Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Supreme Court's scary ruling on state's prisons
San Francisco Chronicle ^ | 5/24/11 | Debra J. Saunders

Posted on 05/24/2011 8:13:43 AM PDT by SmithL

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-46 next last

1 posted on 05/24/2011 8:13:51 AM PDT by SmithL
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: SmithL
"As many as 54 prisoners may share a single toilet."

Obviously the good justice has never been deployed, where a hundred troops share a single working sh~!tter...

2 posted on 05/24/2011 8:17:34 AM PDT by Old Sarge (Marking time on the government's dime...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SmithL

And I find that if there is no fear of punishment, then the entire society is “criminogenic”. The simple answer would be razor wire, tents, and porta-johns in the Mojave.


3 posted on 05/24/2011 8:17:39 AM PDT by Pecos (Constitutionalist. Liberty and Honor will not die on my watch.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Pecos

I always thought a no wall prison in the middle of Alaska would be good. Wanna run...there is the tundra!


4 posted on 05/24/2011 8:19:04 AM PDT by sigzero
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: SmithL
Shrug. The producers are fleeing California as fast as possible. This idiotic decision will simply quicken the pace.

I remember that in a previous thread regarding judicial retention, that I suggested the idea of the public being allowed to vote out a sitting federal judge or a Supreme Court justice. Too bad we can't do that now.

5 posted on 05/24/2011 8:19:17 AM PDT by pnh102 (Regarding liberalism, always attribute to malice what you think can be explained by stupidity. - Me)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SmithL

They shouldn’t be incarcerating all those pot smokers anyway.


6 posted on 05/24/2011 8:20:09 AM PDT by SeeSharp
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SmithL
Maybe California should recognize itself for what it is: A failed state.

The riches in agriculture, technology, tourism, natural harbors and an embarrassment of other assets have been run into the ground through liberal policy and unchecked third world immigration.

If they're ever going to reclaim a functioning society, they ought to build enough prisons to hold 1 million people, and hope that removing the criminals from society will allow the law-abiding majority to be productive enough to support the incarceration of the lawless.

7 posted on 05/24/2011 8:24:31 AM PDT by End Times Sentinel (In Memory of my Dear Friend Henry Lee II)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SmithL
Kennedy argued, "Prisoners retain the essence of human dignity inherent in all persons."

Uh, no...don't wanna do time? Don't do the crime.

8 posted on 05/24/2011 8:25:37 AM PDT by JRios1968 (IÂ’m guttery and trashy, with a hint of lemon. - Laz)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SmithL

I agree that prisons are overcrowded and that something must be done about it. What needs to be done is: build more prisons. Lots of ‘em. Criminals should never be let loose because of overcrowding.


9 posted on 05/24/2011 8:27:45 AM PDT by Sans-Culotte ( Pray for Obama- Psalm 109:8)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SeeSharp

Let’s just legalize drugs, instead of throwing the pot smokers in jail. They are no more dangerous than people who consume alchohol. That should cut the prison population in have, and also have no use for the federal drug enforcemant agency, which can then be eliminated.


10 posted on 05/24/2011 8:28:30 AM PDT by Roklok
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: SmithL
Mexifornia in two years !

11 posted on 05/24/2011 8:28:40 AM PDT by Uri’el-2012 (Psalm 119:174 I long for Your salvation, YHvH, Your law is my delight.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SeeSharp

I wonder how many pot heads are really in the cali jails? Did not cali decriminalize pot years ago? But yeah, end the war on drugs .... we lost.


12 posted on 05/24/2011 8:29:21 AM PDT by jpsb
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: SeeSharp
They shouldn’t be incarcerating all those pot smokers anyway.

If they released all the pot smokers, they wouldn't have anyone left in jail!

13 posted on 05/24/2011 8:29:45 AM PDT by SeeSac
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: SmithL
States can not just neglect one of their responsibilities, building and staffing prisons while at the same time spending large amount of taxpayers money on amenities. So once in while the SCOTUS has to slap a state. Now one can discuss exactly how well a cell should be appointed but there doesn't seem to be a clear standard for that. One crapper for how many people? It just looks like the Root Cause of the problem is a lack of standards and a lack of state priorities to provide that standard. If it was me, I'd have prisoners on three shifts, one shift in rack, on at work, one at recreation/studies etc. But you'd need guards which have been implicated in the cost structure problems in CA.
14 posted on 05/24/2011 8:32:51 AM PDT by dblshot (Insanity - electing the same people over and over and expecting different results.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: All
Back in 2007, Arnold & the Legislature passed AB900 which was aimed at solving overcrowding by, among other things, adding 40,000 new beds via prison construction. The federal courts, however, ruled no other solution was good enough EXCEPT releasing prisoners.
15 posted on 05/24/2011 8:35:53 AM PDT by newzjunkey
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Roklok; SeeSharp
Let’s just legalize drugs, instead of throwing the pot smokers in jail.

SB1401

Possession of less than 28.5 g of marijuana is already a misdemeanor in CA, so the idea that prisons are filled with guys who were just in possession of personal consumption amounts is a myth. Even possession of hash is nearly always punished with a fine instead of jail time.

16 posted on 05/24/2011 8:36:37 AM PDT by End Times Sentinel (In Memory of my Dear Friend Henry Lee II)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: sigzero
I always thought a no wall prison in the middle of Alaska would be good. Wanna run...there is the tundra!

It's been done before

17 posted on 05/24/2011 8:38:13 AM PDT by Oshkalaboomboom
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Oshkalaboomboom

I know Kapuskasing Ontario (way up north) was a place where German POWs were held in minimum security.


18 posted on 05/24/2011 8:39:43 AM PDT by nascarnation
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: JRios1968

Chamberpots were the norm for millenia.


19 posted on 05/24/2011 8:39:43 AM PDT by ctdonath2
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: SmithL

It honestly looks to me more like a problem with the California state government than the SCOTUS.

“In Plata v. Brown, filed in 2001, the State conceded that deficiencies in prison medical care violated prisoners’ Eighth Amendment rights and stipulated to a remedial injunction. But when the State had not complied with the injunction by 2005, the court appointed a Receiver to oversee remedial efforts. Three years later, the Receiver described continuing deficiencies caused by over-crowding. Believing that a remedy for unconstitutional medical and mental health care could not be achieved without reducing over-crowding, the Coleman and Plata plaintiffs moved their respective District Courts to convene a three-judge court empowered by the Prison Litigation Reform Act of 1995 (PLRA) to order reductions in the prison population. The judges in both actions granted the re-quest, and the cases were consolidated before a single three-judge court. After hearing testimony and making extensive findings of fact, the court ordered California to reduce its prison population to 137.5% of design capacity within two years...

...The appeal presents the question whether the remedial order issued by the three-judge court is consistent with requirements and procedures set forth in a congressional statute, the Prison Litigation Reform Act of 1995 (PLRA). 18 U. S. C. §3626; see Appendix A, infra. The order leaves the choice of means to reduce overcrowding to the discretion of state officials.”

http://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/10pdf/09-1233.pdf

FWIW, the dissent starts at page 59.

This has been going on for 10 years, and California refused to spend the money to expand prisons - although I’d bet the salaries of prison guards increased more than inflation during that time.

I support putting people in prison, but I also support the idea of building prisons to hold them. Maybe if California spent less on unions and more on prisons, this would not have happened. Frankly, I would trust the judgment of a 3 judge panel more than I would a vote of the California legislature...


20 posted on 05/24/2011 8:41:37 AM PDT by Mr Rogers (Poor history is better than good fiction, and anything with lots of horses is better still)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-46 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson