the period studied.
At a news conference Wednesday featuring family members
of prisoners, the advocacy groups pointed to the report to renew
their call for the state to nix its use of private prisons.
“When CoreCivic fails to ensure the safety and security of their
prisons and (prisoners are) murdered as a result, they should be
held accountable for those lapses in security to the same extent that
people are held accountable for their crimes by being sentenced to
prison,” said Alex Friedmann of the Human Rights Defense Center.
CoreCivic spokeswoman Amanda Gilchrist described the
report as a “politically biased interpretation of cherry-picked
statistics.” She claimed CoreCivic’s facilities hold a higher
concentration of dangerous inmates, among other factors.

“The bottom line is that even one death in our facilities is too
many, and we’re always working to improve,” Gilchrist said in an
emailed statement.
Tennessee’s maximum security prisons are exclusively staterun. However, Tennessee Department of Correction spokeswoman
Neysa Taylor said that medium security inmates who reside
in general population often have higher rates of violence than
maximum security offenders. She said that’s due in part to the
extra precautions around maximum security inmates.
She also said gangs are on the rise in Tennessee prisons.
Taylor said the state has taken steps to reduce violence in
prisons, including tier management, a tip line and increased training.
“However, similar to the free world, no amount of training
can prevent the random acts of violence that spontaneously erupt
without any notice or preventable indicators,” Taylor said via email.
But at Wednesday’s news conference, family members of two
inmates who died at CoreCivic’s private prisons said their relatives
faced dangerous conditions.
Kayla Cherry stood in front of a blanket bearing pictures of
her nephew, Dameion Nolan, who died in May while he was an
inmate at CoreCivic-run Whiteville Correctional Facility.
Cherry said she had to hear it first from an inmate that Nolan
had died, despite numerous attempts to contact prison officials.
She said Nolan, who had been at Whiteville for 13 years of a 25year sentence, was tortured and stabbed to death.
CoreCivic and Department of Correction officials said Nolan’s
death remains under investigation, and declined to comment
further on it.
“To this day, I still don’t know how this was allowed, what
exactly happened,” Cherry said. “I just get hearsay from inmates
and other correctional officers that work at CoreCivic.”
https://www.apnews.com/34783b66698a494d8e1f293f5ba1e6bb

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

PRISONERS IN JUST TWO STATES CAN VOTE.
HERE'S WHY FEW DO

In Maine and Vermont, low literacy rates and little access to
information means many inmates don’t exercise their right
to cast ballots.
by Nicole Lewis
June 11, 2019
The Marshall Project

W

hen Sen. Bernie Sanders championed voting rights for
prisoners during a CNN town hall, he spotlighted an
intensifying national debate about why going to prison means
losing the right to vote.
Only two states in the country allow incarcerated people to
vote: Sanders’ home state of Vermont and its neighbor, Maine.
Sanders is the sole presidential candidate to support the idea. His
stance may reflect the reality that these states have long-established
procedures, and general public acceptance, of people voting from
behind bars.
The idea is percolating in other states, however. In June,
six of the 13 councilmembers in Washington, D.C. endorsed
legislation that would let the city’s prisoners vote. Legislators
in Massachusetts, Hawaii, New Mexico and Virginia introduced

measures to allow prisoners to vote earlier this year. None
succeeded, but several others states are making it easier for people
to vote once they leave prison. In May, Nevada’s governor signed
a bill that automatically restores voting rights for parolees. And,
last year, voters in Florida re-enfranchised nearly 1.5 million
residents with felony convictions while Louisiana restored voting
rights for nearly 36,000 people convicted of felonies. Lawmakers
are still considering similar proposals in Connecticut, New Jersey
and Nebraska.
Still, prisoners in 48 states lose the right to vote while
incarcerated. Roughly 15 states automatically restore voting rights
upon release, but several states such as Alabama and Mississippi
ban people from voting for life for some crimes.
Why are Vermont and Maine outliers? They share several
characteristics that make voting by prisoners less controversial.
Incarcerated people can only vote by absentee ballot in the place
where they last lived. They are not counted as residents of the
town that houses a prison, which means their votes can’t sway
local elections if they vote as a bloc. And unlike many states,
the majority of prisoners in Maine and Vermont are white, which
defuses the racial dimensions of felony disenfranchisement laws.
Laws barring people with felony convictions from voting
first began cropping up in Southern states during the Jim Crow
era. Many voting rights advocates say the laws were a deliberate
attempt to limit black political power. Of the nearly 6.1 million
people estimated to be disenfranchised because of a felony
conviction, nearly 40 percent are black, according to a 2018 report
by the Sentencing Project.
Joseph Jackson, founder of the Maine Prisoner Advocacy
Coalition, suspects the racial demographics in Maine and Vermont
may account for the fact that prisoners in either state never lost
the right to vote. In Maine and Vermont, black people represent
a larger share of prisoners compared to their share of the general
population, but are a minority of the state's prisoners overall,
nearly 7 and 10 percent respectively.
In Maine and Vermont, the state constitutions guarantee voting
rights for all citizens, interpreted to include incarcerated people
from the earliest days of statehood (in Vermont, a legal decision
dates from 1799). Past attempts to exclude those convicted of
serious crimes have failed in the legislatures. Currently, there is no
organized opposition in either state to voting from prison.
Corrections officials in both states encourage inmates to vote,
but rely on volunteers to register inmates. In recent election years,
voting advocacy organizations such as the League of Women Voters
and the NAACP have coordinated with corrections departments
to hold voter registration drives in the prisons. To bridge the
information gap, they share one-pagers with information about the
state candidates and explain their positions on key issues.
Yet the barriers to voting, both external and internal, remain
high. Incarcerated people are restricted from using the Internet and
often cut off from news in the places they used to live. They are not
allowed to campaign for candidates, display posters or show other
signs of political partisanship.
Experts and volunteers who try to encourage voting from
prison suspect that very few actually exercise the rights they have.
Neither corrections department tracks inmate voting or registration,
so statistics on participation or the political ideologies of prisoners
are unavailable. Because their votes are counted along with other
absentee ballots, election officials in Maine and Vermont do not
specifically tally how many incarcerated people vote.

For John Sughrue, the law librarian at Southern State
Correctional Facility in Vermont, voting is imperative, the only
“effective tool” inmates have for bringing change to the prison
system. Yet, he notes, only a tiny percentage of the people in the
prison where he is incarcerated end up voting. Among the few
interested in politics, discussing issues can be dangerous in prison;
as in the rest of the country, liberal and conservative inmates are
increasingly polarized.
“It seems the current political climate has rendered us
inexorably divided,” he wrote via the prison email system.
But the biggest issue, Sughrue says, is the shockingly high
illiteracy rate among Vermont’s prisoners. In helping people with
their legal cases, Sughrue realized many can’t read, and even those
who can read struggle to write, which makes registering to vote
and filling out a ballot practically impossible without help. The
corrections departments don’t track literacy rates among prisoners,
but in Vermont officials estimate nearly 20 percent of inmates
entered prison with less than a high school education. Some studies
estimate nearly 60 percent of people in prison are illiterate.
Despite volunteers’ efforts to engage incarcerated voters,
many inmates in Vermont don’t seem particularly interested,
said Madeline Motta, who helped register Vermont prisoners in
2018. Motta says some of the inmates were surprised to find they
could vote, assuming their felony conviction was an automatic
disqualifier. Others were more cynical, and expressed a general
distrust of anyone seeking public office. A handful felt as if there
was no point. Motta and the other volunteers tried to explain the
benefits of voting during registration drives.
“We explained to inmates that elected officials are making
decisions about your quality of life while you are incarcerated and
once you are out,” she said.
Motta estimates several dozen men registered to vote between
the two prisons she visited, which house roughly 500 prisoners.
Other volunteers had already registered some inmates, so even
her count was inexact. In Maine, Jackson estimates the NAACP
registered more than 200 voters last year, but he can’t say how
many actually voted.
Before the 2018 midterms, Kassie Tibbott traveled to five of
Vermont's prisons registering voters. Tibbott runs the Community
Legal Information Center at the Vermont Law School. She said she
heard very little political chatter during her visits, but a handful of
prisoners were buzzing over a state attorney race in Bennington.
Tibbott recognizes that a lack of access to information may be partly
to blame. Inmates can’t go online to research candidates. Many watch

television and listen to the radio, but
may not tune into the news.
“They don’t know enough
about the candidates, so why would
they vote?” she asked.
Voter disaffection is hardly
unique to prisoners, said Paul
Wright, executive director of Prison
Legal News. Sixty-one percent of
all eligible voters cast a ballot in
the 2016 presidential election, and
in the 2018 midterms, usually a
time of lower turnout, that number
dropped to 49 percent, according to
Pew Charitable Trusts.
Wright suspects that some
of the apathy about voting stems
from the relatively few candidates with track records on criminal
justice that would appeal to incarcerated people or those with raw
memories of encounters with police and prosecutors.
At the local level, he pointed out, officials who play a major role
in shaping criminal justice outcomes such as sheriffs, judges and
prosecutors often run unopposed or on tough-on-crime platforms.
Progressive prosecutors are a relatively recent phenomenon. So,
like disaffected segments of the general electorate, inmates may
believe their votes will make little difference.
“We don’t have much of a democracy when it comes to
candidate choice,” he said. “Making the conscious choice in
refraining from exercising your rights is just as important as
exercising them.”
www.themarshallproject.org/2019/06/11/prisoners-in-just-two-statescan-vote-here-s-why-few-do

---------------------------------------------------------------------

KANSAS PRISONERS BANNED FROM READING
A GAME OF THRONES ALONG WITH THOUSANDS
OF OTHER BOOKS
by Chantal Da Silva
May 31, 2019
Newsweek

F

rom Anthony Burgess' A Clockwork Orange to George R.R.
Martin's A Game of Thrones, thousands of books have been
banned from entering Kansas' state prisons over the last two
decades, with hundreds added to the list of "censored" literature
over the last two years.
Sharing the Kansas Department of Correction's banned book
list on Twitter, Books to Prisoners, an organization that facilitates
book donations to prisons, called the sheer number of books
banned in detention facilities across the state "unbelievable."
"We just received the banned books list from KDOC and it's
unbelievable," Books to Prisoners, which obtained the list with the
Human Rights Defense Center (HRDC), stated, before pointing
that there are nearly as many banned books as there are prisoners
at Kansas detention facilities.
"Kansas has fewer than 10,000 prisoners, yet more than 7,000
books are banned for them, from A Clockwork Orange to Are
Prisons Obsolete," the organization said.

