ACLU of Pennsylvania Sues Montgomery County for Denying its Lawyers Access to People in the Jail
PHILADELPHIA — The American Civil Liberties Union of Pennsylvania filed a federal lawsuit today alleging that Montgomery County violated the ACLU-PA’s First Amendment rights by denying ACLU lawyers access to people held in the county jail. Since mid-March, officials at the Montgomery County Correctional Facility have barred lawyers from the ACLU and those working in cooperation with the organization from meeting with people in the jail, claiming that the meetings can only occur with court documentation or a letter that establishes a formal relationship between the attorneys and those they are meeting with.
According to the lawsuit, the ACLU is not aware of this requirement being asked of other lawyers who visit people held at the jail. Today’s court filing notes that the ACLU-PA has clashed with Montco officials recently and accuses the county of engaging in retaliation for the organization’s advocacy. Last year, the ACLU was publicly critical of the county commissioners for firing the county’s top two public defenders after they filed a brief in a case about cash bail, and the civil liberties group filed a class action lawsuit in January against the county for excessively charging people for court costs.
The county also recently denied the ACLU-PA’s Right To Know request for its jail admissions logs, which show why people are detained at the jail.
“Jails already operate behind walls and razor wire. Montco officials are trying to make it impossible for our team to investigate ongoing constitutional violations in the county’s criminal legal system,” said Reggie Shuford, executive director of the ACLU of Pennsylvania. “This is not about us or our organization. This is about the people who are held at the jail, who want to report their experiences to us, in the hope that we can help vindicate their constitutional rights.”
The complaint filed in federal court today says that attorneys from the ACLU of Pennsylvania and those working with them held several dozen virtual visits with people held in the jail between October 2020 and March 2021. Then, on March 5, an ACLU-affiliated lawyer had a scheduled meeting cancelled by county officials without notice or explanation. Another lawyer had their online account deactivated on March 11, and when that attorney asked a jail administrator for an explanation, Brian Kniezewski, the assistant director of inmate services at the jail, told the lawyer of the documentation requirement.
The last meeting between someone at the jail and an attorney affiliated with the ACLU occurred on March 15. Afterwards, Kniezewski sent several emails to ACLU-connected lawyers informing them that their meetings would be cancelled without the documents demanded by the county. The complaint filed today contrasts the county’s practice of cancelling visits by ACLU attorneys with other lawyers who have been allowed to meet with detained persons without providing the documents.
On March 23, the ACLU sent a letter to jail administrators warning them that their refusal to allow attorney visits violated the constitution. The administrators never responded.
“The lack of transparency at the Montgomery County Correctional Facility is alarming,” said Witold Walczak, legal director of the ACLU of Pennsylvania. “Neither the DOC nor any of the 66 other counties impose such unreasonable restrictions on the right of ACLU lawyers to meet with incarcerated individuals, which raises the question, ‘What are they trying to hide?’”
The lawsuit argues that the county is in violation of the ACLU-PA’s First Amendment free speech rights and the due process rights of people held at the jail. The complaint also states that the constitution forbids the county from engaging in retaliation against ACLU attorneys for engaging in constitutionally protected activity.
The case, ACLU of Pennsylvania v. Montgomery County et al., was filed in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania. The ACLU of Pennsylvania is acting as both plaintiff and co-counsel and is represented by Witold J. Walczak of the ACLU of Pennsylvania and John A. Freedman, Janine Lopez, Andrew Tutt, and Leslie Bailey of Arnold & Porter.
A copy of the complaint filed today is available at .
Learn More About the Issues in This Press Release
-
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.