Lawsuit Challenges Tennessee Department of Corrections Hepatitis C Protocol
Organizations Charge Lack of Treatment is Cruel and Unusual
NASHVILLE, Tenn. – The American Civil Liberties Union of Tennessee, Disability Rights Tennessee and Branstetter, Stranch & Jennings, PLLC today filed a federal class action lawsuit challenging the Tennessee Department of Corrections’ systematic denial of treatment to inmates infected with Hepatitis C (HCV). No Exceptions Prison Collective also collaborated in the filing of the lawsuit.
“Tennessee’s prisons must operate in compliance with the Constitution,” said Thomas H. Castelli, ACLU-TN legal director. “Incarcerating people under conditions that erode their health, safety and human dignity amounts to cruel and unusual punishment, which not only has devastating long-term effects for those individuals, but which undermines the purported purpose of a rehabilitative criminal justice system.”
The lawsuit was filed on behalf of an inmate at the Northwest Correctional Complex in Tiptonville and an inmate at the Hardeman County Correctional Facility in Whiteville, who were both diagnosed with HCV years ago while incarcerated at Tennessee Department of Corrections facilities. The complaint alleges that the Department of Corrections consistently and systematically denied the plaintiffs treatment for their disease in violation of the U.S. Constitution’s protection against cruel and unusual punishment.
In March 2016, the Tennessee Department of Corrections placed the number of its inmates testing positive for HCV at 3,487, or nearly one in six prisoners, while conceding that this number is likely far below true infection rates due to a lack of routine testing and inaccurate testing. The department further acknowledged that nearly half of the inmates tested for Hepatitis C in 2015 were positive, which puts the likely number of infected inmates closer to 10,000.
The current guidance for treatment of HCV infection, jointly set by the American Association for the Study of Liver Disease and the Infectious Disease Society of America, definitively establishes a 12-week treatment regimen with direct-acting anti-viral drugs as the medically accepted standard of care. This treatment results in curing the disease in at least 90 percent of cases. In its written protocol on managing chronic HCV, the Tennessee Department of Corrections acknowledges this treatment guidance and the recommendation that all individuals testing positive for HCV receive such treatment. However, as of May 2016, only eight of the 3,487 inmates identified as infected were receiving treatment with direct-acting anti-viral drugs.
The lawsuit alleges that the Department of Corrections has “intentionally omitted [direct-acting anti-viral] treatment from [its HCV] Protocol and other policies in order to justify their routine denial of treatment with these life-saving medications.” This deliberate indifference, the lawsuit contends, has led to inmates’ acute physical suffering and, if continued, will lead to irreversible physical harm, including eventual death.
“To knowingly deny people an extremely effective medical treatment when one is readily available is inhumane and morally wrong,” said Jeannie Alexander, director of the No Exceptions Prison Collective, which collaborated to bring the lawsuit.
The lawsuit asks the court to declare that the Tennessee Department of Corrections’ policies and practices with regards to HCV violate the Eighth Amendment and to require the department to develop and implement a new plan for diagnosis and treatment that complies with the community standard of care and expert medical advice.
“The Tennessee Department of Corrections’ failure to treat inmates with HCV does not occur in a vacuum. The vast majority of Tennesseans in state custody will eventually be released, making both treatment and a failure to treat a public health issue,” said Disability Rights Tennessee attorney Liz Logsdon. “Treating inmates with HCV is good for all Tennesseans.”
The lawsuit was filed in the U.S. District Court for the Middle District of Tennessee.
In addition to Castelli and Logsdon, the plaintiffs are represented by ACLU-TN cooperating attorney Karla Campbell of Branstetter, Stranch & Jennings, PLLC.
A copy of the complaint can be found .
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.