"Kansas... it just seems like they hate books," Books to
Prisoners organizer and Public Records Manager at the HRDC
Michelle Dillon told Newsweek in a phone interview.
In her seven years working with Books to Prisoners, Dillon
said she had "never seen a list like this, except in Texas," where she
said officials have banned as many as 15,000 books.
According to the list shared by Books to Prisoners, in 2019
alone, the Kansas Department of Corrections has seen dozens
of books banned. These include Ron Stallworth's memoir Black
Klansman, which inspired Spike Lee's 2018 BlacKkKlansman film
about how Stallworth, an African American police officer from
Colorado Springs, infiltrated a local Ku Klux Klan branch.
Other notable books censored over the years include Soloman
Northup's 12 Years A Slave, E.L. James' Fifty Shades of Grey, Neil
Gaiman's American Gods and dozens of James Patterson novels.
At least 60 "how-to" books also made the ban list, including
How To Make Small Talk by Melissa Wadsworth, How To Paint
& Draw by Hazel Harrison, How To Analyze People by Aiden
McCoy, How to Disappear by Frank M. Ahearn and Eileen C.
Horan and How To Survive Anything, Anywhere by Chris McNab.
The list also includes a number of banned coloring books,
newsletters, comic books, including a number of Marvel and DC
comics, role-playing manuals for games such as Dungeons and
Dragons and Pathfinder and magazines, including Cosmopolitan,
Allure, Elle, Art in America, Hot Bike and Hooters.
While some of the books likely made the banned list due
to references of violence, such as Vince Flynn's Consent to Kill,
social media users were quick to point out how innocuous many
of the books, magazines and graphic novels appear to be. These
include Klaus Honnef's book on Contemporary Art and a "Step by
Step" guide on how to use Microsoft Office Excel 2007.
Dillon said prison book bans tend to vary from state to state,
with more conservative states tending to see greater censorship.
In the case of Kansas prisons, Dillon said: "Well, that's
Kansas, right? They traditionally have had some serious problems
with conservatism and contradictions within their own treatment
of people within the state."
However, she said "the more general problem with books in
prisons is that there's not a lot of oversight" when it comes to prison
literature restrictions, leading to "censorship that's happening on a
grand scale."
"The difficulties come down to no accountability, no oversight
and very vague policies that allow for a lot of interpretation,"
Dillon said.
For organizations like Books to Prisoners, the lack of clear
guidelines makes determining what literature can and cannot be
sent out to prisoners a difficult and time-consuming task. "It's like
trying to read the stars, you know? Is the moon waning? Is it a
Tuesday in February? Okay, then we can send this atlas," she said.
Atlases, she added, are also commonly rejected by prisons,
including maps of imaginary places, like Westeros in A Game of
Thrones.
With George R.R. Martin's popular books, Dillon said, it
may not even be the "violence or sexual content" that will get his
novels banned from prisons, "but it's also because of the maps
because, you know, somehow it could lead to a prisoner escaping
to Westeros."
Kansas Department of Corrections Secretary Roger Werholtz
said in a statement sent to Newsweek that decisions on which
books to censor are made based on pre-established criteria.

"If one item within a publication meets the criteria, then the
entire publication must be censored as we cannot redact that one
item," Werholtz said.
The corrections secretary said that if facility staff do flag
a publication for censoring, an appeal can be launched against
the decision.
"The current censorship list is approximately 15 years old.
Within this time frame, 1,622 publications have been appealed
with 141 appeals being overturned," Werholtz said.
"While this list reflects censorship activity during the past 15
years, the standards by which items are placed on the list have
evolved over time," he continued. "For instance, role playing
publications were not allowed within the facility at one time.
However, this is no longer a blanket practice. Also, at one time,
depictions of guns in magazines were not allowed. However, this
practice has changed and photographs of guns are now allowed.
The censorship list does not reflect these changes because our
practice is that each publication is reviewed as it enters a facility."
"Censorship decisions have been made based on maintaining
the safety and security of the facility and those decisions err on the
side of caution," Werholtz said.
However, he said that the Kansas Department of Corrections
was "planning to review the processes by which publications are
placed on this list."
Werholtz asserted that the department was "not aware that
the censorship process was an issue until objections were recently
raised in the media."
"A quick perusal of the list does raise questions about the
overzealousness of publications being placed on the list," he
admitted. "Our goal is to review the list and apply some common
sense judgement in how this list was and is put together."
In the meantime, he said, "offenders are not facing a shortage
of reading materials. Aside from operating facility libraries, the
facilities participate in the state's inter-library loan program so the
depth of selection is large and almost endless. The facilities also
now provide a limited number of books on tablets."
www.newsweek.com/kansas-prisoners-banned-reading-game-thronesalong-thousands-other-books-1440556

--------------------------------------------------------------

SIX LOUISIANA ANGOLA PRISON EMPLOYEES
RESIGN AFTER ALLEGED INAPPROPRIATE
RELATIONSHIPS WITH INMATES
by Daniel Moritz-Rabson
March 15, 2019
Newsweek

S

ix correctional officers and a nurse from Louisiana's Angola
Prison resigned after an investigation revealed they had
improper relationships with inmates and helped smuggle drugs,
The Advocate reported on Friday.
One employee, Denise Prevot, was accused of having sex
with an inmate. The Advocate reported that some individuals were
accused of helping smuggle illicit substances into the facility.
Another Myron Cage, is accused of conspiring with inmates to
help smuggle items into the prison.
Department of Corrections spokesman Ken Pastorick said that
the accused individuals, who range in age from 21 to 62, had resigned

within the past week, according to The Advocate. Four of the accused
have already been arrested.
"We will continue to crack down on those who choose to betray
the public trust, and will prosecute to the fullest extent of the law,"
Department of Public Safety and Corrections Secretary James M. Le
Blanc said in a statement emailed to Newsweek. "This is not a reflection
of the many hard working men and women in our Department who
are dedicated to keeping our prisons and our public safe."
Alex Friedmann, associate director of the Human Rights Defense
Center and managing editor of Prison Legal News, told Newsweek
that the prosecution of staff engaged in misconduct is unusual.
Angola prison received public scrutiny in October when
a paraplegic inmate spoke in federal court about conditions in
the facility.
Farrell Sampier said that inmates needing medical treatment
were not adequately cared for and were forced to sit in their own
feces, according to the ACLU.
"There has been a long history of misconduct by staff at Angola,
including indictments for a scheme to sell horses to private parties by
bypassing public auctions; the brutal beating of a prisoner following
an attempted escape that resulted in the conviction of three guards,
including a major and a captain; and a $1.5 million jury verdict
against five Angola guards who beat a prisoner in retaliation for filing

[I]n 2015, there were 24,661 reports
of sexual victimization in adult
correctional facilities. Of the reported
incidents, 58 percent involved
employee victimization of inmates.
grievances and lawsuits," Friedmann said.
He also noted the former misconduct by former Angola Warden
Burl Cain.
"The recent Angola indictments are an indication there is a very
thin line between the keepers and the kept in prison, and sometimes
that line is crossed."
Inappropriate and sexual relations between inmates and prison
employees have previously occurred at facilities around the country.
Two years ago, The Charlotte Observer published an
investigation that found 65 prison employees in North Carolina had
been fired for inappropriate conduct with inmates.
"You have a relationship with an inmate and all of a sudden,
he owns you," Gary Harkins, who formerly was a research director
at the American Correctional Officer Intelligence Network, told the
outlet. "If they want weapons in return for sex, that puts a lot of
people in danger."
Sexual predation also regularly occurs in correctional facilities.
A Department of Justice report on sexual victimization in
prisons released in July 2018 said that, in 2015, there were 24,661
reports of sexual victimization in adult correctional facilities.
Of the reported incidents, 58 percent involved employee
victimization of inmates.
www.newsweek.com/employees-resign-angola-prison-louisiana-1364898

THE FIRST STEP ACT COULD BE A BIG GIFT TO
CORECIVIC AND THE PRIVATE PRISON INDUSTRY
by Liliana Segura
December 22, 2018
The Intercept

O

n the day the U.S. Senate passed the First Step Act, the muchheralded federal criminal justice reform bill just signed into law,
63-year-old Bill Anderson stood before a joint subcommittee of the
Tennessee General Assembly. With his wife Teresa, Anderson had
traveled from Cleveland, Tennessee, far from Washington, D.C., and a
nearly three-hour drive from downtown Nashville.
“We’re here because of the death of our son,” Anderson began.
“On December 6, 2018, he was found hanging in his cell in Trousdale
Turner.” The facility is the largest private prison in Tennessee and
one of the most dangerous, beset by staff shortages, gang activity and
inadequate medical care. News reports, whistleblowers, and families
like the Andersons have long raised alarm about Trousdale, where
numerous people have died since it opened in 2016.
The hearing was set to follow up on a damning audit in 2017.
Run by CoreCivic, the Nashville-based company formerly known as
the Corrections Corporation of America, Trousdale opened under a
$276-million contract, promising programs aimed at rehabilitation,
from job training to drug counseling. Instead it quickly came to embody
the neglect and impunity that has made private prison companies
notorious nationwide.
Although the state relies on CoreCivic to house a third of its
incarcerated population, the company’s recent track record has prompted
local lawmakers to threaten its operations in Tennessee. For a fleeting
moment toward the end of the Obama administration, the company
appeared to be on the brink of losing business at the federal level as
well. But buoyed by Donald Trump’s election — and after rebranding
itself as a “government solutions company” — CoreCivic continues to
do steady business. A “zero tolerance” immigration policy has fueled
demand for immigration detention centers, where miserable conditions
have also proven deadly. Like Ross Anderson, who would have turned
35 this week, immigrants held at its facilities have died by suicide after
their mental illness went untreated.
In a checkered shirt and with a full beard, Bill Anderson maintained
his composure as he spoke of his son. But his grief was raw. His son’s
suicide occurred exactly three years after a “psychotic breakdown,”
when he fatally shot his girlfriend and her 5-year-old child. Diagnosed
as schizophrenic, he was driven by delusions and did not comprehend
his own actions, his father explained. Prosecutors wanted the death
penalty but ultimately offered a plea deal, according to the local press,
citing a “significant chance that he would have been found not guilty
by reason of insanity.” Despite a recommendation that Anderson’s son
be committed to a mental institution, he was instead sent to Trousdale.
After his death, the family was notified by a prison chaplain but never
heard from anyone else. “We’re tormented knowing he died alone in a
place where no one loved him, and he was just a number,” Anderson
said, his voice breaking.
Anderson was still speaking when Republican Sen. Mike Bell,
acting as committee chair, interrupted. “Your three minutes are up,”
he said. As he prepared to move on, Teresa Anderson, who had wept
quietly into a tissue as her husband spoke, held up her son’s obituary
from the Cleveland Daily Banner. “We got our information from the
newspaper and from no one else,” she said. Repeated phone calls had
never been returned. “We just want answers,” her husband said. “And I
don’t think that’s unreasonable at all.”
Anderson was only the second witness to speak at the hearing
that morning. But his testimony proved too much for Democratic Rep.

