TRAPPED
INSIDE:
The Past, Present, and Future of
Solitary Confinement in New York

OCTOBER 2019
1

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
This report was authored by Data and Research Strategist
Michelle Shames and Senior Staff Attorney Philip
Desgranges, edited by Diana Lee, and designed by Abby
Allender. The report authors would like to thank April
Rodriguez for her research, as well as Nicole Triplett,
Lee Rowland, Mack Finkel, Pooj Padmaraj, Ben Schaefer,
Christopher Dunn, Lourdes Rosado, and Donna Lieberman
for their support.

ABOUT THE NYCLU
The New York Civil Liberties Union (NYCLU) is one of the
nation’s foremost defenders of civil liberties and civil
rights. Founded in 1951 as the New York affiliate of the
American Civil Liberties Union, the NYCLU is a not-forprofit, nonpartisan organization with eight chapters and
regional offices and more than 150,000 members across
the state. The NYCLU’s mission is to defend and promote
the fundamental principles and values embodied in the
Bill of Rights, the U.S. Constitution, and the New York
Constitution, including freedom of speech and religion,
and the right to privacy, equality, and due process of law
for all New Yorkers. For more information, please visit
www.nyclu.org.

Executive
Summary
Every day thousands of people in New York State
prisons, mostly people of color, are held in 23-hour
isolation for months, sometimes years, at a time. As
solitary confinement has come under increasing
scrutiny, institutions around the world have been
turning away from the practice. New York must join
them. There are currently two proposals to reform the
use of solitary in New York State prisons: a state bill
called the HALT Act and regulatory amendments put
forward by the Department of Corrections and
Community Supervision (DOCCS), the agency that runs
prisons in New York State. Both aim to address
problematic aspects of solitary confinement, but the
NYCLU believes that HALT is the more meaningful
option for reform.
Using never-before-released data, this report reveals
the current state of solitary confinement in New York
State prisons, including the impact of the Peoples
settlement, the NYCLU’s 2012 lawsuit against DOCCS.
This analysis also assesses the impacts of the HALT
Act and DOCCS’ proposal.

year after the bill’s passage. DOCCS’ regulatory
amendments propose a 30-day time-cap on solitary
confinement that would go into effect by October
2022. In addition to having an impact sooner than
DOCCS’ proposal, HALT would also shorten more
than 1,000 SHU sanctions and more than 10,000
Keeplock sanctions annually that fall between the
16- and 30-day range.
•	

In 2018, over 6,000 solitary confinement sanctions
were served directly after a previous sanction, a
practice known as “back-to-backs.” The HALT Act
would prevent a majority of back-to-backs by
mandating a 20-day cap on solitary within any
60-day period. DOCCS’ proposal does not restrict
consecutive sanctions, creating a loophole to its
own time-cap.

•	

On October 1, 2019, eight percent of the SHU
population was between the ages of 18 to 21, three
percent was aged 55 or older, and 31 percent had a
diagnosed mental health challenge. The HALT Act
would prohibit solitary confinement for all of these
groups, which would reduce the SHU population by
several thousand people each year. DOCCS’ much
more limited list of protected groups addresses age
only for people under 18 and includes people with
disabilities only if the disability limits the ability to
provide “self-care,” a vague and unquantifiable
group.

•	

The HALT Act significantly improves conditions for
those who are held in solitary by mandating more
out-of-cell time and better programming (see Box 5,
page 12).

•	

At full implementation, the HALT Act would reduce
the average daily SHU population by double the
reduction that DOCCS’ proposal would achieve, in
addition to reducing tens of thousand of solitary
confinement sanction lengths served outside of
SHU.

TOPLINE FINDINGS
•	

•	

40,000 solitary confinement sanctions were given
in 2018. One-quarter were in the form of special
housing unit, or SHU sanctions, the most restrictive
form of isolation. The remainder were in the form of
Keeplock sanctions (see Box 3, page 8). Despite a
recent drop in SHU sanctions, Keeplock sanctions
have increased so much that the overall disciplinary
confinement sanctions has actually increased. The
HALT Act limits all forms of solitary, including
Keeplock, but DOCCS’ proposed reforms primarily
focus on reducing SHU sanctions, maintaining a
loophole that could result in further increases in
confinement.
The HALT Act proposes a 15-day time-cap on
solitary confinement that would go into effect one

1

Table of
Contents
4	
	

Introduction: The State of Solitary Confinement in 	
New York’s Prisons

7	

How Many People Are in Solitary Confinement?

8	

Disciplinary Confinement

11 	

Solitary Confinement Beyond Discipline

13	

How Long Are People in Solitary Confinement?

14	

Special Housing Unit (SHU) Sanction Lengths

16	

Keeplock Sanction Lengths

17	

Consecutive Solitary Confinement

19	

Who is in Solitary Confinement?

20	 Young People and People Age 55 and Older
22 	 People with Disabilities: Spotlight on Mental Health
25	 Projected Impact of DOCCS’ Proposal and the 	
	
HALT Act
28	Conclusion
30	 Appendix: Comparison of DOCCS and HALT 		
	Proposals

2

INTRODUCTION
The State of Solitary Confinement in
New York’s Prisons

3

Introduction
Thousands of people are currently being held in solitary confinement throughout New York State’s prison system. They
have been held in isolation for weeks, months, and some even years. Solitary confinement, which restricts people to
minimal or rare meaningful contact with others,1 can cause such cruel and irreparable harm that the United Nations
considers it torture to hold someone in solitary for more than 15 days.2 The United Nations has called on the United
States to end this form of torture,3 and New York State now has the opportunity to take a step closer through two very
different proposed measures.
For decades, New York prison officials have relied heavily on solitary confinement as a tool to punish and control
people who are incarcerated. During the 1990s, prison officials significantly expanded their capacity to isolate people
by constructing more than 3,700 special housing units, often referred to as SHUs, to hold people in solitary confinement. By 2012 the Department of Corrections and Community Supervision (DOCCS), the agency responsible for New
York State prisons, was confining roughly 4,500 people in SHU on any given day. This does not account for the number
of people in other types of solitary confinement outside of SHUs, such as “Keeplock,” where people are held in similar
isolation in other types of cells (see Box 3, page 8).

Box 1

THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN JAILS AND PRISONS
Because of a lack of data on solitary confinement in jails, this report focuses on New York State prisons.
Jails are county-level facilities that incarcerate people who are awaiting trial, who have been arrested on
parole violations, or have been convicted of a crime and sentenced to incarceration for one year or less.
Prisons are a network of state facilities that imprison people who have been convicted of a crime and
sentenced to serve more than one year in incarceration. The Department of Corrections and Community
Supervision (DOCCS), a state agency, operates the New York State prison system.
Jails must operate according to regulations issued by the State Commission of Corrections (SCOC), a
state watchdog agency, and prisons must operate according to regulations issued by DOCCS. The SCOC
has conceded that there has been a “prevalent misuse of solitary confinement” in the jails across the
state.4 As compared to the state-run prison system, there is little to no public data available on how
counties are using solitary confinement in their jails.

