Advocates Reach Agreement with Shelby County Sheriff to Fix Dangerous Pandemic Conditions at Jail
NASHVILLE, Tenn. – Today a federal judge approved an agreement reached between local and national civil rights advocates and the Shelby County sheriff to improve jail conditions to protect people from widespread infection, serious injury and death from COVID-19.
The agreement guarantees that the jail will implement rigorous monitoring and reporting; additional jail inspections; improved airflow and ventilation measures to keep people safe from airborne transmission of COVID-19; better quality protective equipment for people being detained in the jail; continued efforts to expedite release for those who are disabled and medically vulnerable; improved social distancing; and other enhancements that will better protect people living and working in the facility.
In Judge Sheryl Halle Lipman’s statements from the bench during the hearing, she stated that she believed it to be in the community’s interest to stop the spread of COVID and that the measures put in place in the facility are designed to do that. She said the point is to get as many safety features into the jail as possible and keep detainees as safe as possible. The judge went on to say that containing the spread of coronavirus helps within the facility as well as the community, and that the effort put in to reach and protect the safety of the detainees is in the public interest and critically important.
The agreement was reached in a lawsuit filed by the American Civil Liberties Union of Tennessee; the American Civil Liberties Union Foundation; Just City; Paul, Weiss, Rifkind, Wharton & Garrison; and attorneys Brice Timmons and Steve Mulroy on behalf of people incarcerated at the Shelby County Jail.
The lawsuit followed a court order that urged the jail to address numerous public health lapses identified after two expert inspectors — one appointed by the court — issued reports expressing alarm at the tactics employed at the jail to contain the virus. Among the horrid conditions the inspectors found at the jail were a failure to test new arrestees, even those displaying COVID-19 symptoms; open airflow between areas of the facility where COVID-positive and quarantined people were detained and areas where others who have not been exposed to the virus were detained; a lack of fresh masks; staff wearing masks below their chins when speaking; and inadequate availability of cleaning supplies, hand sanitizer, and free soap.
Most of the named plaintiffs in the case are at high risk of serious illness or death if they contract COVID-19, including a pretrial detainee with progressive multiple sclerosis and heart disease who takes an immunosuppressant to manage his multiple sclerosis; a person held pretrial at the jail with diabetes and hypertension; and another pretrial detainee with hypertension and an irregular heartbeat, who previously had a heart attack. They alleged that the jail temporarily made improvements to certain conditions in preparation for the inspections by a court-appointed inspector and knowingly allowed those improvements to lapse shortly after the inspections occurred, putting the lives of those who live and work at the facility at risk.
“This case and agreement shine a light on conditions in the Shelby County Jail and how officials there are responding to the COVID-19 crisis,” said Andrea Woods, staff attorney with the ACLU’s Criminal Law Reform Project. “While the work will continue, we applaud the court’s approval and commitment to ensuring that inspections and other monitoring continue until the pandemic is over.”
“This agreement could quite literally mean the difference between life and death for our clients and many others who live and work at the Shelby County Jail, and in the wider Memphis community,” said Stella Yarbrough, ACLU of Tennessee staff attorney. “Far too many people are held in conditions that daily threaten their health, safety, and human dignity, especially during this pandemic, and we are relieved that conditions at the jail will now be improved.”
Josh Spickler, executive director of Just City, stated, “In Shelby County, the number of presumed innocent people being held in cages is extraordinarily high. This settlement will bring some much-needed accountability to those responsible for their well-being, but the real work is only beginning - we must break our community's addiction to pretrial detention.”
"This case sparked jail improvements and continued monitoring which would not have occurred without our filing," said University of Memphis law professor and former Shelby County Commissioner Steve Mulroy, one of the plaintiffs' lawyers. "It's helped protect the health of thousands of Shelby Countians, most of whom have not been convicted of any crime."
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.