Bo Mitchell, who erupted in frustration. It was just last year that the
committee had heard similarly disturbing accounts about CoreCivic’s
facilities. “I’m sick of hearing citizens of this state come in here with
these stories. And then we tell ’em, Hey, your son’s life is worth three
minutes,” he said. The state of Tennessee pays CoreCivic hundreds
of millions of dollars in contracts, then stands by as people die in its
prisons, imposing fines that barely make a dent in its bottom line.
“We do nothing, again and again and again,” Mitchell fumed. No
one from the company had even bothered to show up to the hearing.
Part of the Solution
As the hearing in Nashville was underway Tuesday morning,
lawmakers in Washington, D.C. were gearing up for a different fight.
After months of wrangling and mixed signals from the president, the
First Step Act was tantalizingly close to becoming law. A series of
“poison pill” amendments threatened to sink the landmark legislation
at the eleventh hour, with Arkansas Sen. Tom Cotton raising the specter
of violent criminals unleashed upon society. But the scaremongering
proved unconvincing. By 9 p.m. Tuesday, the amendments had been
overwhelmingly defeated. On Friday, Trump signed the bill into law.
In a political climate that feels endlessly dark and divisive, the
successful passage of bipartisan criminal justice reform feels to many
like an unmitigated good, if not miraculous. Since it was first passed by
the House in May, the First Step Act won over skeptics from across the
political spectrum — and for some good reasons. Among its bright spots
are improvements on the conditions of confinement, particularly for
women, as well as a number of hard-fought sentencing reforms. Federal
judges will have more discretion going forward in some nonviolent
drug cases. And for thousands of people in federal prison — including
those denied clemency by the Obama administration — the law offers a
potential path to early release.
But while it has been hailed as the most significant criminal justice
reform measure in a generation, most agree that the First Step Act has
limited reach. Lobbying by law enforcement reduced even further the
already limited pool of individuals eligible for its central provisions; a
list of revisions released by the Judiciary Committee last week included
18 bullet points of “disqualifying offenses,” from arson to assault to
“felonies committed while in a dangerous street gang.” Many have also
decried the categorical exclusion of immigrants who represent more
than half of all federal prosecutions. Within a federal prison population
that represents less than 15 percent of those behind bars in this country,
the First Step Act will directly assist a relative handful of carefully
vetted individuals — a fraction within a fraction of the country’s 2.1
million incarcerated people.
At the same time, critics of the First Step Act worry that it could be
far-reaching in other ways. Some warn of unintended consequences down
the line. Implementing the First Step Act will rely on infrastructure that
has yet to be built — and which could give opportunities for companies
like CoreCivic to expand their business. Indeed, along with its main
competitor, GEO Group, CoreCivic enthusiastically backed the First
Step Act. Both corporations have spent years repositioning themselves
from private prison firms to providers of re-entry services — the very
kinds of “evidence-based” tools that the legislation repeatedly invokes.
For its part, CoreCivic insists that prison reform like the First
Step Act is central to its values. After all, the law’s stated goal is
“to provide for programs to help reduce the risk that prisoners will
recidivate upon release from prison” — a mission it claims to share. In
a holiday greeting published on the company’s website this week, CEO
Damon Hininger boasted about the ways that CoreCivic spent the year
“building a company culture focused on reentry.” There was the release
of CoreCivic’s “first-ever Reentry Report,” for example, as well as an
“inaugural Reentry Conference,” where the company shared ideas and
best practices with national re-entry experts. “As I visited facilities in

2018,” Hininger wrote, “I could see a growing understanding that each
of us is a reentry professional and that we all have a hand in helping the
individuals in our care put their lives back on track.”
Hininger’s letter was accompanied by a photo of smiling
executives holding shovels adorned with red, white, and blue ribbons.
Two days later, as the First Step Act made its way to the Oval Office,
Hininger released a congratulatory statement. “We’ve never been better
positioned to be part of the solution to one of the most costly, complex
and longstanding challenges our country faces,” he wrote, adding, “We
couldn’t be more excited about the work ahead and the difference we
feel we can make for the American people.”
The Treatment Industrial Complex
It is hard to say specifically how much CoreCivic stands to gain
from the First Step Act. Its design and implementation will be largely
up to the U.S. attorney general, who within 180 days of the enactment
of the law “shall develop and release a risk assessment system” to
determine who should be eligible to enter programs to facilitate reentry. This part of the law has sparked particular alarm, since evidence
shows that the algorithms used to calculate risk amount to little more
than racial profiling.
The attorney general is also responsible for guiding the
implementation of the programs, “developing policies for the warden of
each prison of the Bureau of Prisons to enter into partnerships, subject
to the availability of appropriations.” In a December 17 advocacy
letter, the American Civil Liberties Union and Leadership Conference
flagged this provision as one cause for concern, specifically the clause
that allows for partnerships with “private entities.” This “could result in
the further privatization of what should be public functions and would
allow private entities to unduly profit from incarceration,” it warned.
For CoreCivic, a company synonymous with prison profiteering,
this is precisely the point. The Tampa Bay Times recently reportedthat
the bill “authorizes a $375 million expansion of post-prison services for
inmates transitioning back into society” — the very products CoreCivic
has spent years developing.
“These companies are very savvy,” says Alex Friedmann, associate
director of the Human Rights Defense Center and a leading expert on
the private prison industry. Based in Nashville, Friedmann was himself
once incarcerated at a CoreCivic prison; in the years since his release,
he has dedicated himself to investigating the company and others like it.
He was also among those who testified at before Tennessee lawmakers
earlier this week, providing context for the death of Ross Anderson. For
all the drama and disturbing testimony, there was little that surprised
him, Friedmann said. CoreCivic has spent decades embroiled in scandal,
without paying any real consequences. As far as its potential profiting
from the First Step Act, it is “business as usual.”
Friedmann traces CoreCivic’s involvement in re-entry to 2010
and 2011, when the national prison population began to level off.
Private prison companies “diversified to other things,” entering the
market for electronic tracking and re-entry facilities. As prison reform
offering alternatives to incarceration went mainstream, a vast realm of
“rehabilitative” services proved lucrative. A 2014 report co-authored
by American Friends Service Committee, Grassroots Leadership,
and the Southern Center for Human Rights traced the contours of the
burgeoning “treatment industry complex,” showing the myriad ways
in which prison profiteers had expanded their services to include
“alternative” programs and technologies like GPS ankle bracelets for
electronic monitoring.
As it continued to roll out new products to meet the demand
for supervised re-entry, CoreCivic did what the industry has always
done: pushed for more laws that would be good for business. In 2017,
CoreCivic announced a stepped-up lobbying campaign to reduce
recidivism, along with support for political candidates who support

reform efforts. “A lot of folks would assume that we have a view that
the status quo is fine, and that’s just not our view,” one executive told
reporters. “We want to be a part of the solution.”
Incentives and Rewards
The 2014 report on the “treatment industrial complex” issued
a prescient warning against expanding the kind of alternatives to
incarceration enshrined in the First Step Act. Community confinement
may be preferable to a prison cell, but the increased use of electronic
monitoring can risk putting “more people on stricter forms of supervision
than is necessary, for longer than is warranted.” The report also urged
readers to be wary of allowing companies like CoreCivic to influence
legislation. “The role of for-profit prison corporations in these important
policy discussions could mean the difference between reforms that truly
address human needs and a destructive ‘widening of the net’ that only
serves to increase the level of control and surveillance at the expense of
public safety.”
Friedmann says that in the grand scheme of things — and relative
to the billions such companies make every year — the financial rewards
offered by the First Step Act are not likely to be huge. “What it does is
it perpetuates the industry,” he said. “It gives them another inroad to do
what they do, which is to profit off incarceration.”
For some, this fulfills fears that have been a long time coming. In
2017, the Federal Bureau of Prisons began quietly defunding halfway
houses across the country. Some 16 facilities lost their contracts; while
the Trump administration claimed the facilities were “underutilized,”
observers saw something more strategic underway. “While it is too
early to say what that portends,” Prison Legal News reported earlier this
year, “some critics believe the BOP is realigning its residential reentry
center portfolio to make room for halfway houses operated by private
prison firms that made substantial donations to President Trump’s
election campaign or inauguration fund.”
DeAnna Hoskins, an outspoken critic of the First Step Act
and executive director of JustLeadershipUSA, was working at the
Department of Justice when the halfway house contracts were ended.
Formerly incarcerated in Indiana, Hoskins had been through the reentry
process herself. She remembers the concern expressed by members of
Congress whose constituents said the funding was still urgently needed.
“The Bureau of Prisons contracts out 100 percent of their re-entry center
beds,” Hoskins explains. By slashing the existing halfway houses, then
passing laws that rely on transitional housing, “now you just opened up
the door for GEO Group and CoreCivic to come in.”
Like many racial justice activists, Hoskins worries that the First
Step Act risks replacing “one form of incarceration with another” by
placing more and more people on electronic monitoring. The contracts
for such technology can be particularly exploitative since they can rely
upon the subjects of such monitoring — disproportionately poor people
and communities of color — to pay for the devices themselves. Once
private firms have secured contracts to provide such tools, she warns,
there is no incentive to reduce their use. “What is the benefit for GEO
Group or CoreCivic to make sure people are successfully weaned off of
home incarceration?”
Oversight and Accountability
Among progressive organizers who fought to pass the First Step
Act, few if any would welcome the prospect of CoreCivic cashing
in on the legislation. “We absolutely are not willing to have this be a
moneymaking endeavor where people are profiting off of somebody
else’s struggle,” says Erin Haney, policy director of advocacy group
#Cut50, one of the leading champions of the law. Ensuring that the
law is implemented responsibly has been a central concern, Haney
says — and indeed, many groups on the left only endorsed the bill after
language was added to address the need for oversight and accountability,
particularly over the risk-assessment tools.