1

National Commission on Correctional Health Care, Solitary Confinement (Isolation). Available at: https://www.ncchc.org/solitary-confinement.

2

United States General Assembly, Interim report of the Special Rapporteur of the Human Rights Council on torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or
punishment, August 2011. Available at: http://solitaryconfinement.org/uploads/SpecRapTortureAug2011.pdf.

3

“UN independent expert calls on US to ban prolonged, indefinite solitary confinement,” UN News, August 23, 2013. Available at: https://news.un.org/en/story/2013/08/447382.

4

4

State Commission of Correction, Regulatory Impact Statement. Available at: http://www.scoc.ny.gov/pdfdocs/ris.pdf.

In the years since this expansion, tens of thousands of people have been subjected to inhumane confinement. Solitary
confinement in the prison system has been arbitrary (people received wildly different sanctions for the same rule violation), harsh (the average SHU sanction was five months), and designed to be cruel (phone calls with family members
were prohibited).
In 2012, the New York Civil Liberties Union (NYCLU) sued DOCCS over its solitary confinement practices. That lawsuit,
Peoples v. Annucci, resulted in a court-ordered settlement agreement requiring broad changes to disciplinary segregation, the most common form of solitary. The Peoples settlement accomplished three major reforms:
•	

Reduced the number of people who could be placed in disciplinary segregation by eliminating it as a punishment
option for some petty rule violations;

•	

Established guidelines limiting the number of days people could be sentenced to solitary for each type of rule
violation and created new mechanisms for early release; and

•	

Improved conditions by allowing people in solitary confinement to call their families and have greater access to
reading materials and radios, among other improvements.

While these are important changes, they are far from enough.
Today approximately 2,300 people are in SHUs across the state and hundreds, potentially thousands, more are in
Keeplock. The average length of a SHU sanction is 105 days. Dozens of people have been in SHU for years, several of
whom have diagnosed mental health disorders.
No New Yorker should tolerate this inhumane treatment of incarcerated individuals, especially when other states have
successfully adopted reforms. New Jersey and Colorado recently enacted reforms to significantly curb the use of solitary confinement. As the Executive Director of Colorado’s Department of Corrections explained, Colorado imposed a
15-day cap on solitary confinement because “long-term isolation manufactures and aggravates mental illness.”5

5

Rick Raemisch, “Why We Ended Long-Term Solitary Confinement in Colorado,” The New York Times, October 12, 2017. Available at: https://www.nytimes.
com/2017/10/12/opinion/solitary-confinement-colorado-prison.html.

5

INTRODUCTION

Box 2

THE HARMS OF EXTREME ISOLATION
New York State laws currently permit the use of 23-hour solitary confinement for months and even years at
a time in concrete cells where people do not have access to their personal property.
People in solitary confinement are cut off from meaningful human interaction—and the consequences
can be severe. Solitary confinement that exceeds 15 consecutive days is torture according to the United
Nations, because studies show it causes severe mental and physical trauma and irreparable harm. Solitary
confinement can cause or exacerbate mental illnesses, stunt brain development in young people, and
dramatically increase the risk of self-harm and suicide.6

Although there is widespread agreement among lawmakers to curb the use of solitary confinement, the public has
had limited information on how solitary is used in New York—until now. This report reveals for the first time previously
confidential data on solitary confinement in New York State prisons that the NYCLU obtained through the Peoples
settlement. The data reveals the answers to three critical questions: how many people are in solitary confinement,
who are they, and how long are they being confined. Together, the information in this report provides the fullest picture
to-date of the current state of solitary confinement in New York State prisons, and what reforms would meaningfully
limit the use of extreme isolation.
Currently pending are two proposals to reform solitary confinement practices, but only one of the measures
meets international standards and best practices in other states: The Humane Alternatives to Long-Term Solitary
Confinement Act (HALT). This legislation calls for capping all forms of isolation at 15 days, starting one year after the
bill’s passage. Despite broad support for the bill, Assembly and Senate Leadership never brought the bill to the floor
for a vote. Lawmakers will have the opportunity to reconsider the HALT Act when the next legislative session begins in
January 2020.
By contrast, DOCCS has put forward a much less robust proposal, which includes a phased-in segregated
confinement cap that would take three years to come into full effect. Even then it would allow 30 days in solitary,
which is equivalent to double the amount of time defined as torture by the U.N. And the gaps and loopholes in
DOCCS’ proposal would continue other harmful forms of solitary confinement.
As the NYCLU’s analysis demonstrates, the HALT Act’s more comprehensive and lasting protections are a more
humane path forward.

6

Stuart Grassian, Psychiatric Effects of Solitary Confinement, 22 Wash. U. J. L. & Pol’y 325 (2006), available at: https://openscholarship.wustl.edu/law_journal_law_
policy/vol22/iss1/24; American Civil Liberties Union, Alone & Afraid: Children Held in Solitary Confinement and Isolation in Juvenile Detention and Correctional
Facilities, 2013, available at: https://www.aclu.org/sites/default/files/field_document/alone_and_afraid_complete_final.pdf; Kaba, Fatos et al. Solitary Confinement
and Risk of Self-Harm Among Jail Inmates, Am J Public Health 104 (2014), available at: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3953781/.

6

HOW MANY
PEOPLE ARE IN
SOLITARY
CONFINEMENT?

7
7

How Many People Are in
Solitary Confinement?
Disciplinary Confinement
Incarcerated people can be held in solitary confinement for several reasons. The most common is for disciplinary
purposes, to punish a violation of facility rules such as fighting, making threats, or disobeying a direct order. There are
two types of disciplinary confinement sanctions. People in SHU, solitary confinement in a special housing unit, are
isolated for up to 23 hours per day in a bare cell the size of a small elevator. People in Keeplock are also isolated for
up to 23 hours per day—either in a SHU cell, dedicated Keeplock unit, or general population cell—but are allowed to
keep their personal property.

