In 2011, the ACLU and the ACLU of Alabama sued the Alabama Department of Corrections for discrimination against inmates living with HIV. Alabama is one of only two states, along with South Carolina, that continue to segregate inmates living with HIV in separate housing units and otherwise restrict their access to prison programs. We are awaiting a decision. You can read more about it here.
I found out that I was HIV-positive while I was in prison in Alabama, and right away they locked me up in segregation until they could send me off to Limestone Correctional Facility where the other prisoners with HIV were kept. I hadn’t even done anything to get disciplinary action, and yet they locked me up in solitary right away. When I was let out of my cell, the guards would always say “dead man walking” loud enough for the other prisoners to hear. That’s when I realized this was going to be a weird, weird time.
Soon they sent me to Limestone to live in the HIV-positive unit. Alabama and South Carolina are the only two states where they still segregate positive inmates – all the other states stopped doing it when they realized it was unnecessary.
While I was at Limestone I joined their Substance Abuse Program (SAP). It’s an excellent program and it helped me get myself together and get off drugs. When you attend SAP, you go to one part of the facility to attend the classes, and during that time HIV-positive prisoners and prisoners without HIV are together in one place. But then when it’s lunchtime, they send the prisoners with HIV back to the other side of the facility to eat lunch separate from everyone else. Most of the prisoners in SAP live and eat together – it’s just the prisoners with HIV who are separated at lunchtime and after classes.
One day I was at SAP when they called for lunch. One of the inmates without HIV invited me to eat with him and some of the other prisoners. I felt honored that they invited me, so I just lined up, sat down for 15 minutes to eat with them, and then went back to class. It felt really good just to feel like a regular inmate during those 15 minutes.
That afternoon an officer approached me and said she heard I had eaten lunch with the non-positive prisoners. I said that was true, and the next thing I knew they put me in solitary confinement and locked down the whole facility. It turned out they were trying to find my particular spoon and plate. I’m not sure why, since you can’t transmit HIV this way.
They gave me a disciplinary ticket for being in an unauthorized area and causing a health hazard. I was in solitary confinement – which we call seg – for several weeks. I can’t remember exactly how long because it’s impossible to keep track of the time while you’re in there, but it was close to a month. The officers in seg were very sympathetic toward me, because they said they didn’t think I had done anything wrong.
When you’re in the segregated housing for prisoners with HIV, you don’t get the opportunity to participate in the full range of special training and work programs that the Department of Corrections offers. I would have liked to be able to study cooking – I really like to cook and I would have been really good at that. I would have loved to be able to work so I could have saved some money to help me land on my feet when I got out of prison. Instead, I couldn’t make any money. The prison loses out too, since they get part of the pay when prisoners are allowed to work.
Prisoners with HIV also don’t get the opportunity to transfer to a facility closer to their family, like other prisoners. That’s too bad – being able to work and to see your family really help to make the transition back to regular society easier. If prisoners with HIV could do these things, they might have a more successful re-entry into the real world when they get out.
Prisoners in the segregated HIV housing are made to wear a white armband, and prison officials tell everyone what that means. You can spot it from a mile away. People judge you instantly. I would have liked to be able to tell people on my own terms, but I didn’t have a chance.
I joined the ACLU lawsuit because I feel like it’s not right for us to be punished just because we have a disease. I’m not asking for special treatment – all I want is to be treated the same as other inmates. I believe that you do the crime, you do the time – but you should have the chance to better yourself while you’re doing the time.
There is no reason whatsoever for HIV-positive prisoners to be segregated, but unfortunately prison officials in Alabama are not educated in the ways of transmitting the disease. Hopefully, the court will rule against this ongoing discrimination, and Alabama will have to do the right thing. If something isn’t working, you have to change it. You have to change with the times.
Learn more about HIV/AIDS discrimination: Sign up for breaking news alerts, , and .
