The Supreme Court ordered California on Monday to release tens of thousands of its prisoners to relieve overcrowding, saying that “needless suffering and death” had resulted from putting too many inmates into facilities that cannot hold them in decent conditions.
It is one of the largest prison release orders in the nation’s history, and it sharply split the high court.
Justices upheld an order from a three-judge panel in California that called for releasing 38,000 to 46,000 prisoners. Since then, the state has transferred about 9,000 state inmates to county jails. As a result, the total prison population is now about 32,000 more than the capacity limit set by the panel.
Justice Anthony M. Kennedy, speaking for the majority, said California’s prisons had “fallen short of minimum constitutional requirements” because of overcrowding. As many as 200 prisoners may live in gymnasium, he said, and as many as 54 prisoners share a single toilet.
Kennedy insisted that the state had no choice but to release more prisoners. The justices, however, agreed that California officials should be given more time to make the needed reductions.
In dissent, Justice Antonin Scalia called the ruling “staggering” and “absurd.”
He said the high court had repeatedly overruled the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals for ordering the release of individual prisoners. Now, he said, the majority were ordering the release of “46,000 happy-go-lucky felons.” He added that “terrible things are sure to happen as a consequence of this outrageous order.” Justice Clarence Thomas agreed with him.
In a separate dissent, Justice Samuel A. Alito Jr. and Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr. said the ruling conflicted with a federal law intended to limit the power of federal judges to order a release of prisoners.
State officials and lawyers for inmates differ over just how many prisoners will have to be released. In recent figures, the state said it had about 142,000 inmates behind bars, and the judges calculated the prison population would need to be reduced to about 110,000 to comply with constitutional standards.
Kennedy said the judges in California overseeing the prison-release order should “accord the state considerable latitude to find mechanisms and make plans” that are “consistent with the public safety.”
The American Civil Liberties Union said the court had “done the right thing” by addressing the “egregious and extreme overcrowding in California’s prisons.”
David Fathi, director of the ACLU national prison project, said “reducing the number of people in prison not only would save the state taxpayers half a billion annually, it would lead to the implementation of truly rehabilitative programs that lower recidivism rates and create safer communities.”
Meanwhile, the court took no action on another California case in which a conservative group is challenging the state’s policy of granting in-state tuition at its colleges and universities to students who are illegal immigrants and have graduated from its high schools.
The justices said they would consider the appeal in a later private conference.
(Source: LA Times)
Join the official YWN WhatsApp status
12 Responses
Who are they going to let out, the dangerous ones or the blue collar ones?
They should let out the ones least likely to be dangerous, regardless, once they are freed. How they figure that out is anybody’s guess.
Actually most of these don’t belong in prison anymore; they are only there because of the “three strikes” law. This will help save California from fiscal collapse. The advocates of three strikes consistently oppose paying for its consequences.
No. 1: What is a “blue collar criminal”? An unlicensed electrician?
What SHOULD happen is that the lightest crimes with the least punishment should be released first, but…
What WILL happen is that the hardened criminals who have the money and connections to the top lawyers will get out first…
BAD BAD BAD for a BAD state…
The unregulated pharmacists should be let out and given permission to ply their trade out of the ACLU offices, they will surely be happy to have them,
Charlie,
There are 46,000 (or most, so 23,000) people in California prisons under their 3 strikes law? Closest thing I found by Google was 25,000 total serving life in prison.
The problem is that the prison guards union is one of the most powerful unions in the sate. They make running good prisons too expensive.
The state should use private prisons.
I wonder how many people that are imprisoned – are judged righteously and would ever be judged under Torah or by a Beis Din. Only in America are people imprisoned by thoughts, words and intentions not just damage or actions. i.e. Conspiracy to commit a crime or in the days ahead “hate speech” for speaking out against Toviah marriages.
Even silly little moving violation’s – are on the words of a single witness. We judge unrighteously when we agree with people convicted in the media, rather than one the word of two or three witnesses.
How many lives have been destroyed – because of “prison” even if one has made Tshuvah and restoration – they are always a “convict”. Yet we continue to judge, them by calling them “convicts”. (B”H I have never spent a day in jail). How would we view/call Yoesph today?
Yoni1, this conspiracy to commit a crime charge you speak so negatively about is what is currently used to arrest terrorists BEFORE they blow up synagogues. Perhaps you would rather they follow through with the plot and then we will dump them in prison. And “in the days ahead “hate speech” for speaking out against Toviah marriage,” please provide one reasonable piece of evidence to support this is coming in the days ahead because it is news to me.
California is liberalism at its worse or best. This is what happens when you have too many libs. And the libs here attack the only good thing in the state “three strikes and you’re out” law. If you want to solve the crime problems in America, start having a real death penality. Ya’know- they are found guilty and the next day they are taken out back and disposed of. Wait at minute the libs don’t want to be cruel to the poor criminal -they’re victims of the mean-spirited society. Ok, another idea -they say one-third of American jails are full of illegals -deport them. And California- it’s probably half the prison population. But since we don’t have any serious border protection -how do you stop them from coming back? Simple- pay the Mexican gov. or some private company down there to lock them up in a facility forever!
It probably costs to lock up a thousand prisoners down there as much as it costs to lock up one guy in California. There must be something wrong with me for not coming up with the plan of our Supreme Liberal Court, which must be the best idea. Why not free a bunch of murderers and other such criminals to go victimize again and again? It must really be a good idea, after all aren’t all Americans protected by Secret Service agents 24/7, just like some of our gov. officials? And how dare I call our Supreme Court libs? After all the media insists they are conservatives because they were appointed by Bush. IMO, there are extreme libs on the court and regular libs. Noone can call this or any court conservative until they reverse Roe vs. Wade, at the very least!
Maybe some of the California prisoners could be moved into the New York apartment of Dominique Strauss-Kahn, the former head of the International Monetary Fund who is accused of attempted rape and other sex crimes allegedly committed in a Manhattan hotel. I’ll bet the food is pretty good – he is French, after all. California could pay rent to him. Problem solved.