Box 3

TYPES OF ISOLATION: SHU AND KEEPLOCK
SHU (special housing unit) sanctions are disciplinary solitary sanctions given to people who are found
guilty of committing what DOCCS categorizes as a serious facility rule violation. People serving SHU
sanctions are confined for up to 23 hours a day in a SHU cell, which is the most restrictive setting in the
prison system. Unlike ordinary cells with gate-style doors, SHU cells typically have solid doors with only
a small vision panel that can be closed by staff, making it extremely difficult to communicate with anyone
outside of the cell. People serving SHU sanctions have severely limited access to personal property, and
basic benefits like calling family or purchasing snacks and hygiene items in prison stores are restricted.
Keeplock sanctions are disciplinary solitary sanctions given to people who are found guilty of less serious
facility rule violations. Keeplock sanctions can be served in one of three locations, depending on what
space is available at each facility:
•	 General population cell: Most Keeplock sanctions are served in general population unit cells,
where a person is restricted to their cell.
•	 Long-term Keeplock cell: Keeplock sanctions can also be served in a dedicated long-term
Keeplock unit, which varies in design from repurposed SHUs to gate-style doors similar to those
in general population. These units are reserved for longer Keeplock sanctions, and because not
all facilities have these units, individuals often need to be transferred between facilities to serve a
sanction there.
•	 SHU cell: While SHU cells were designed for more serious rule-violators, Keeplock sanctions can
also be served in a SHU cell. This happens most frequently in lower security prisons that instead of
individual cells have barracks, which make isolation impractical.
People serving Keeplock sanctions are also isolated for up to 23 hours per day, regardless of their location.
However, because Keeplock is intended by DOCCS to be less restrictive than SHU, people serving Keeplock
sanctions are usually allowed to retain their personal property and have greater access to basic benefits
like phones and the prison store. Additionally, in recognition of the more restrictive environment of SHU
cells, DOCCS credits people with having been confined for three days for every two days Keeplock is served
in a SHU cell.
8

As part of the Peoples settlement in
2016, DOCCS was required to
drastically reduce the types of rule
violations that could be punished
with disciplinary confinement. Since
then, the number of SHU sanctions
has dropped by 2,400. While this
reduction is an important
improvement, it is largely offset by
the 3,100 sanction increase in
Keeplock, which still subjects
people to isolation. In fact, when
taking Keeplock sanctions into
account, the total number of
disciplinary solitary sanctions has
actually increased, from 37,600 in
2015 to 38,249 in 2018.

Figure 1

NUMBER OF DISCIPLINARY SOLITARY SANCTIONS
40,000
24,688

27,164

25,101

27,783

30,000

20,000

10,000

0

12,912

2015

12,206

11,534

2016

2017
Keeplock

10,466

2018

SHU

Comparison of Proposals
Because so many incarcerated people spend such long periods of time in solitary confinement, placing a time-cap on
confinement would be the fastest way to reduce the number of people in extreme isolation.
DOCCS’ proposed regulatory changes would cap segregated confinement, defined as “disciplinary confinement
of an incarcerated individual in a special housing unit or in a separate Keeplock unit,” at 30 days by October
2022. Though disciplinary sanctions in SHU or a separate Keeplock unit would eventually be capped at 30 days,
Keeplock sanctions in general population cells would not. DOCCS does not report where each disciplinary sanction is
served, but based on snapshots of SHU cell occupancy, it is clear that the majority of Keeplock sanctions are served
in general population cells.7 As a result, tens of thousands of Keeplock disciplinary sanctions given each year would
not be subject to the 30-day time-cap.

7

On October 1, 2019, there were 408 people serving Keeplock in a SHU cell and 141 people serving Keeplock in a Keeplock unit.

9

NUMBERS

DOCCS’ proposed changes would, however, increase the number of out-of-cell hours for people confined to
Keeplock, from the current one hour per day to five hours per day on weekdays excluding holidays, and two hours per
day on all other days.
DOCCS’ proposal would also further limit the types of rule violations that would be punishable with SHU to acts
or threats of serious physical injury, forced sexual acts, coercion, incitement of a serious disturbance, procurement of
deadly weapons or dangerous contraband, escape, or conduct constituting a felony under the penal law.

Box 4

THE IMPORTANCE OF PRISON PROGRAMS
Prison programs provide opportunities for incarcerated people to work on their personal development.
Some programs focus on addressing the causes of problematic behavior that either resulted in a
disciplinary sanction or their incarceration, and others focus on providing educational and job training
opportunities. Because most effective programs require that people take classes outside of their small
cells, prison programs also provide a respite from extreme isolation.
In the New York State prison system, people in SHU are cut off from all out-of-cell prison programs. That
practice would continue under DOCCS’ proposed regulatory amendments, but the HALT Act would grant
access to out-of-cell programming to all those in SHU.

The HALT Act, which mandates a 15-day cap on segregated confinement within one year of the bill’s passage,
defines segregated confinement as “any form of cell confinement for more than 17 hours a day.” This means that in
addition to capping sanctions at half the length of the limit proposed by DOCCS, HALT’s 15-day cap would apply to all
disciplinary sanctions, not just those served in SHU or Keeplock units. By contrast, DOCCS’ proposal would cap just
a portion of the nearly 40,000 disciplinary sanctions given each year. And segregated confinement sanctions would
only be allowed to exceed three days, up to 15 days, for the most serious rule violations involving acts of physical
injury, forced sexual acts, extortion, coercion, inciting serious disturbance, procuring deadly weapons or dangerous
contraband, or escape.
Furthermore, HALT would apply to a much larger number of people. HALT would cover correction facilities across the
state, including jails, whereas DOCCS’ proposal would only apply to New York State Prisons (see Box 1, page 4). A
different state agency, the SCOC, has proposed reforms to solitary confinement practices in jails, but those reforms
would be even less effective at ending inhumane solitary confinement.
HALT would also improve conditions of confinement, by requiring at least four hours of out-of-cell programming
per day for anyone in segregated confinement. This is a drastic difference from the one-hour-recreation minimum
required for people in SHU under DOCCS’ proposal.8
8

Under current standards, which are reaffirmed in DOCCS’ regulation proposal, all people in special housing units are entitled to at least one hour of out-of-cell time
per day. However, through the PIMS incentive program, one can earn up to an additional 2 hours, 3 days a week, depending on the facility and its recreation space
capacity. As such, even at the maximum PIMS level (Progressive Inmate Movement System, a behavioral incentive program), people get different benefits simply as
the result of the location they are serving their sanction.

10

Solitary Confinement
Beyond Discipline

Figure 2

SHU POPULATION BY STATUS (OCT 1, 2019)

While roughly 80 percent of people
in SHU are there for disciplinary
sanctions, thousands of people each
year are confined in SHU cells for
other reasons.
When an incarcerated person is
charged with a rule violation that is
punishable with solitary confinement they are entitled to a hearing.
Yet more than half of people charged
are held in SHU before their hearing.
Hundreds of people spend time in
isolation each month before even
being found guilty of any rule
violation, making pre-hearing
confinement the second most
common reason that people are held
in SHU. Current regulations mandate
that a hearing must begin within
seven days of initial confinement
unless there is authorization to do
otherwise, which happens
frequently. In 2018, 4,900 people
held in pre-hearing confinement
waited over seven days before their
hearing started, 54 of whom waited
more than 100 days. Additionally,
people held in pre-hearing
confinement who ultimately had all
of their charges dismissed spent a
total of almost 20,000 days in SHU
in 2018 alone. Until June 2019, time
spent in pre-hearing confinement
was not counted toward time served,
but this changed as the result of the
Peoples settlement monitoring
process.