Haney points to one important safeguard, courtesy of an
amendment by Rep. Sheila Jackson Lee — an Independent Review
Committee made up of six experts, who will monitor the rollout of the
First Step Act. “The attorney general is required to report how this is
going,” Haney says. She stresses that, as with the public advocacy for
the legislation, which put formerly incarcerated people front and center,
those with lived experience will play a crucial role. After all, they know
better than anyone what works and what doesn’t when attempting to
rejoin the outside world after prison.
Still, the language of the law offers few guarantees. Vivian Nixon,
executive director of College and Community Fellowship, worries that
the First Step Act is full of holes. “On the surface, a lot of this stuff looks
good,” she said. But digging deeper into the text, she sees ambiguities
and red flags. “Where is the money gonna go?” she asks. “And what
are the long-term implications for the communities that are already
impacted in a disparate way by our justice system?”
Like Hoskins, Nixon also spent years behind bars. She says she
has a lot of respect for those who fought to pass the First Step Act. But
she also knows how ruthless the criminal justice system can be when
it stands to benefit off the backs of incarcerated people. When she was
in prison in New York state, she said, one of the available jobs was
working for Prison Industries to weld together desks — “those old, gray
metal desks you used to see in government buildings,” she says. “And
you had to sign a waiver that if you got hurt, if you chopped off your
finger, if you burned a hole in your eye, no matter what happened to
you, you could not recoup any rewards from the state.”
Indeed, one provision of the First Step Act that has received little
scrutiny calls for “expanding inmate employment through Federal
Prison Industries,” while auditing its “effectiveness in reducing
recidivism.” What this will mean in practical terms is, like many things,
hard to say for sure.
No One Would Listen
Before the hearing in Nashville concluded on Tuesday, lawmakers
had heard more disturbing testimony about CoreCivic facilities in
Tennessee. A woman talked about her son, an Army veteran with PTSD
and bipolar disorder who is not eligible for any of the programs offered
at Trousdale and has had problems receiving basic medical care. “They
don’t care about rehabilitation,” she said.
Another witness spoke on behalf of a friend incarcerated at a
different CoreCivic prison, where a regimen of constant lockdowns
means that he is not allowed outside his cell for a week or two at a
time. In a diary entry written over the summer, his friend described how
the water and electricity were both shut down, leading to an oppressive
combination of heat and the foul stench of his overflowing toilet, which
was like an “open sewer.”
Finally, a man named Edwin Steakley approached the mic and
said he had been released from Trousdale earlier this year. Wearing a
yarmulke and an anguished expression, he said he had been violently
targeted because he is Jewish, twice gang raped and forced to perform
oral sex. When he tried to tell the proper authorities, no one would
listen, he said. He could not even call the federal hotline devised by
another major federal reform, the Prison Rape Elimination Act.
There was no record of the incident in the audit before the
lawmakers. Tennessee Department of Correction Commissioner Tony
Parker vowed to look into it. But he defended CoreCivic throughout the
hearing. The company remains a valuable partner, he said. “They work
well with us to try to correct these issues.”
Parker also pointed out that a number of the problems faced at
Trousdale exist at state facilities too. Indeed, his predecessor was often
under fire for prison conditions in Tennessee. Not long after Trousdale
opened, that commissioner left to work for GEO Group.
theintercept.com/2018/12/22/first-step-act-corecivic-private-prisons/

Prison Education Guide

$49.95

Christopher Zoukis

ISBN: 978-0-9819385-3-0 • Paperback, 269 pages
Prison Education Guide is the most comprehensive guide to correspondence programs for prisoners available today.
This exceptional book provides the reader with step by step instructions to find the right educational program,
enroll in courses, and complete classes to meet their academic goals. This book is an invaluable reentry tool for prisoners who seek to further their education while incarcerated and to help them prepare for life and work following
their release.

The Habeas Citebook: Ineffective Assistance of Counsel, Second Edition
Brandon Sample & Alissa Hull

$49.95

ISBN: 978-0-9819385-4-7 • Paperback, 275 pages
The Habeas Citebook: Ineffective Assistance of Counsel is the first in a series of books by Prison Legal News Publishing
designed to help pro-se prisoner litigants identify and raise viable claims for potential habeas corpus relief. This
book is an invaluable resource that identifies hundreds of cases where the federal courts have granted habeas relief
to prisoners whose attorneys provided ineffective assistance of counsel.

Disciplinary Self-Help Litigation Manual, Second Edition
Dan Manville

$49.95

ISBN: 978-0-9819385-2-3 • Paperback, 355 pages
The Disciplinary Self-Help Litigation Manual, Second Edition, by Dan Manville, is the third in a series of books by Prison
Legal News Publishing. It is designed to inform prisoners of their rights when faced with the consequences of a
disciplinary hearing. This authoritative and comprehensive work educates prisoners about their rights throughout
this process and helps guide them at all stages, from administrative hearing through litigation. The Manual is an
invaluable how-to guide that offers step-by-step information for both state and federal prisoners, and includes a
50-state analysis of relevant case law and an extensive case law citation index.

The Habeas Citebook: Prosecutorial Misconduct

$59.95

Alissa Hull

ISBN-13: 978-0-9819385-5-4 • Paperback, 300 pages
The Habeas Citebook: Prosecutorial Misconduct is the second in PLN Publishing’s citebook series. It’s designed to
help pro se prisoner litigants identify and raise viable claims for potential habeas corpus relief based on prosecutorial misconduct in their cases. This invaluable title contains several hundred case citations from all 50 states and on
the federal level, saving readers many hours of research in identifying winning arguments to successfully challenge
their convictions.

r Prison Education Guide

Order by mail, phone, or online.

r The Habeas Citebook

By: r check r credit card r money order

r Disciplinary Self-Help
Litigation Manual

Name _________________________________________________________________

r The Habeas Citebook:
Prosecutorial Misconduct
Shipping included in all prices.

Amount enclosed ______________

DOC/BOP Number ______________________________________________________
Institution/Agency ______________________________________________________
Address _______________________________________________________________
City _____________________________________ State _____ Zip _______________

Prison Legal News
Dedicated to Protecting Human Rights

Prison Legal News

PO Box 1151 • Lake Worth Beach, FL 33460
Tel 561-360-2523 • www.prisonlegalnews.org

57

October 2019

PLN Subscription Rates

Order Form
Note: All purchases must be pre-paid.
Books (3 & 4 yr subscription specials: CIRCLE
one book or bonus issues, and DO NOT add S/H)

$ Amt.

Protecting Your Health and Safety
or 4 Bonus Issues (3-yr subscription offer)

Free

Prison Profiteers
or 6 Bonus Issues (4-yr subscription offer)

Free

Book Total (inc. all books bought separately)

________

Add 6% sales tax for Florida residents only

________

ADD $6.00 S/H to book-only orders UNDER $50

________

---------------------------------------------

PLN Subscriptions
6-month Subscription (Prisoners only)
1 yr Subscription (12 issues)
2 yr Subscription (24 plus 2 Bonus issues)

_________

3 yr Sub (Circle bonus book above or 4 Bonus issues)
4 yr Sub (Circle bonus book above or 6 Bonus issues)
Back Issue (after publication date) - $5.00 each

_________

Sample Issue (random date) - $5.00 each

_________

TOTAL Amount Enclosed:

_______

_________
_________

_________
_________

Send to:
Name: ____________________________________
DOC #: ____________________________________

Agency/Inst: ____________________________________
Address: ____________________________________
City/State/Zip: ____________________________________

MAIL PAYMENT AND THIS FORM TO:
Prison Legal News
P.O. Box 1151
Lake Worth Beach, FL 33460
To purchase with Visa, MasterCard, Discover or
American Express, call: 561-360-2523
Or buy books and subscriptions online at:
www.prisonlegalnews.org

Subscription Rates
Prisoners
Individuals
Professionals/Entities

1 yr
$30
$35
$90

2 yrs
$60
$70
$180

3 yrs
$90
$105
$270

4 yrs
$120
$140
$360

(Attorneys, govt. & professional agencies, prison libraries, etc.)

Sample issue (random date) - $5.00 each
Back issue (after publication date) - $5.00 each
Six-month prisoner subscription for $18.00

Subscription Bonuses!
2 years - 2 bonus issues, for 26 monthly issues total.
3 years - 4 bonus issues (40 total) OR Protecting Your Health and
Safety (see book description on the other side of this brochure).
4 years - 6 bonus issues (54 total) OR Prison Profiteers (see descriptions on the other side of this brochure).

Dedicated to Protecting Human Rights
PLN is a project of the
Human Rights Defense Center

3 or 4-Year Subscription Book Offers!
Subscribe or renew for three years at the regular price
($90 for prisoners & $105 for individuals), and receive
as a FREE bonus, Protecting Your Health and Safety
or four bonus issues of PLN! (40 monthly issues total).
Indicate your choice on the Order Form.
Subscribe or renew for four years at the regular price
($120 for prisoners & $140 for individuals), and receive
as a FREE bonus, Prison Profiteers or 6 bonus issues
of PLN! (54 monthly issues total). Indicate your
choice on the Order Form.

Eastern State Penitentiary 1829-1971

\

NO shipping charge for subscription bonus books!
NOTE: If you want the bonus issues of PLN instead of the
free book offer, please indicate that on the Order Form.

Contact Us for PLN’s Book List!
You can buy dozens of legal, social commentary, selfhelp books, and legal and regular dictionaries directly
from PLN’s book store! Ask us for a book list, or view
our selection online at:
www.prisonlegalnews.org/store
All subscription rates & bonus offers are effective as of 1-1-19
No refunds after orders have been placed. Not responsible
for address changes after orders have been placed.