Learn More About the Issues on This Page
-
Press ReleaseDec 2024
Prisoners' Rights
Criminal Law Reform
ACLU Sues Bureau of Prisons for Keeping People in Prison Longer Than the Law AllowsACLU Sues Bureau of Prisons for Keeping People in Prison Longer Than the Law Allows
WASHINGTON – A federal lawsuit brought today by the American Civil Liberties Union, ACLU of D.C., and Jenner & Block LLP challenges the Federal Bureau of Prisons (BOP) for unlawfully incarcerating people longer than the law allows under the First Step Act. The lawsuit contends that the BOP’s failure to implement the First Step Act according to its plain language violates the rights of thousands of people who should be returning to their communities and rebuilding their lives but instead remain incarcerated. Signed into law in 2018 by then-President Donald Trump, the bipartisan First Step Act was designed to reduce the population in federal prisons, reform extreme sentencing laws, and provide programming and reentry transition services to people in prison. Central to the First Step Act is a system of earned time credits, which allows people in prison to earn time off their sentences and time out of prison by participating in rehabilitation programs. Through the First Step Act, Congress unambiguously ordered BOP to move people out of prison when they meet certain requirements to use their earned time credits. Instead of faithfully following the mandatory law, BOP adopted a regulation treating the law as optional. As a result, thousands of people, who should already be back in their communities and with their families, remain in prison. “Every extra unlawful day our clients spend in prison is a serious injustice,” said Emma Andersson, deputy director of the Criminal Law Reform Project at the ACLU. “It is egregious that the Bureau of Prisons is imprisoning people for months longer than the law allows. The government must follow through on its legal obligation to get people out of prison on time and back into their communities, where they belong.” Additional comments below from: Vanessa Crowe, plaintiff: “Time is what I owed for my wrongdoing, and I have paid my time. But I should not have to spend more time in prison than the law allows. I often reflect on what I will miss during the months after when I should be out of prison. I will miss work and lose out on wages that would help me get back on my feet. I could be a tax paying citizen instead of a burden on society. But most of all, I will miss more precious time with my family. My family and I are ready to tum the page on this period in our lives — we are all ready to start a new life, a life with purpose, hope, and healing together. I want to start that life when I am legally entitled to start it-not five months later.” Arthur Spitzer, senior counsel at ACLU of D.C.: “There’s no excuse for the Bureau of Prisons to pretend not to understand Congress’s clear command that people who have earned the right to early release must be released. This law has been on the books for six years. The Bureau of Prisons has had plenty of time to understand it. Law enforcers should obey the law.” Betsy Henthorne, partner at Jenner & Block: “It has been six years since the First Step Act was signed, but despite Congress’s clear directives, the Bureau of Prisons continues to hold thousands of people in prison longer than the law allows. We should and do expect better—it’s past time for the BOP to ensure that those who have earned their release are able to return home to their families and communities according to the law Congress passed.” -
Press ReleaseSep 2024
National Security
Prisoners' Rights
ACLU Statement on Senator’s Discriminatory Questioning of Civil Rights Leader Maya BerryACLU Statement on Senator’s Discriminatory Questioning of Civil Rights Leader Maya Berry
WASHINGTON — American Civil Liberties Union Executive Director Anthony D. Romero, released the following statement regarding Sen. John Kennedy’s questioning of Maya Berry, the executive director of the Arab American Institute: “The American Civil Liberties Union condemns this discriminatory and vitriolic attack on Maya Berry, a renowned civil rights leader, and joins the chorus of voices from across the political spectrum in denouncing these remarks. “To use a hearing about the disturbing rise in anti-Muslim, anti-Arab, and antisemitic hate crimes to launch personal and discriminatory attacks on an expert witness they’ve invited to testify is both outrageous and inappropriate. This kind of racist rhetoric should be widely condemned. It has no place in Congress, or in politics. “Maya Berry is a courageous and compassionate leader who has spent her entire career working to strengthen our democracy and protect the rights of Arab American communities, and other vulnerable communities who face discrimination and targeting because of their ethnicity, race, or religion.” -
Ohio Supreme CourtSep 2024
Prisoners' Rights
State v. MorrisState v. Morris
This case in the Ohio Supreme Court concerns the scope of the state constitutional right to counsel. The police in this case interrogated the defendant, Isaiah Morris, without mentioning his already-appointed counsel or asking him to waive his right to counsel. This procedural circumstance risks confusing criminal defendants and undermining their state constitutional rights. The ACLU’s State Supreme Court Initiative, alongside the ACLU of Ohio and WilmerHale, filed an amicus brief arguing that merely providing a defendant notice of Miranda rights falls short of the bare minimum requirements for a valid waiver. -
Oregon Supreme CourtSep 2024
Prisoners' Rights
Huskey v. Oregon Department of CorrectionsHuskey v. Oregon Department of Corrections
This case in the Oregon Supreme Court centers on whether Article I, Section 41(3) of the Oregon Constitution, which provides that Oregon prisoners lack legally enforceable rights to prison jobs and training, bars prisoners from collecting damages relating to lost prison jobs and training caused by the alleged breach of a settlement agreement by prison officials. The ACLU’s State Supreme Court Initiative, alongside the ACLU of Oregon, filed an amicus brief arguing that that plaintiff Arnold Huskey, an incarcerated individual whose identity was used in Department of Corrections training materials, is entitled to damages notwithstanding Article I, Section 41(3), because plaintiffs in contract disputes never have to show standalone legal rights to the damages they claim. Instead, they need only show that the damages were reasonably foreseeable consequences of the alleged breach of contract.