9

61% | 1433 — SHU

17% | 408 — Keeplock

17% | 388 — Pre-hearing

2% | 57 — Protective Custody
1% | 17 — Administrative Segregation
2% | 42 — Other

People can also be confined to a SHU cell for voluntary or involuntary
protective custody (isolation to safeguard the person from possible harm)
and administrative segregation (indefinite isolation when DOCCS
determines that a person poses a safety threat or unreasonable risk of
escape). The conditions in administrative segregation are effectively no
different than disciplinary SHU sanctions. Under current protective custody
practices, people are given three hours of out-of-cell time per day and are
allowed to keep their personal property. However, the people whom DOCCS is
attempting to protect still suffer from the negative impacts of extreme
isolation. People in protective custody or administrative segregation can
spend months or even years in SHU confinement, since the Peoples
settlement did not have jurisdiction over these groups.

“Other” includes people in SHU who are pending move, on special watch, or are being held pending an investigation.

11

NUMBERS

Comparison of Proposals
DOCCS’ proposed regulatory amendments uphold the right to confine people in SHU pre-hearing (including for
rule violations that are only punishable with Keeplock), as well as for administrative segregation and protective
custody. However, DOCCS’ eventual 30-day time-cap would apply to all segregated confinement served in SHU,
limiting these three types of confinement to 30 days. Additionally, the regulatory amendments would give people in
administrative segregation the right to keep their personal property.
The HALT Act’s 15-day time-cap would similarly apply to administrative segregation, but mandates that “no
person may be held in segregated confinement for protective custody.” Additionally, HALT mandates that “all
hearings to determine if a person may be placed in segregated confinement shall occur prior to placement in
segregated confinement,” although a number of exceptions would allow for people to be held in solitary as long
as the hearing takes place within five days. Not only would HALT dramatically reduce the number of people in prehearing confinement, it would also reduce the time spent in SHU pre-hearing for those who fall under the exceptions.

Box 5

ALTERNATIVES TO SEGREGATED CONFINEMENT: THE RRU
Residential rehabilitation units (RRUs) are housing units “used for the treatment and rehabilitative
programming of incarcerated individuals serving disciplinary sanctions which extend beyond the maximum
duration of placement in segregated confinement.” Under both DOCCS’ proposed regulatory amendments
and the HALT Act, once the respective time-cap in solitary is reached, people are then transferred to an
RRU to serve the remainder of their sanction.
RRUs are designed to be less restrictive and provide a higher level of individually tailored programming
geared towards treatment and rehabilitation, rather than punishment. However, for RRUs to be a true
alternative to segregated confinement, and not simply solitary by another name, their differences from
solitary units must be meaningful.
DOCCS’ proposed RRUs would include five hours of out-of-cell time on weekdays and two hours on
weekends and holidays; the ability to participate in a good behavior incentive system; and programs that
promote personal development and group engagement.
The RRU guidelines in the HALT Act include seven hours out-of-cell every day, the right to personal
property, and access to programs and work assignments comparable to those offered to people in the
general population, in addition to the same programming proposed by DOCCS.
Furthermore, while both proposals allow for early release from RRU after successful completion of
programing, the HALT Act sets a one-year cap on time served in an RRU per sentence.

12

HOW LONG ARE
PEOPLE IN
SOLITARY
CONFINEMENT?

13 13
13

How Long Are People in
Solitary Confinement?
SHU Sanction Lengths
Until recently, DOCCS had no limits on the length of time that a person could be held in SHU, except for certain
special populations (see page 20). Hearing officers had wide sentencing discretion, resulting in over 20,000 people
being held in SHU for six months or more between 2007 and 2011.
The Peoples settlement placed several limits on disciplinary sanction lengths including creating sentencing
guidelines that established a maximum number of days for each type of rule violation and time-cut requirements for
good behavior. While the number of disciplinary SHU sanctions served exceeding 90 days has dropped by half since
2015, more than 2,600 people in 2018 served more than 90 days in SHU on a disciplinary sanction, 131 of whom had
sanctions one year or longer. Critically, this accounts only for individual sanctions, and not the cumulative time of
consecutive sanctions.

Box 6

TIME-CUTS

Time-cuts are one of the mechanisms DOCCS implemented as a result of the Peoples settlement to
shorten sanction lengths. With the exception of rule violations related to violent conduct, escape, or
unhygienic acts, the sanction length for people serving disciplinary sanctions in SHU can be shortened
according to the following guidelines, if the individuals are not charged with any subsequent rule violations
while in SHU:
•	 For sanctions under 90 days: 7-day time-cut off original sanction after serving 30 days, and
another 7-day time-cut after serving 60 days.
•	 For sanctions of 90 days or more: Depending on behavior, a 10 to 25 percent time-cut off the
original sanction after serving half the sanction.
Additionally, people serving a Keeplock sanction in a SHU cell are counted as having served three days
for every two days served, and since June 2019, people serving Keeplock elsewhere are eligible for a
discretionary time-cut based on what DOCCS considers good behavior.

14

Figure 3

DISCIPLINARY SHU SANCTIONS
TIME SERVED AFTER TIME-CUTS

1,146

2015 419

1,146

2016 469

1,153

2017 363

2018

532

0

2,675

3,845

3,638

2,690

1,169

2,600

5,200

782

2,401

3,108

3,049

991

3,164

3,533

3,335

1,108

3,459

2,045

7,800

568

480

131

10,400

136

230

286

Length of sanction
15 days or fewer
16-30 days
31-60 days
61-90 days
91-180 days
181-364 days
365+ days
13,000

Number of SHU Sanctions Served

In addition to disciplinary sanctions, dozens of people currently in administrative segregation and protective custody
have spent months, and even years, in SHU. For people in administrative segregation in SHU on October 1, 2019, the
average time they had been in SHU was almost eight years.