Charles Dickens visited Philadelphia’s Eastern
State Penitentiary in 1842 and he later wrote:
“The System is rigid, strict and hopeless ... and I
believe it to be cruel and wrong....I hold this slow
and daily tampering with the mysteries of the
brain to be immeasurably worse than any torture of the body.” The prison remained open for
129 years after Dickens condemned it as being
barbaric, and some of its inhumane practices still
continue to be used in prisons nationwide.
Tel: 555 555 5555

P.O. Box 1151, Lake Worth Beach, FL 33460
561-360-2523 • www.prisonlegalnews.org

“I truly appreciate all the efforts you put forth to safeguard
our Constitutional Rights.
From the heart I say ‘Thank
You’ on Behalf of us All!”
~ BL, Washington prisoner

P

rison Legal News is an independent, non-profit
72-page monthly publication that reports, reviews and analyzes court rulings and news related to
prisoners’ rights and criminal justice issues. PLN has a
national (U.S.) focus on state, federal and private
prison issues, with some international coverage.
PLN’s many thousands of subscribers and readers
include civil and criminal trial and appellate attorneys,
judges, public defenders, journalists, academics, paralegals, prisoners’ rights activists, students, family
members of prisoners, concerned individuals, politicians, other government officials and numerous local,
state and federal prisoners nationwide.
PLN is a vital link for prisoners who otherwise don’t
have access to current legal and prison-related news
and information.
“Invaluable resource for anyone wanting ‘user friendly’
information about current legal developments affecting
prisoners in the United States.”
~ Human Rights Watch, a long-time PLN subscriber

P

LN’s coverage of prison issues includes medical
neglect, disciplinary hearings, nutrition, living
conditions, excessive force, court access, censorship,
jail litigation, visiting, telephones, religious freedoms,
free speech, prison rape and sexual abuse, mental
health, attorney/client access, retaliation, the PLRA,
HIV and hepatitis C, control units, staff misconduct,
the death penalty, attorney fees and much more.
PLN Subscription Rates
Prisoners: $18 for 6 months or $30 per year
Non-incarcerated individuals: $35 per year
Professionals, attorneys, gov’t. agencies, libraries: $90 per year
Sample issue (random date): $5.00 each
Back issue (after publication date): $5.00 each

E

ach monthly issue of PLN includes three different
types of reporting:
A cover story on a criminal justice-related topic.

Articles about individual and class-action prison and

jail-related lawsuits when they are filed, when a judgment is entered or the case settles, or when an appellate
court decision is issued. We also have news articles about
prison and criminal justice topics nationwide.

A “News In Brief” section that summarizes interesting
news stories across the U.S. and internationally.

Each issue of PLN also contains numerous advertisements
from businesses that provide prison-related personal and
legal services and books. PLN further sells dozens of selfhelp, social commentary and legal books.

D

onations: PLN is a project of the non-profit Human
Rights Defense Center. Your tax-deductible donations support our advocacy, free speech and First Amendment litigation efforts on behalf of prisoners and publishers. PLN not only provides uncensored prison-related news,
but actively contests prison censorship that interferes with
the delivery of our publication or any other PLN materials
sent to prisoners. All donations further our goal of advocating for people imprisoned in U.S. detention facilities.
“Great source of information, especially in states such as
Arizona where the law libraries have been taken from
the inmates and replaced with paralegals.”
~ SB, Arizona prisoner

Special 4-Year Subscription Offer!
Special 3-Year Subscription Offer!
Free with a 3-year PLN subscription! Four bonus issues of
PLN (40 issues total) or a free book, Protecting Your
Health and Safety! Circle your bonus choice on the form
on the other side of this brochure (3-year subscription
rates: prisoners $90, individuals $105, professionals $270).
Protecting Your Health and Safety, by
Robert E. Toone. Published by the Southern Poverty Law Center, 325 pages (2009).
$10.00 (free with a 3-year sub!). This book
explains some basic rights that prisoners
have in a jail or prison in the U.S. It deals
mainly with rights related to health and
safety, such as communicable diseases and abuse by
prison officials; it also explains how you can enforce your
rights to health and safety within the facility and, if necessary, in court through litigation. Buy separately $10.00

Free with a 4-year PLN subscription! Six bonus issues
of PLN (54 issues total) or Prison Profiteers! Circle
your choice on the form on the other side of this
brochure (4-year subscription rates: prisoners $120,
individuals $140, professionals $360).
Prison Profiteers: Who Makes Money
from Mass Incarceration, edited by Paul
Wright & Tara Herivel, New Press, 323
pages (2007). $24.95 (free with a 4-year
subscription!). This is the third in a series
of PLN anthologies that examines the reality of mass imprisonment in the U.S.
Prison Profiteers is unique from other books on the market because it exposes and discusses who profits and
benefits from mass imprisonment, rather than who is
harmed by the prison industrial complex and our nation’s
reliance on over-incarceration. Buy separately $24.95

You Can Buy These Books Separately!

Check out PLN’s website!

If you don’t want to purchase a 3 or 4-year subscription
to PLN, you can still purchase any of the bonus books
at the regular price. Just indicate which books you want
to buy on this page, then enter the total cost on the other
side of this brochure on the “Book Total” line of the
Order Form. Shipping is $6 per order (not per book), and
we offer FREE shipping on book orders of $50 or more!
To place a phone order, please call 561-360-2523. We also
accept book orders online, at www.prisonlegalnews.org.

PLN’s website, www.prisonlegalnews.org, includes
every issue of PLN published since 1990, as well as
thousands of other news articles, court rulings, a
brief bank with pleadings in prison and jail cases, a
collection of criminal justice reports and other publications, and much more! Most of our online content is free, and you can purchase access to all our
legal content, including verdicts and settlements.

CLN Subscription Rates

Order Form
Note: All purchases must be pre-paid.
Books (3 & 4 yr subscription specials: CIRCLE

Subscription Rates

1 yr

2 yrs

3 yrs

4 yrs

Prisoners/Individuals $48
Professionals/Entities $96

$96
$192

$144
$288

$192
$384

(Attorneys, govt. & professional agencies, prison libraries, etc.)

one book or bonus issues, and DO NOT add S/H)

$ Amt.

Arrested: What to Do When Your Loved One’s in Jail

or 4 Bonus Issues (3-yr subscription offer)

Free

Habeas Citebook: Ineffective Assistance (2nd ed.)
or 6 Bonus Issues (4-yr subscription offer)

Free

Book total (inc. all books bought separately)

________

Add 6% sales tax for Florida residents only

________

ADD $6.00 S/H to book-only orders UNDER $50

________

---------------------------------------------

CLN Subscriptions
6-month Subscription (Prisoners only) $28
1 yr Subscription (12 issues)
2 yr Subscription (24 plus 2 Bonus issues)

_________

3 yr Sub (Circle bonus book above or 4 Bonus issues)
4 yr Sub (Circle bonus book above or 6 Bonus issues)
Back Issue (after publication date) - $5.00 each

_________

Sample Issue (random date) - $5.00 each

_________

TOTAL Amount Enclosed:

_______

_________
_________

_________
_________

Send to:
Name: ____________________________________
DOC #: ____________________________________

Agency/Inst: ____________________________________
Address: ____________________________________
City/State/Zip: ____________________________________

MAIL PAYMENT AND THIS FORM TO:
Criminal Legal News
P.O. Box 1151
Lake Worth Beach, FL 33460

Sample issue (random date) - $5.00 each
Back issue (after publication date) - $5.00 each
Six-month prisoner subscription - $28.00

Criminal Legal News
Dedicated to Policing
the Police State

Subscription Bonuses!
2 years - 2 bonus issues, for 26 monthly issues total.
3 years - 4 bonus issues (40 total) OR Arrested: What to Do...
(see book description on the other side of this brochure).
4 years - 6 bonus issues (54 total) OR The Habeas Citebook (2nd ed.)
(see book description on the other side of this brochure).

3 or 4-Year Subscription Book Offers!
Subscribe or renew for three years at the regular price
($144 for prisoners & $288 for professionals), and receive as a FREE bonus, Arrested: What to Do..., or
four bonus issues of CLN! (40 monthly issues total).
Please indicate your choice on the Order Form.
Subscribe or renew for four years at the regular price
($192 for prisoners & $384 for professionals), and receive as a FREE bonus, The Habeas Citebook (2nd ed.)
or 6 bonus issues of CLN! (54 monthly issues total).
Please indicate your choice on the Order Form.

— Criminal

Legal News —

The people who bring you Prison Legal
News proudly announce the
introduction of its
companion publication,
Criminal Legal News

NO shipping charge for subscription bonus books!

Same timely, relevant, and practical legal
news and features as PLN

NOTE: If you want the bonus issues of CLN instead of the
free book offer, please indicate that on the Order Form.

BUT

Contact Us for CLN’s Book List!

CLN provides legal news you can use
about the criminal justice system prior to
confinement and post-conviction relief

\

You can buy dozens of legal, social commentary, selfhelp books, and legal and regular dictionaries directly
from CLN’s book store! Ask us for a book list or view
our selection online at:
www.criminallegalnews.org/store

To purchase with Visa, MasterCard, Discover or
American Express, call: 561-360-2523

All subscription rates & bonus offers effective as of 1-1-19.

Or buy books and subscriptions online at:
www.criminallegalnews.org

No refunds after orders have been placed. Not responsible
for address changes after orders have been placed.

Tel: 555 555 5555

“STOP RESISTING”
and subscribe today!
P.O. Box 1151, Lake Worth Beach, FL 33460
561-360-2523 • www.criminallegalnews.org

E

ach monthly issue of CLN includes three different
types of reporting:
A cover story on a criminal justice-related topic.

News and legal articles and appellate court decisions about
criminal justice topics nationwide.

A “News In Brief” section that summarizes interesting
criminal justice related news stories across the U.S.

C

riminal Legal News is a 48-page monthly print
publication published by the Human Rights
Defense Center, a 501(c)(3) nonprofit human rights
organization that zealously advocates, educates, and
litigates on issues pertaining to prisoners’ rights as well
as individuals going through the criminal justice system.
CLN and its well-known companion publication
Prison Legal News serve as vital links for prisoners
who otherwise don’t have access to current legal and
prison-related news and information.

C

LN’s coverage of criminal justice issues includes, but is not limited to, criminal law and
procedure, police brutality, prosecutorial misconduct, habeas corpus relief, ineffective counsel, sentencing errors, militarization of police, surveillance
state, junk science, wrongful convictions, false confessions, witness misidentification, paid/incentivized
informants, search and seizure, right to remain silent, right to counsel, right to speedy trial, due process rights, and much more.

CLN Subscription Rates
Prisoners/Individuals: $48 per year
Professionals, attorneys, govt. agencies, libraries: $96 per year
Sample issue (random date): $5.00 each
Back issue (after publication date): $5.00 each

Each issue of CLN also contains numerous advertisements
from businesses that provide prison-related personal and
legal services and books. CLN further sells dozens of selfhelp, social commentary and legal books.

Special 3-Year Subscription Offer!
Free with a 3-year CLN subscription! Four
bonus issues of CLN (40 issues total) or a
free book, Arrested: What to Do When
Your Loved One’s in Jail! Circle your
bonus choice on the form on the other side
of this brochure (3-year subscription rates:
prisoners $146 / professionals $288).
Arrested: What to Do When Your Loved One’s in Jail, by
Wes Denham, 240 pages. $16.95 (free with a 3-year subscription!). Whether a defendant is charged with misdemeanor disorderly conduct or first-degree murder, this is
an indispensable guide for those who want to support
their family members or friends who have been arrested
and are facing criminal charges. Buy separately: $16.95

You Can Buy These Books Separately!
If you don’t want to purchase a 3 or 4-year subscription
to CLN, you can still purchase either of the bonus books
at the regular price. Just indicate which books you want
to buy on this page, then enter the total cost on the other
side of this brochure on the “Book Total” line of the
Order Form. Shipping is $6 per order (not per book), and
we offer FREE shipping on book orders of $50 or more!
To place a phone order, please call 561-360-2523. We also
accept book orders online, at www.criminallegalnews.org.

