On May 23, the Supreme Court voted 5-4 in favor of a measure that would require the State of California to decrease its prison population by up to 37,000 inmates over a two year period. Currently, there are approximately 142,000 inmates housed in California’s 33 prisons. The reduction would ease overcrowding, but the correctional system would still be running at 137 percent capacity.
Associate Justice Anthony Kennedy’s 52-page decision stated that the reduction was “required by the Constitution” to protect the rights of inmates. The case was originally brought before the Court in 1990 with the filing of Coleman V. Brown, and later, in 2001, when Plata V. Brown was filed in response to mentally ill inmates not getting proper treatment due to overcrowding. In subsequent decades since the overcrowding got worse. The opinion, signed by Kennedy, and supported by Justices Stephen Breyer, Ruth Bader Ginsburg, Sonia Sotomayor, and Elena Kagen, declared that California’s prisons are designed to hold under 80,000 inmates, but have been known to hold over 150,000 at times. The opinion further declared that the centers where new prisoners are processed sometimes are over 300 percent of the capacity for which they were designed.
Health care staffing in some California prisons is 54 percent of acceptable minimum standards. The hiring of more health care professionals would not do much to provide better health care, because the prison system is so overcrowded. The Court observed that California has a suicide rate that is 80 percent higher than other state prison systems.
If California somehow discovers another way to alleviate overcrowding, the state does not have to adhere to the Court’s ruling. Solving the problem without releasing prisoners is a conundrum California legislators are facing. Getting rid of the “Three Strikes” law could alleviate a small part of the overcrowding situation, particularly if it was made retroactive. Californians are sentenced to life if they commit three felonies. A life sentence could be handed down if an offender with two prior felonies is convicted of shoplifting a $5 frozen pizza. The actual crime is not important. Possession of marijuana, a minor assault, or stealing a lawn mower over a period of 30 years can land a person in prison for life.
Judges Antonin Scalia and Clarence Thomas cast the dissenting votes. Scalia went so far as to opine that the decision in favor of reducing California’s prison population is “perhaps the most radical injunction issued by a Court in our Nation’s history.” Was it a radical decision? Maybe.But many feel it was also a "necessary" one. American citizens have Constitutional rights, which our Courts are sworn to protect -- even for those who are incarcerated. The decision came a week before the United States celebrates Memorial Day, a day when Americans pause to remember those who died to protect our Constitutional rights. The Court’s decision, for many, is a reflection of the honor bestowed upon those who gave their lives, the ultimate sacrifice, to protect one of the United States’ most glorious documents.
|
|
|
|