Comparison of Proposals
DOCCS’ proposed regulatory amendments would cap segregated confinement at 90 days by October 2021, at 60
days by April 2022, and at 30 days by October 2022. Under this timeline, an estimated 5,000 sanctions of more
than 90 days would be served in SHU over the next two years before the 90-day cap goes into effect; and another
estimated 15,000 sanctions would exceed 30 days before the ultimate 30-day cap goes into effect. More than half of
sanctions given in 2018 were for 90 days or less, yet DOCCS’ proposal builds in a two-year delay for the 90-day cap
to go into effect.
The HALT Act mandates a 15-day cap on all forms of isolation effective one year after the bill’s passage. This
means that an estimated 20,000 sanctions of 30 days or longer would be capped significantly sooner, and sanctions
would be capped at half the time suggested by DOCCS. Similarly, at least 1,000 sanctions given each year between
16 and 30 days would not be impacted by DOCCS’ proposal, but would be capped at 15 days under HALT.

15

SOLITARY LENGTH OF STAY

Keeplock Sanction Lengths
Keeplock sanctions can be served in SHU, separate Keeplock units, or general population cells. While DOCCS
reports the length of Keeplock sanctions, they do not break down where these sanctions are served. The numbers
reported in Figure 4 take into account a time-cut policy established through the Peoples settlement, where DOCCS
credits people with having been confined for three days for every two days Keeplock is served in a SHU cell. As the
number of Keeplock sanctions has grown, so too has the number of lengthier sanctions. Between 2015 and 2018, the
number of Keeplock sanctions of more than 30 days served (after factoring in time-cuts) increased from over 4,500
to over 5,200. Critically, this accounts only for individual sanctions and not the cumulative time that may have been
served due to consecutive sanctions.

Figure 4

DISCIPLINARY KEEPLOCK SANCTIONS
TIME SERVED AFTER TIME-CUTS
Length of sanction

2015

9,004

2016

9,535

2017

2018

0

2,813

11,661

11,162

9,749

3,202

11,383
6,000

1,312 504

12,000

1,336 533

3,634

11,956
18,000

Number of Keeplock Sanctions Served

16

1,234 497

3,338

12,727

15 days or fewer
16-30 days
31-60 days
61-90 days
91-180 days

24,000

1,050 548

30,000

Comparison of Proposals
DOCCS’ proposed time-cap would only apply to Keeplock sanctions that are served in SHU or a separate
Keeplock unit. DOCCS does not reveal where disciplinary sanctions are served, but snapshots of who was in SHU on
a given date are illustrative. For example, on October 1, 2019, of the 408 people serving a Keeplock sanction in SHU,
69 people had been in SHU for 31 to 60 days, 31 people for 61 to 90 days, and 63 people for over 90 days. As with
SHU sanctions, these lengthy Keeplock sanctions would continue for the next two to three years until the time-caps
go into effect.10 For those serving Keeplock in a general population cell—likely the majority of Keeplock sanctions—no
time-cap would apply. However, the proposed regulatory amendments do include a new time-cut policy, under which
people serving Keeplock in a general population cell who have not committed an additional rule violation would be
presumptively awarded a 25 percent time-cut after having served half of their Keeoplock sanction.
While Keeplock sanctions are on average much shorter than SHU sanctions (see Figures 3 and 4) they can still result
in isolation for months at a time, and in the case of nine people in 2018, for one year or more. After the Peoples
settlement limited SHU sanctions, Keeplock sanctions increased significantly. If the segregated confinement timecaps do not apply to Keeplock sanctions served in a general population cell, there will likely be a similar increase in
Keeplock sanctions, as this provides hearing officers a loophole to evade the time-cap.
The HALT Act’s time-cap would apply to all forms of Keeplock, shortening the length of more than 12,000
Keeplock sanctions each year that currently exceed 15 days. By covering all Keeplock sanctions regardless of where
they are served, the HALT Act does not risk creating a loophole.

Consecutive Solitary Confinement
While limits on the length of sanctions are important, for any reform to be meaningful it must address consecutive
sentences. The negative effects of solitary confinement are often compounded by the practice of imposing consecutive confinement sanctions for new rule violations on people already in confinement. Also known as back-to-backs,
these consecutive sanctions are not uncommon: In 2018, 20 percent of all SHU sanctions (more than 2,100) and 14
percent of all Keeplock sanctions (more than 4,000) were back-to-backs.11 Research indicates that using isolation as a
form of punishment worsens behavior 12, making it all the more problematic when DOCCS officials punish such misbehavior with more isolation sanctions. Despite efforts to curb consecutive solitary sentences, back-to-backs have been
increasing in frequency.
As part of the Peoples settlement, DOCCS issued a guidance instructing hearing officers to “consider alternative
sanctions other than additional SHU confinement” when an individual is already serving time in SHU. Since implementation of this guidance, back-to-backs in SHU dropped from 67 percent of SHU punishable rule violations in 2015
to 51 percent in 2018. While this change is far from negligible, back-to-back Keeplock sanctions (including only new

10

DOCCS’ proposal would also extend the time credit of three days for every two served currently offered to people serving Keeplock sanctions in SHU to people 		
who are serving Keeplock sanctions in an RRU.

11

Back-to-back Keeplock sanctions given to individuals who were already serving a Keeplock sanction but not in a SHU cell are not tracked by DOCCS as back-tobacks, so the frequency of this is unknown and therefore not taken into account in these numbers.

12

Vera Institute of Justice, Solitary Confinement: Common Misconceptions and Emerging Safe Alternatives, March 2015. Available at: https://www.vera.org/down		
loads/publications/solitary-confinement-misconceptions-safe-alternatives-report_1.pdf

		

17 17

Figure 5

SANCTIONS GIVEN FOR SHU PUNISHABLE RULE VIOLATIONS THAT OCCURED IN SHU (BACK-TO-BACKS)
100%

16%

16%

17%

21%

12%

12%

30%

37%

75%
67%

64%
58%

50%

51%

25%

0%

2015

2016
No Confinement

2017
Keeplock

2018
SHU

Keeplock sanctions given to people already in SHU) nearly doubled during this same period. Taking this into account,
the proportion of people who were held in back-to-back confinement actually increased, from 84 percent in 2015 to 88
percent in 2018.
The impact of back-to-back sanctions on total lengths of stay in SHU can be easily observed through SHU cell
population snapshot data. For example, on October 1, 2019, 668 people in SHU had been serving a disciplinary sanction
for 30 days or less. However, 100 of these people were in SHU on a back-to-back, one-quarter of whom had been in
SHU for over 90 days.

Comparison of Proposals
DOCCS’ proposal attempts to address back-to-backs by instructing officers to rely on de-escalation and other types
of intervention “as the preferred methods of responding to misbehavior [by people already in confinement].” However, it is unlikely that a policy shift from “considering” to “preferring” alternatives to back-to-backs will result in any
meaningful change. Consequently, even if segregated confinement sanctions are capped at 30 days, because of backto-backs, people could still be confined consecutively for months or even years.
The HALT Act mandates that “no person may be placed in segregated confinement for longer than necessary and no
more than fifteen consecutive days or twenty total days within any sixty-day period” for a serious facility rule violation, and “no longer than six days in any thirty-day period” for less serious violations. Given that back-to-backs are
commonly used, this requirement is essential to meaningfully restrict lengths of solitary sanctions.