D

onations: CLN is a project of the non-profit Human
Rights Defense Center. Your tax-deductible donations support our advocacy, free speech and First Amendment litigation efforts on behalf of prisoners and publishers. All donations further our goal of informing and educating our readers about relevant developments regarding the
ever-expanding police state and recent appellate court decisions on issues of criminal and constitutional law affecting
our readership as well as the general public.

Our mission at CLN is to educate and inform readers about their constitutional rights and relevant
developments in criminal law in an effort to provide practical knowledge that can be used at all
stages within the criminal justice system prior to
imprisonment and for post-conviction relief.

Special 4-Year Subscription Offer!
Free with a 4-year CLN subscription! Six
bonus issues of CLN (54 issues total) or a free
book, The Habeas Citebook: Ineffective
Assistance of Counsel (2nd. ed)! Circle
your bonus choice on the form on the other
side of this brochure (4-year subscription
rates: prisoners $192 / professionals $384).
The Habeas Citebook: Ineffective Assistance of
Counsel, 2nd Edition, by Brandon Sample & Alissa
Hull. Published by Prison Legal News Publishing, 275
pages (2016). $49.95 (free with a 4-year subscription!).
The Habeas Citebook is an invaluable and concise self-help
guide for prisoners seeking habeas relief based on claims
of ineffective assistance of counsel. Navigating the complex terrain of habeas law is never easy, and claiming
your lawyer screwed up is even more difficult. The Habeas Citebook is an essential resource for all jailhouse lawyers. Buy separately: $49.95
NOTE: No refunds on CLN subscription or book orders after
orders have been placed. We are not responsible for incorrect
addresses or address changes after orders have been placed.
Please send any address changes as soon as possible; we do not
replace missing issues of CLN due to address changes.

Prison Legal News Book Store
Fill in the boxes next to each book you want to order, indicating the quantity and price. Enter the Total on the Order Form on the next page.
FREE SHIPPING on all book orders OVER $50 (effective 1-1-2019 until further notice). $6.00 S/H applies to all other book orders.
SUBSCRIBE TO PLN FOR 4 YEARS AND CHOOSE ONE BONUS!

SUBSCRIBE TO PLN FOR 3 YEARS AND CHOOSE ONE BONUS!

1. SIX (6) FREE ISSUES FOR 54 ISSUES TOTAL! OR
2. PRISON PROFITEERS (A $24.95 VALUE!)

1. FOUR (4) FREE ISSUES FOR 40 ISSUES TOTAL! OR
2. PROTECTING YOUR HEALTH AND SAFETY (A $10.00 VALUE!)

Prison Profiteers: Who Makes Money from Mass Incarceration,
edited by Paul Wright and Tara Herivel, 323 pages. $24.95. This is the
third book in a series of Prison Legal News anthologies that examines
the reality of mass imprisonment in America. Prison Profiteers is unique
from other books because it exposes and discusses who profits and
benefits from mass imprisonment, rather than who is
harmed by it and how.
1063
Prison Education Guide, by Christopher Zoukis, PLN Publishing (2016),
269 pages. $49.95. This book includes up-to-date information on pursuing
educational coursework by correspondence, including high
school, college, paralegal and religious studies.
2019
The Habeas Citebook: Ineffective Assistance of Counsel, 2nd Ed.
(2016) by Brandon Sample, PLN Publishing, 275 pages. $49.95. This is an
updated version of PLN’s second book, by former federal prisoner Brandon Sample, which extensively covers ineffective assistance of
counsel issues in federal habeas petitions.
2021
Prison Nation: The Warehousing of America’s Poor, edited by Tara
Herivel and Paul Wright, 332 pages. $35.95. PLN’s second anthology
exposes the dark side of the ‘lock-em-up’ political agenda and
legal climate in the U.S.
1041
The Celling of America, An Inside Look at the U.S. Prison Industry,
edited by Daniel Burton Rose, Dan Pens and Paul Wright, 264 pages.
$22.95. PLN’s first anthology presents a detailed “inside” look
at the workings of the American justice system.
1001
The Criminal Law Handbook: Know Your Rights, Survive the System, by
Attorneys Paul Bergman & Sara J. Berman-Barrett, Nolo Press, 642 pages.
$39.99. Explains what happens in a criminal case from being arrested to sentencing, and what your rights are at each stage of the process. Uses an
easy to understand question-and-answer format.
1038
Represent Yourself in Court: How to Prepare & Try a Winning Case, by
Attorneys Paul Bergman & Sara J. Berman-Barrett, Nolo Press, 536 pages.
$39.99. Breaks down the civil trial process in easy-to-understand
steps so you can effectively represent yourself in court.
1037
The Merriam-Webster Dictionary, 2016 edition, 939 pages. $9.95. This
paperback dictionary is a handy reference for the most common English words, with more than 75,000 entries.
2015
The Blue Book of Grammar and Punctuation, by Jane Straus, 201
pages. $19.99. A guide to grammar and punctuation by an educator with experience teaching English to prisoners. 1046
Legal Research: How to Find and Understand the Law, 17th Ed., by
Stephen Elias and Susan Levinkind, 363 pages. $49.99. Comprehensive and
easy to understand guide on researching the law. Explains case
law, statutes and digests, etc. Includes practice exercises. 1059
Deposition Handbook, by Paul Bergman and Albert Moore, Nolo Press, 426
pages. $34.99. How-to handbook for anyone who conducts a
deposition or is going to be deposed.
1054
Criminal Law in a Nutshell, 5th edition, by Arnold H. Loewy, 387 pages.
$49.95. Provides an overview of criminal law, including punishment, specific crimes, defenses & burden of proof. 1086

Protecting Your Health and Safety, by Robert E. Toone, Southern
Poverty Law Center, 325 pages. $10.00. This book explains basic rights
that prisoners have in a jail or prison in the U.S. It deals mainly with
rights related to health and safety, such as communicable diseases and
abuse by prison officials; it also explains how to enforce
your rights, including through litigation.
1060
Spanish-English/English-Spanish Dictionary, 2nd ed., Random House.
694 pages. $15.95. Has 145,000+ entries from A to Z; includes
Western Hemisphere usage.
1034a
Writing to Win: The Legal Writer, by Steven D. Stark, Broadway Books/Random
House, 303 pages. $19.95. Explains the writing of effective complaints, responses, briefs, motions and other legal papers.
1035
Roget’s Thesaurus, 709 pages. $9.95. Helps you find the right word for
what you want to say. 11,000 words listed alphabetically with over 200,000
synonyms and antonyms. Sample sentences and parts of speech shown for
every main word. Covers all levels of vocabulary and identifies informal and slang words.
1045
Beyond Bars, Rejoining Society After Prison, by Jeffrey Ian Ross, Ph.D.
and Stephen C. Richards, Ph.D., Alpha, 224 pages. $14.95. Beyond Bars is a
practical and comprehensive guide for ex-convicts and their families for
managing successful re-entry into the community, and includes information
about budgets, job searches, family issues, preparing for
release while still incarcerated, and more.
1080
The Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, Practitioner’s Desk Reference
2017, by A. Benjamin Spender, 439 pages. $54.95. This concise compilation
of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure and portions of Title 28 of the U.S.
Code most pertinent to federal civil litigation provides attorneys and pro se
litigants with a handy resource that facilitates quick reference
to the Rules.
1095
Merriam-Webster’s Dictionary of Law, 634 pages. $19.95. Includes definitions for more than 10,000 legal words and phrases, plus pronunciations,
supplementary notes and special sections on the judicial system, historic
laws and selected important cases. Great reference for jailhouse lawyers who need to learn legal terminology.
2018
The Best 500+ Non Profit Organizations for Prisoners and Their
Families, 5th edition, 170 pages. $19.99. The only comprehensive, up-todate book of non-profit organizations specifically for prisoners and their
families. Cross referenced by state, organization name and
subject area. Find what you want fast!
2020

Please Note: Book orders are mailed via the U.S. Postal
Service with delivery confirmation. PLN does not assume
responsibility to replace book orders once their delivery to
the destination address (facility) is confirmed by the postal
service. If you are incarcerated and placed a book order but
did not receive it, please check with your facility’s mailroom
before checking with us. If books ordered from PLN are censored by corrections staff, please file a grievance or appeal
the mail rejection, then send us a copy of the grievance
and any response you received.

* ALL BOOKS SOLD BY PLN ARE SOFTCOVER / PAPERBACK *

Hepatitis and Liver Disease: What You Need to Know, by Melissa Palmer,
MD, 471 pages. $19.99. Describes symptoms & treatments of Hepatitis B & C and
other liver diseases. Discusses medications to avoid, diets to follow
and exercises to perform, plus includes a bibliography.
1031

Federal Prison Handbook, by Christopher Zoukis, 493 pages. $29.95.
This leading survival guide to the federal Bureau of Prisons teaches current
and soon-to-be federal prisoners everything they need to
know about BOP life, policies and operations.
2022

Criminal Procedure: Constitutional Limitations, 8th ed., by Jerold H.
Israel and Wayne R. LaFave, 557 pages. $49.95. This book is intended for
use by law students of constitutional criminal procedure, and
examines constitutional standards in criminal cases.
1085

Federal Rules of Evidence in a Nutshell, 9th ed., by Paul F. Rothstein,
Myrna S. Raeder and David Crump, 816 pages. $49.95. This succinct overview presents accurate law, policy, analysis and insights into
the evidentiary process in federal courts.
1093

Prisoners’ Self-Help Litigation Manual, updated 4th ed. (2010), by John
Boston and Daniel Manville, Oxford Univ. Press, 928 pages. $54.95. The
premiere, must-have “Bible” of prison litigation for current and aspiring
jail-house lawyers. If you plan to litigate a prison or jail civil suit, this book
is a must-have. Includes detailed instructions and thousands
of case citations. Highly recommended!
1077

Civil Procedure in a Nutshell, 8th edition, by Mary Kay Kane, 334 pages.
$49.95. This comprehensive guide provides a succinct overview of procedural rules in civil cases.
1094