18

WHO IS IN
SOLITARY
CONFINEMENT?

19 19
19

Who is in Solitary
Confinement?
Today, nearly all people incarcerated in the New York State prison system can be subject to solitary confinement, with
a small number of exceptions. In a snapshot of the SHU cell population on October 1, 2019, 99 percent were men, 57
percent were Black, and 24 percent were Latinx. While some of these groups are notably overrepresented in the SHU
population in comparison to the general prison population, they are even more starkly overrepresented when compared
to the population of New York State.13
A number of changes implemented over the last decade have helped limit the placement of certain groups considered
“special populations” in SHU. While, pregnant people and juveniles have not been placed in SHU since 2016, these
special populations are regularly placed in other forms of confinement.

Young People and People Age 55 and Older
While the health impacts of solitary confinement are detrimental to anyone, they are significantly heightened for
young people.14 Since the Peoples settlement placed multiple restrictions on the isolation of people under 18, the
number of disciplinary confinement sanctions given to 16- and 17-year-olds dropped by more than half from 332 in
2015 to 127 in 2018. Furthermore, people under 18 who do receive disciplinary confinement sanctions are now placed in
special juvenile separation units (JSUs), instead of SHU, where cell confinement is limited to 18 hours on all weekdays
excluding holidays (with possible exceptions) rather than the standard 23 hours, with a mandated two hours of “outside
exercise, weather permitting” on all other days. As a result of these changes, no person under the age of 18 has served
a disciplinary sanction in a SHU cell in several years. However, dozens of 16- and 17-year-olds each year are still subject
to 18-hour isolation in JSUs.
Research has shown that isolation can stunt brain development in young adults,15 making solitary confinement
especially dangerous to people under the age of 21. And people 55 and older are more susceptible to health problems
which can be compounded by isolation in SHU cells.16 Despite these risks, thousands of disciplinary confinement
sanctions are given to people 21 and younger or 55 and older each year.17 The most recent available SHU cell population
data indicates that they account for more than 10 percent of the population currently in solitary.

13

The 2018 New York State Prison population was 95 percent male, 48 percent Black, and 25 percent Latinx. The 2018 New York state general population was 49 		
percent male, 18 percent Black, and 19 percent Latinx.

14

Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Young Adult Development Project: Brain Changes. Available at: http://hrweb.mit.edu/worklife/youngadult/brain.html.

15

Human Rights Watch and the American Civil Liberties Union, Growing Up Locked Down: Youth in Solitary Confinement in Jails and Prisons Across the United States, 		
October 2012. Available at: https://www.aclu.org/report/growing-locked-down-youth-solitary-confinement-jails-and-prisons-across-united-states.

16

Prison Policy Institute, Aging alone: Uncovering the risk of solitary confinement for people over 45, May 2, 2017. Available at: https://www.prisonpolicy.org/		
blog/2017/05/02/aging_alone/ .

17

In 2018, people between the ages of 22 and 54 received 9,345 SHU sanctions and 24,178 Keeplock sanctions.

20

Figure 6

DISCIPLINARY CONFINEMENT SANCTIONS BY AGE (2018)

2,000

2,068

1,500
1,414

1,000
801

500
316

0

123

4

16-17

18-21
SHU

Comparison of Proposals
DOCCS’ proposed regulatory amendments, which
rename JSUs as AOSUs (adolescent offender
separation units), would improve the conditions
of confinement for people under 18. In addition to
removing the “weather permitting” clause for
recreation, the regulations modify the current
mandated programing to include “programs and
activities that promote personal development and
group engagement, addressing underlying causes
of problematic behavior resulting in placement
in the unit and helping prepare for discharge
from the unit to general confinement or the
community.” DOCCS’ proposal would also expand
the PIMS (Progressive Inmate Management)

55+

Keeplock

Figure 7

SHU POPULATION BY AGE (OCT 1, 2019)
8% — 18 to 21
3% — 55+

89% — 22 to 54

21

WHO IS IN SOLITARY?
incentive system to people under 18, which includes four levels of incentives that people can earn based on good
behavior.
The HALT Act, like DOCCS’ proposal, mandates no person in a special population be placed in segregated confinement
for any amount of time. However, unlike DOCCS’ definition of special populations, which only includes people under
18, HALT’s definition would include all persons 21 and younger and those 55 and older. Under HALT’s more inclusive
definition, thousands of people in these age groups who are currently serving SHU or Keeplock sanctions would be
exempt from all forms of segregated confinement.

Box 7

“SPECIAL POPULATIONS” DEFINITION

DOCCS’ Proposed Regulatory
Amendments

The HALT Act

Any person:

Any person:

a) Housed in an adolescent offender facility;
b) Who is pregnant, or in the first eight weeks
of post-partum recovery period after giving
birth, or caring for a child in a correctional
institution;
c) Who suffers from a disability as defined in
paragraph (a) of subdivision twenty-one of
section two hundred ninety-two of the
Executive Law and said disability impairs
the individual’s ability to provide self-care
within the environment of a correctional
facility.

a) Twenty-one years of age or younger
or fifty-five years of age or older;
b) Who is pregnant, in the first eight weeks of
the post-partum recovery period after giving
birth, or caring for a child in a correctional
institution;
c) With a disability as defined in paragraph (a)
of subdivision twenty-one of section two
hundred ninety-two of the Executive Law.

People with Disabilities: Spotlight on Mental Health
The SHU Exclusion Law passed in 2008 mandates that a person with a serious mental illness18 (SMI) must be
transferred to a rehabilitative mental health treatment unit (RMHU) if they are held in SHU for longer than 30 days. The
Peoples settlement further restricted confinement of people with mental health diagnoses, requiring hearing officers
to take account of mental health diagnoses not only for the purpose of assessing guilt but also during sentencing. The
Peoples settlement also mandated the establishment of a correctional alternative rehabilitation (CAR) program for
people with intellectual or cognitive disabilities. Still, many people with disabilities are not exempted and continue to
be placed in solitary confinement.
While DOCCS’ disciplinary data does not record a person’s disability status, it does include their mental health status.

18

22
22

N.Y. Ins. Law § 137. Available at: https://www.nysenate.gov/legislation/laws/COR/137.

In 2018, seven percent of SHU sanctions (765) and nine percent of Keeplock sanctions (2,377) were given to people
with an SMI. While many of these people are diverted to an RMHU, where confinement is less restrictive and there
is more access to mental health care, up to a dozen serve time in SHU each month, and an unknown number are
confined elsewhere.
In addition to the SMI diagnosis, DOCCS utilizes an Office of Mental Health (OMH) service level system that
categorizes people who require mental health services from OMH levels 1 to 4.19 Not all people between levels 1 and 4
get an SMI classification; however, all persons with an SMI classification are between levels 1 and 4. Because the SHU
Exclusion Law applies only to those with an SMI, people classified with an OMH level 1 through 4 who do not also have
an SMI designation are currently not excluded from SHU.
In 2018, 32 percent of SHU sanctions and 36 percent of Keeplock sanctions were given to people with mental health
service needs (OMH levels 1 to 4). Furthermore, on October 1, 2019, 11 percent of the SHU population had a major
mental health disorder (OMH levels 1 and 2), and another 20 percent required shorter term mental health care.

Figure 8

DISCIPLINARY CONFINEMENT SANCTIONS (2018)
4,000
3,527

3,000
2,870

2,779

2,000

1,000

1,169

1,017

862

822

316

0

OMH 1

OMH 2

OMH 3
SHU

19

OMH 4

Keeplock

People requiring mental health services are classified by DOCCS Office of Mental Health into four levels:
•	
•	
•	
•	

Level 1: Person diagnosed with a major mental illness and/or severe personality disorder with active symptoms and/or a history of psychiatric instability.
Level 2: Person diagnosed with a major mental illness without significant “active” symptoms but with a history of complying with mental health treatment
and of psychiatric stability.
Level 3: Person who is or may be in need of short-term psychiatric medication.
Level 4: Person who is or may be in need of short-term mental health intervention, excluding psychiatric medication.

23

WHO
IS IN SOLITARY?
Figure 9
SHU POPULATION BY MENTAL HEALTH STATUS (OCT. 1, 2019)

11% — Major Mental Health
Disorder [OMH 1 + 2]

20% — Moderate Mental Health
Disorder [OMH 3 + 4]

69% — No Diagnosed Mental
Health Disorder

Comparison of Proposals
Both proposals use the same section of the state human rights law to define people with disabilities. However, their
slightly different definitions of “special populations” create a stark contrast between the two proposals in terms of
who would count as a special population and be excluded from segregated confinement.
DOCCS’ proposed regulatory amendments mandate that special populations shall not be placed in segregated
confinement or administrative segregation “for any length of time.” However, for a person with a disability to be
considered as a special population, DOCCS’ proposal requires that “said disability impairs the individual’s ability
to provide self-care within the environment of a correctional facility.” This clause does not specify what “selfcare” means, who would be authorized to make this determination, or how it would be made, which could create wide
disparities in how the policy is interpreted. For example, a person with a diagnosed mental health disorder who is
medicated into compliance could be seen as able to provide “self-care,” and thus would not be exempted from segregated confinement. Similarly, a person with hearing impairments who under normal circumstances would be perfectly
able to provide self-care would likely also be excluded from the special population exemption, despite the increased
harm that isolation would have to their mental health as a result of the compounded sensory depravation.20 Many people with disabilities, including those with an OMH level 1 to 4 without an SMI, may be excluded from the very definition
that was designed to help protect them.
The HALT Act similarly mandates that special populations shall not be placed in segregated confinement for any
length of time. However, unlike DOCCS’ proposal, the human rights law definition of disability is not caveated by any
further clause, so all people with any disability would be exempted from segregated confinement. This means that
under HALT, the exemption from SHU for people with an SMI would be extended to thousands more people with other
physical and mental disabilities who are more vulnerable to the negative impacts of isolation. For example, the extension of this exemption to people with an OMH level of between 1 and 4 alone would decrease the daily SHU population by one-third. And the impact of the extension would be compounded by the fact that, unlike DOCCS’ proposal, it
would additionally exempt people from Keeplock in a general population cell.

20

American Civil Liberties Union, Caged In: Solitary Confinement’s Devasting Harm on Prisoners with Physical Disabilities, 2017. Available at: https://www.		
aclu.org/sites/default/files/field_document/010916-aclu-solitarydisabilityreport-single.pdf.

24

	

PROJECTED
IMPACT
of DOCCS’ Proposal and the HALT Act

25
25 25
25

PROJECTED IMPACT

The analysis below compares the projected impact of DOCCS’ proposed regulatory amendments and the HALT Act if
each were fully implemented today. Using a snapshot of people held in SHU on October 1, 2019, the NYCLU projects
that DOCCS’ proposal would likely lead to a 43 percent reduction in the SHU population, while the HALT Act would
lead to an 88 percent reduction. Additionally, HALT’s time-cap and restrictions would apply to tens of thousands of
Keeplock sanctions served each year in a general population cell, whereas under DOCCS’ proposal, these sanctions
would be subject only to conditions changes and not caps or restrictions.

Restrictions on Who Can Be Held in Segregated Confinement
Non-Disciplinary Confinement: DOCCS’ proposal would improve the conditions of non-disciplinary confinement, but
would not impact the number of people who could be placed in segregated confinement for non-disciplinary reasons.
The HALT Act would ban the placement of people under protective custody from segregated confinement, and would
eliminate pre-hearing confinement except for a number of charges for which it would be capped at five days. This
would exclude from the October 1 SHU population 57 people who were under protective custody and 215 people who
had been in pre-hearing confinement for more than five days.
Age: DOCCS’ proposal does not introduce new age restrictions for segregated confinement. The HALT Act expands
age restrictions to people 21 and younger, and 55 and older, which would exclude 262 people from the October 1 SHU
population.
Mental Health: Both DOCCS’ proposal and the HALT Act bar people with disabilities (as defined in the State Human
Rights Law) from being placed in segregated confinement. However, DOCCS’ proposal narrows the exclusion to people
with disabilities who are unable to “provide self-care,” a term which they fail to define, and which could easily result in
maintaining the status quo. Under a generous interpretation, this could possibly result in the exclusion of people with
a serious mental illness (SMI) or OMH level 1 major mental health disorder. On the other hand, the HALT Act excludes
all people with an SMI or OMH level between 1 and 4 from segregated confinement. Under these circumstances, DOCCS’ standard could reduce the number of people in SHU on October 1 by up to 80 people, while the HALT Act would
reduce it by 722 people.