How to Win Your Personal Injury Claim, by Atty. Joseph Matthews, 9th
edition, NOLO Press, 411 pages. $34.99. While not specifically for prisonrelated personal injury cases, this book provides comprehensive information on how to handle personal injury and property damage
claims arising from accidents.
1075
Sue the Doctor and Win! Victim’s Guide to Secrets of Malpractice
Lawsuits, by Lewis Laska, 336 pages. $39.95. Written for victims of medical malpractice/neglect, to prepare for litigation. Note that this book addresses medical malpractice claims and issues in general, not
specifically related to prisoners.
1079
Advanced Criminal Procedure in a Nutshell, by Mark E. Cammack and
Norman M. Garland, 3rd edition, 534 pages. $49.95. This text is designed
for supplemental reading in an advanced criminal procedure course on the
post-investigation processing of a criminal case, including
prosecution and adjudication.
1090a

Nolo’s Plain-English Law Dictionary, by Gerald N. Hill and Kathleen
T. Hill, 477 pages. $29.99. Find terms you can use to understand and access
the law. Contains 3,800 easy-to-read definitions for common
(and not so common) legal terms.
3001
Win Your Case, by Gerry Spence, 287 pages. $21.95. Relying on the successful methods he has developed over more than 50 years, Spence, an
attorney who has never lost a criminal case, describes how to
win through a step-by-step process
1092
Disciplinary Self-Help Litigation Manual, by Daniel Manville, 355
pages. $49.95. By the co-author of the Prisoners’ Self-Help Litigation Manual,
this book provides detailed information about prisoners’ rights in disciplinary hearings and how to enforce those rights in court. Includes state-bystate case law on prison disciplinary issues. This is the third
book published by PLN Publishing.
2017
NEW! The Habeas Citebook: Prosecutorial Misconduct, by Alissa
Hull, 300 pages. $59.95. This book is designed to help pro se litigants identify and raise viable claims for habeas corpus relief based on prosecutorial
misconduct. Contains hundreds of useful case citations from
all 50 states and on the federal level.
2023

Subscription Bonuses

Subscription Rates
Prisoners
Individuals
Professionals

1 year
$30
$35
$90

2 years 3 years 4 years
$60
$90
$120
$70
$105
$140
$180
$270
$360

(Attorneys, agencies, libraries)

2 years - 2 bonus issues for 26 total issues
3 years - 4 bonus issues (40 total) or a free book (see other page)
4 years - 6 bonus issues (54 total) or a free book (see other page)
(All subscription rates and bonus offers are valid as of 1-1-2019)

Purchase with Visa, MasterCard, AmEx or Discover by phone: 561-360-2523
Or buy books and subscriptions online: www.prisonlegalnews.org

Mail Payment
and Order to:

Prison Legal News
P.O. Box 1151
Lake Worth Beach, FL 33460

Note: All purchases must be pre-paid.
Please Change my Address to what is entered below

Mail Order To:
Name: _______________________________________
DOC #: _______________________________________
Suite/Cell: _______________________________________
Agency/Inst: _______________________________________
Address: _______________________________________
City/State/Zip: _______________________________________

Subscribe to Prison Legal News

$ Amount

6 month subscription (prisoners only) - $18
1 yr subscription (12 issues)
2 yr subscription (2 bonus issues for 26 total!)
3 yr sub (write below: FREE book, Protecting Your Health & Safety
or 4 bonus issues for 40 total!)
4 yr sub (write below: FREE book, Prison Profiteers
or 6 bonus issues for 54 total!)
Single back issue or sample copy of PLN - $5.00 each

___________
___________
__________
__________
__________
__________

Books Orders

(No S/H charge on 3 & 4-year
subscription free books OR book orders OVER $50!)

___________________________________
___________________________________
___________________________________
___________________________________

Qty.

____
____
____
____

Add $6.00 S/H to BOOK ORDERS under $50

_________
_________
_________
_________
_________

(PLN subs do not count towards $50 for free S/H for book orders)

FL residents ONLY add 6% to Total Book Cost
TOTAL Amount Enclosed:

_________
_________

* NO REFUNDS on PLN subscription or book orders after orders have been placed. *
* We are not responsible for incorrect addresses or address changes after orders have been placed. *
* Please send any address changes as soon as possible; we do not replace missing issues of PLN due to address changes. *

Prison Legal News

Non-Profit Org.
U.S. Postage
PAID
Portland OR
Permit No. 3142

PO Box 1151
Lake Worth Beach FL 33460
Change Service Requested

Subscription Renewal — 10/19

The above mailing address for PLN subscribers indicates how many
issues remain on the subscription. For example, if it says “10 LEFT”
just above the mailing address, there are 10 issues of PLN remaining
on the subscription before it expires. IF IT SAYS “0 LEFT,” THIS IS YOUR
LAST ISSUE. Please renew at least 2 months before the subscription
ends to avoid missing any issues.

Change of Address

If you move or are transferred, please
notify PLN as soon as possible so your issues can be mailed to your new address!
PLN only accepts responsibility for sending an issue to the address provided at
the time an issue is mailed!

Criminal Legal News
Criminal Legal News is the sister publication of Prison Legal News. Both are published monthly
by the Human Rights Defense Center, Inc. Same timely, relevant, and practical legal news and
features as PLN, BUT CLN provides legal news you can use about the criminal justice system
prior to confinement and post-conviction relief. Coverage includes:

	
	
	
	
	
	
	
	
	

• Criminal Law & Procedure	
• Prosecutorial/Police Misconduct	
• Ineffective Counsel	
• Militarization of Police	
• Junk Science	
• False Confessions	
• Witness Misidentification	
• Post-Release Supervision	
• Due Process Rights	

• Police Brutality
• Habeas Corpus Relief
• Sentencing Errors & Reform
• Surveillance State
• Wrongful Convictions
• Search & Seizure Violations
• Paid/Incentivized Informants
• Police State in America

Between the two publications, every possible interaction with the
criminal justice system is reported, analyzed, and exposed.
“STOP RESISTING” and subscribe today!
Subscriptions to CLN are $48/year for individuals and $96/year for professionals/entities. To subscribe, send payment to:
Criminal Legal News, P.O. Box 1151, Lake Worth Beach, FL 33460; (561) 360-2523. www.criminallegalnews.org

VOL. 1

Crimina
l Legal N
ews
PUBLI

ISSN 2576-No. 8
ISSN 2577- 9987 (Print)
0004 (Onlin
e)

SHED

BY TH
E HUM
A

Dedicate

N RIG
HT

d to Protect

S DEF
EN

ing Huma

SE CE
NTE

n

Rights
Cell-Sit
e
Techno Simulators: Po
logy to
Reach oulice Use Milita
aw enfo
ry
rcement
t and Sp
Lwide
by Chr isto
agen
are empl
y on Yo
oying techn cies nationpher Zou
for milit
nated effor
ary use in
ology, desig
kis
u
ts of crim
foreign lands
track the
ned leadi
inal
locat

R

July 201
8

, in orde
ion of U.S.
can soil.
r to ness ng to greater publ defense attorneys
citizens on
And
, is devic
ic and judic
of the natu
Amerithe FBI — authorities —
es cost
ial
re and use
all
of stingrays.aware- $200,000 law enforcement
the surve have gone to great the way up to the Courts are begin
agencies betw
and $500
illance syste
lengths to
ning to
Four th
,000
een
criminal
grap
defense bar, m from the publ hide their usag Ame ndm ent impl ple with CorpAccording to USA each.
e. Even the
ic, the
Spending
and even
icati ons
oration recei
Cell-site
(“DOJ”)
.gov, Harr
the judic
of fund
ved $3.6
recognizes Department of
iary.
rays, trick simulators, also
is
ing and
Justice
implicate
that their
known as
cellphone
held more million in feder
contracts
s constituti
intrusive
stingdevice inste
s into conn
al
than 2,00
in 2017
natu
DOJ
onal priva
0 federal
cy protectionre
operating ad of an actual cell ecting to the enfor policy now requ
Law enfor alone.
ires
the devic
s. and
tower. Polic
cement agen
cement agen
that all feder
es
of all conn
the Dist
al lawected cellp can track the locat e cause-supported cies obtain a
rict of Colu cies in 23 state
stingray
radiu s, and
full, prob
s
hones with
ion ployi
mbia
searc
techn
able
h warrant
were usin
ology as
also can
ng the devic
in a certa
metadata
of 2016.
prior to em- ing to a 2017
g
about phon potentially inter in
But the DOJes.
federal agen Cato Institute And, accordand lengt
e calls (the
cept
report,
policy is
h
cies in addi
number called all courts requ
not law,
calls and of the call), the conte
tion to the multiple
ire law
and not the technolog y,
a warrant
text mess
FBI use
inclu
ICE, DEA
ages, as well nt of phone
prior to usingenforcement to
data usag
obta
, NSA, U.S.ding the ATF, DHS
no
e—
as
All of this including brow the nature of the legal changes shor a stingray. Moreoverin even the IRS.
Marshals
,
ser informati
t of an outri
Service,
The Arm
takes place
devices will
, and Nati
whose cellp
on.
ght
unbeknow
onal Guar y, Navy, Marine and
hone
nst to users hijack a cellphonechange what they ban on
Corp
d use cell-s
The grow s have been hijac
can do:
and force
the governme
ite simulators,
ked.
ing use
it to
has alarm
unsuspect nt, all while it sits report in to
ed privacy of stingray track
ing user’s
defense
quiet
advo
ers
ly
cates
pocket.
in an
attorneys
, but conc and criminal
use have
The Stin
erns over
been met
gray Fou
and prose
with silen
their
SCOTUS:
nd Terr
cutors. Law
ce from
Now It
Unexplain
orists,
polic
23 states
Will Find
enforceme
ed Habe
use
nt in at leaste Cell-site simu
as Decis
You
Column:
federal agen the technology
ions 9
SCOTUS
lators
veloped
, as
cies.
P UInBsome
L I Scases
H E D B Y TdoHa EhostHofU M
A ology
N over
R I two
G Hdeca
T S wer
D EeFfirs
E Nt Sde-E COH
E SNCtTLimit
E R and Black Lives
techn
10
s Inventory
, prosecutor
. According des ago, as milit
far as to
report
dismiss
Search
s have gone
ary Bail
to a
criminal
Reform
disclosing
so was by The Daily Dot, 2016 investigative
14
in Alaba
char
any infor
develope
the original
ma
mation abou ges to avoid
Incre1dibly
d by
6th Cir.:
stingray
December
VOL. 1 No.
Dedicated
to conju
Protecting
Human
Rights
Harr
, the FBI
t stingray
Anticipato 2017
16
requires
ment auth
use. intel nction with the is Corporation,
ry
Sear
local
orities to
ch Warrant
Pentagon
in Epide
law enfor
ligence agen
nondisclo
accept a
mic of Cops
and
cies. The
17
sure agree
comprehen ce- signed for
Shooting
technology federal
lowed to
use
ment
sive
Dogs
9th Cir.:
was deprior
war on terro on foreign battl
use
CJ Not Crim
20
police and stingrays. The agree to being ale of Viole
security-re r and for use in efields in the Data
prosecutor
ments requ
nce
othe
lated
informati
base of
r national
arenas.
23
Police Crim
on abou s to refuse to hand ire
t stingray
inality
usage to
over rema Harris, based in
SCOTUS:
defense
technolo
Melbourn
ins the leadi
Right to
24
Assert Innoc
Successfu attorneys and judge gy or simu
manufactu e, Florida, Dom
lators. The ng
l Freedom
ence
s alike. by Christopher
litigation,
rer
inant Witn
Zoukis
comp
of Infor
28
mod
ess Theo
as well as
any make of cell-site
ry
the dilige mation Act ray els, including the
s a variety
WY S Ct
first-gene
of address
and newe
and coord The authority
‘Cast
he U.S. is a world leader inntthe
to arrest people
and ratio
en- solutions
symptoms
of the illness,
34
le Doctrine’
r models
in
for Cohaof
- the
suchstage
wHead,
jailing and imprisoning of its own citi- force theArro
criminal
lawAmb
at the initial
is Sting
but not
itself. An examination
CAillness
Man Awar
bitants
as Hail
37
ded $10 and absurd
m, of the various
k, and
within
the King
broad Stor
some
outrageous
zens. The FBI estimates that local, state, and vested almost exclusively erJac
Millio
n
Fish. The
News in
Brief criminal justice system
in the modern
federal authorities have carried out more than discretion of the police. Police exercise their practices
38
a quarter-billion arrests in the past 20 years. authority to arrest liberally; statistics show illustrates just how far we have to go.
42
As a result, the American criminal justice that police arrest more than 11.5 million
Crime Creation:
system is a robust behemoth that, across the people each year.
Legislatures at Work
While the initial arrest decision is
country, costs taxpayers billions of dollars