Time-Caps
In addition to the difference in the timeline of implementation of the two proposals, at full implementation, DOCCS’
regulatory amendments cap segregated confinement at 30 days, whereas the HALT Act caps it at 15 days. On October 1, 2019, 1,239 people had a SHU start date that was more than 30 days before October 1, and another 451 had a
SHU start date that was between 15 and 30 days before October 1. However, the wording of each proposal’s time-cap
clause creates additional differences in their impact, particularly with regards to back-to-back sanctions. DOCCS’
proposal, which caps “segregated confinement as a result of a disciplinary hearing” at 30 days, offers no language
that would limit subsequent sanctions resulting from a separate disciplinary hearing. Of the 1,239 people who had a

26

SHU start-date more than 30 days before October 1, 294 were serving back-to-backs, whom under DOCCS’ proposal
could remain in SHU.21
The HALT Act includes a cap of 20 days within any 60-day period. Although available data does not track separate
sanctions in SHU by individual over time, of the 655 people who had a SHU start-date that was 15 days or fewer before
October 1, 63 people had actually been in a SHU cell for more than 20 days.

Segregated Confinement Outside SHU
DOCCS’ proposal does not consider Keeplock served in a general population cell as segregated confinement, but the
HALT Act does. As such, tens of thousands of Keeplock sanctions where people are isolated in their own cell each
year, under HALT, would be capped at 15 days if not barred from being confined altogether. Under DOCCS’
proposal, they would remain in Keeplock for the same length of time, but in improved conditions.

Taken together, DOCCS’ proposal could reduce the daily SHU population by about 1,000 people. But the HALT Act
could reduce the daily SHU population by about 2,000 people and end the torture of long-term confinement by tens of
thousands of sanctions each year.

21

The regulations would allow DOCCS to hold people in SHU for more than 30 days on back-to-backs. This analysis projects that the 294 people who were in SHU for 		
more than 30 days on back-to-backs would not be subject to the 30-day cap. However, it is possible that not all of the 294 people would continue to be held.

22

The projections for this category only take account of mental health disabilities, as data on other types of disabilities was not available.

23

The total projected SHU population does not take account of restrictions on SHU punishable offenses put forth by each proposal as they are listed in vague 	
	
categories that do not indicate specific charges. However, the list of offense categories is quite similar between proposals, and is thus projected not to have a 		
differential impact.

27

CONCLUSION

	

28
28

28
28
28

Conclusion
The NYCLU’s analysis reveals that DOCCS’ proposed regulations do not adequately limit the use of solitary confinement. The proposed regulations fail to effectively restrict the many forms of solitary confinement, fail to end the continued use of torture through long periods of isolation, and fail to protect all vulnerable populations from the harms of
solitary confinement. Conversely, the HALT Act would provide a much more humane approach to limiting solitary confinement. It imposes comprehensive restrictions on all forms of solitary confinement, ends the use of torture through
long periods of isolation, and protects all vulnerable populations from the harms of solitary confinement.

The HALT Act would also provide greater transparency and accountability by requiring more in-depth public reporting
on confinement practices and by requiring that an independent agency regularly evaluates DOCCS’ compliance with
confinement restrictions. And unlike the proposed regulations, neither DOCCS nor any future administration can roll
back the HALT Act, because it is legislative, rather than regulatory, reform.
For all these reasons, the NYCLU believes that the HALT Act represents the more humane path forward to
meaningfully curb the use of solitary confinement.

29

APPENDIX:
COMPARISON OF DOCCS
AND HALT PROPOSALS
Issue

DOCCS Regulatory Amendments

The HALT Act

Segregated Confinement
Definition

“The disciplinary confinement of an incarcerated individual in a special housing unit
[SHU] or in a separate Keeplock unit.”

“Any form of cell confinement for more
than seventeen hours a day other than
in a facility-wide emergency or for the
purpose of providing medical or mental
health treatment.”

Keeplock as Segregated
Confinement

Applies only to Keeplock sanctions served in
SHU or a separate Keeplock unit.

Applies to all forms of Keeplock.

Time-Caps and Timeline

90-day cap on segregated confinement by
October 2021, 60-day cap by April 2022,
30-day cap by October 2022.

15-day cap on all segregated
confinement within one year after bill’s
passage.

Facility Rule Violations
Specificities

Segregated confinement sanctions may only
be given to people found to have committed
or threatened to commit more serious acts of
physical injury, forced sexual acts, coercion,
inciting a serious disturbance, procuring
deadly weapons or dangerous contraband,
escape, or conduct constituting a felony
under the penal law.

Segregated confinement sanctions
may only exceed 3 days if the person is
found to have committed or threatened
to commit more serious acts of physical
injury, forced sexual acts, extortion,
coercion, inciting serious disturbance,
procuring deadly weapons or dangerous
contraband, or escape.

Consecutive Sanction
Limits (Back-to-Backs)

No mandatory limits but officers are
instructed to rely on de-escalation and other
types of intervention as the “preferred”
methods for responding to subsequent rule
violations.

No person may be placed in segregated
confinement for no more than 15
consecutive days or 20 total days within
any 60-day period; For less serious rule
violations, no person may placed in
segregated confinement for more than 6
days in a 30-day period.

No later than the expiration of the sanction
imposed or upon successful completion of
programing, whichever is earlier.

No later than the expiration of the
sanction imposed or upon successful
completion of programing, whichever is
earlier, with a one-year maximum time
in RRU.

RRU Time-Cap

30

Issue

DOCCS Regulatory Amendments

The HALT Act

Pre-Hearing
Confinement

Upholds the right to hold people in SHU
pre-hearing confinement, including for rule
violations that are only punishable with
Keeplock; Hearing must commence within
seven days of initial confinement unless
authorization is received to do otherwise.

Hearings must take place prior to confinement, with number of exceptions
under which the hearing must take
place within five days.

Administrative
Segregation

30-day eventual time-cap with the right to
keep personal property.

15-day time-cap.

Protective Custody

30-day eventual time-cap with the right to
keep personal property.

Bans the use of segregated
confinement for those in protective
custody.

SHU: At least 1 hour of out-of-cell time per
day.
Out-of-Cell Time

Keeplock: 5 hours per day on weekdays
excluding holidays, and 2 hours per day on
all other days.

At least 4 hours of out-of-cell
programming per day for all segregated
confinement.

Time-Cuts

Extends current SHU time-cut policies to
SHU sanctions served in RRU; creates an
additional time-cut policy for Keeplock.

Upholds existing time-cut policies.

Special Populations:
Young People and People
Over 55

Bans segregated confinement for any
amount of time for people under 18; Expands
programing requirements and incentive
program for alternatives to segregation for
people under 18.

Bans segregated confinement for
any amount of time for people 21 and
younger, and 55 and older.

Special Populations:
People with Disabilities

Bans segregated confinement for any
amount of time for people with disabilities as
defined in the state human rights law if said
disability impairs the individual’s ability to
provide self-care within the environment of a
correctional facility.

Bans segregated confinement for
any amount of time for people with
disabilities as defined in the state
human rights law.
31

New York Civil Liberties Union
125 Broad St., 19th Floor, New York, NY 10004
(212) 607-3300
www.nyclu.org