Criminal Legal News

Criminal Legal News

INSID

E

Absurd, Abusive, and Outrageous:
The Creation of Crime and Criminals in America

T

important, the charging decisions made by The creation of law is the work of fedeach year.
The American criminal justice system prosecutors are, arguably, much more conse- eral and state legislatures. A significant change
and the criminal law have their roots in Eng- quential. The power of the prosecutor in the to the criminal law in almost every American
lish common law. Developed over hundreds modern American criminal justice system can jurisdiction in the last quarter century is the
of years, the criminal law reflected what hardly be overstated, given the inordinately legislative manufacturing of habitual offender
conduct English society and government high percentage of criminal cases that are charges and sentencing enhancements. These
would not tolerate. Crimes developed either disposed of through plea agreements. The laws allow for significantly longer sentences
as malum in se—criminal because of the prosecutorial discretion to charge the crimes
innate wrongfulness of the act—or malum and enhancements deemed appropriate drives
prohibitum—criminal because the govern- plea negotiations and ultimately convictions.
Legislators, police, and prosecutors are
ment decreed it. Mala in se crimes include
murder and rape. Mala prohibita crimes powerful agents of crime creation, enforceinclude everything from traffic tickets to drug ment, and control. As the criminal justice
ER
E CENT
system has grown at the hands of this influenand gambling offenses.
DEFENS
S the
H Tinto
further
lives
Modern American criminal law has seen tial triad, it has
RIG
N even
Acrept
H U MAmericans.
They include children
an exponential increase in mala B
June 2018
Y T H Eof everyday
D prohibita
E
H
S
I
who
are being pulled into the criminal justice ts
crimes created
by
various
legislatures.
The
L
PUB
Righ
aninclude
rate.
They also
natural result of creating more and more system at an alarming
g Hum
ectin
Prot
to
thedpoor and homeless, for whom policies are
crimes has been the filling of more and moreicate
Dedof specifically
7 newly-minted criminals. Some
1 No.
designed and implemented to suck
jail cells
with
VOL.
(Print)
2576-9987 (Online)
ISSN
these
crimes
004 are absurd, and some are outra- them into the system and ultimately to jail.
ISSN 2577-0
geous. Many are subject to shocking abuse in Policies that mandate the jailing of the poor
the hands of police officers and prosecutors. simply for being unable to pay fines are alive
Congress
is
ally children.
The explosive increase in what types of and well in America.
stopher Zouk
public, especi example, “[i]n order to
bytheChri
ed of the
As
American publicedcomes
to grips
behavior have been criminalized is not the
A, for
and ofand replac
passed SORN
sex offenders
Act repeal all-consuming
the Walsh
out-of-control,
only reason America arrests and imprisons with
n’s Law. The protect the public from . .” 34 U.S.C. § 20901.
The Adam
and Mega
en. .
da
the criminal
justice
d
individuals in such large numbers.
ByJacob
design monster that
’s Law
createhas
ed by sex
Actsystem
against childr
11-year-ol int and both Jacob
Walsh
1989,justice
Adam
ated fenses the “protections” provid laws are
efforts
address
the
situation
ornnot,
theber
criminal
system in the U.S. become,
ive to
mandhave
Octo
tion
y and
ped at gunpo
But
comprehens
was akidnap
Unfortunately,
these efforts
relyAct,
on
has
evolved
relentless machine that is begun.al sex
offender registr
ation and restric more than
rlinginto
I of the
registr
Wette
er
Title
and
nation
with
y that do not tell the
rling, data and crime
ca- offend
compl
again. by law enforcement
rate
trends
information
largelyseen
controlled
authorir, Patty Wette
never
g registry laws,
that every state Registration and Notifi t based on faulty
der legislative and executive
the boy’s mothe of Minnesota did wholeSex
ties and
prosecutors.
story.
Current
se. In passin high rates of
percen
10
Offen
When
premi
losing
A one false frequently cite the
her home state le suspects—no- the Act (“SORNA”) or risk
Judges do
tors
learned that
funding. SORN
offenders.
se of possib
out to tion
enforcement
estab- legisla
ne v.
among sex
not have a databasex offenders—she set
of federal law other things, that states
opinion McKu ny
, recidivism
ted
es, among
registry system the same. In the 2002
tably convic
Justice Antho
of requir
sex offender
e.
update
the passage
Supreme Court and high” sexthree-tiered
make a chang
required to
ening
efforts led to
ren lish a
s, Lile, U.S.
3” offenders
Wetterling’s Crimes Against Child
three month
dy cited a “fright of up to 80 percent.
with “Tier
ation every
rling
rate
Sex Kenne
der Registration
registry inform
the National 5 offender recidivism that would, indeed, be
the Jacob Wette
Violent Offen federal law by their SORNA also created
true,
nearly
figure
had
were
that
it
life.
and Sexually
into
If
ver,
which
for
Howe
Law
website,
was signed
and high.”
dy based that
Act, which Clinton in 1994. Jacob’s wide Offender public 772 million hits by 2008.
“frightening
. Justice Kenne
A has provn visits and
ish a nation
President Bill
flat-out wrong
effort to establ ers, but it was millio compliance with SORN
out. As is
Full
was the first
have opted
ted sex offend
many states
compliance;
registry of convic
en costly, and
were in full
was enacted, of 2014, only 17 states have foregone their
not the last.
Jacob’s Law
states
mur33
after
while
Soon
raped and
funding
remaining
11
Kanka was
tion the
enforcement
ying’
7-year-old Meganor with a previous convic us full federal law
e of ‘Testil
lly compliant. ing not to
12
heino
NYPD Practic
ning partia
dered by a neighb t of a child. This
Insanity?
states choos
t
Me- remai
assaul
a End the
Despite many a tremendous amoun
Jersey to pass
14
for sexual
Will Dimay
state of New
of Violence’
e “convicted, comply with SORNA, legislation has been
crime led the
required anyon
S Strikes ‘Crime
.
registry
guilty
16
ook 2.0
since the 1990sa SCOTU
gan’s Law, which uent or found not a sex of sex-offender
g
the country
delinq
: Habeas Handb
ission of
18
adjudicated
enacted across gone well beyond keepinnow Book Review
ty for comm
ement
insani
of
have
and
enforc
ers,
law
s Hints
by reason
These laws
r with local
ted sex offend
and
20
into the
Column: Habea
y of convic
offense” to registe prison, relocation
ers may live
registr
90% of Time
e
offend
Wrong
sex
is
from
and
includ
t,
24
upon release conviction that did not
regulate where they may have contac for FBI: Hair Analys
dited
a
me’ Discre
with whom
t. Illinois,
state, or after
Syndro
work,
presen
be
Baby
n
y
may
24
d a fedn.
‘Shake
where they
ement registr
incarceratio
Congress enacte
Arrested: Ex-Cop
the even
a law enforc the Illinois
State Killer’
Two years later, bill, which passed in
n
le, created
d,
‘Golde
examp
nduct 26
it was create
s Law. The
Senate by
Involve Misco
1986. Since
registry 23 times,
eral Megan’
and in the
rations: 60%
pro- in
34
amended the restrictions, or
418-0 vote
Exone
a
states
has
by
e
that
ature
ed
Hous
Legisl
offenses,
es Circuit Split
consent, requir of sex offender
adding new
38
unanimous
SCOTUS Resolv
notification
to each time s.
Rule
x
sary
unity
Mailbo
ement
is neces
vide comm
s Prison
bers,
ation “that
every requir
40
5th Cir. Extend
Faulty Num
registry inform .” By the end of 1996,
ises,
ey
Shatn
nces
Prem
public
hes
public
of
eque
False
42
protect the
some form
R.I. S Ct Abolis
tended Cons
nation had
and Unin
ally uners in place.
virtu
state in the
offend
and
sex
Brief
ble
Adam
law for
News in
notification Congress adopted the Act, There is a lauda ated with sex-offender
associ
tion
Safety
goal
protec
In 2006,
ble
and
laws:
Prote ction
Walsh, assaila ation and restriction
Walsh Child of 6-year-old Adam
Florida. registr
honor
in
in
red
named
ted and murde
who was abduc

egal News
Criminal L
INSIDE

on Sense

tries: Comm

der Regis

Sex Offen

?

or Nonsense

I

INSIDE