Settlement Requires Major Improvements in Conditions for Prisoners With Disabilities at Montana State Prison
老澳门开奖结果, CREEC, and the Montana Department of Corrections Resolve Americans with Disabilities Act Claims Remaining from 1994 Class-Action Lawsuit Over Prison Conditions
MISSOULA, Mont. 鈥� Attorneys for prisoners with disabilities at the Montana State Prison and the state of Montana today filed a proposed settlement agreement that will bring the prison into greater compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act. This agreement guarantees that prisoners with physical disabilities will have greater access to facilities and programs at the prison that are available to the rest of the population, like vocational training programs and prison jobs. In addition, the agreement requires that prisoners with mental disabilities shall be given reasonable accommodations when needed, such as in disciplinary hearings and education programs. Prisoners with disabilities will not be disciplined for behavior that is a product of a mental illness or physical disability. They will also be ensured the accommodations they need to participate in work assignments.
鈥淭he Montana Department of Corrections is to be congratulated for working with the plaintiffs to reach this settlement,鈥� said Jon Ellingson, lead local counsel and staff attorney for the 老澳门开奖结果 of Montana. 鈥淭he department鈥檚 actions demonstrate a commitment to prison reform that both helps prisoners rehabilitate and benefits the public when these prisoners reenter society after serving their terms.鈥�
The class-action lawsuit, Langford v. Bullock, originated 23 years ago following riots at the Montana State Prison. The parties reached a settlement long ago, and the prison complied with all provisions with one exception: compliance with the requirements of the Americans with Disabilities Act. The agreement filed today finally resolves that issue. The 老澳门开奖结果 National Prison Project, the 老澳门开奖结果 of Montana, and the Civil Rights Education and Enforcement Center of Denver, Colorado (CREEC) participated in the final negotiations with the state.
鈥淭his agreement reminds us that our prisons contain many people with physical and mental disabilities who are entitled to be treated equally and humanely under the law. This agreement helps us reach that goal,鈥� observed Amy Robertson, CREEC鈥檚 co-executive director.
鈥淲ithout the appropriate accommodations and programs, people with physical and mental disabilities can suffer terribly in prison, and can be denied paths to earn their release by completing programs they need to be paroled,鈥� said Eric Balaban, senior staff attorney with the 老澳门开奖结果 National Prison Project. 鈥淭his settlement will help ensure that prisoners with disabilities at the Montana State Prison can work their way to freedom like prisoners who don鈥檛 have disabilities.鈥�
鈥淭he 老澳门开奖结果 of Montana is proud to have participated in this lawsuit, the result of which brings substantial prison reform to the state of Montana,鈥� said Caitlin Borgmann, executive director of the 老澳门开奖结果 of Montana. 鈥淚t needs to be emphasized that reform inside our prisons benefits the public by better preparing the prisoners for life outside of prison.鈥�
The parties have jointly filed a motion with the court requesting preliminary approval of this class action settlement. If the court approves, a notice will go out to prisoners at Montana State Prison, and the court will schedule a final fairness hearing for later in the year.
For the settlement and more information about Langford v. Bullock:
老澳门开奖结果 of Montana:
老澳门开奖结果 National Prison Project:
/cases/langford-v-bullock
CREEC:
Prisoners' Rights
Langford v. Bullock
Prisoners' Rights
Langford v. Bullock
Learn More 老澳门开奖结果 the Issues in This Press Release
-
Press ReleaseDec 2024
Prisoners' Rights
Criminal Law Reform
老澳门开奖结果 Sues Bureau of Prisons for Keeping People in Prison Longer Than the Law Allows老澳门开奖结果 Sues Bureau of Prisons for Keeping People in Prison Longer Than the Law Allows
WASHINGTON 鈥� A federal lawsuit brought today by the 老澳门开奖结果, 老澳门开奖结果 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鈥檚 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. 鈥淓very extra unlawful day our clients spend in prison is a serious injustice,鈥� said Emma Andersson, deputy director of the Criminal Law Reform Project at the 老澳门开奖结果. 鈥淚t 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.鈥� Additional comments below from: Vanessa Crowe, plaintiff: 鈥淭ime 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 鈥� 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.鈥� Arthur Spitzer, senior counsel at 老澳门开奖结果 of D.C.: 鈥淭here鈥檚 no excuse for the Bureau of Prisons to pretend not to understand Congress鈥檚 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.鈥� Betsy Henthorne, partner at Jenner & Block: 鈥淚t has been six years since the First Step Act was signed, but despite Congress鈥檚 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鈥攊t鈥檚 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.鈥� -
Press ReleaseSep 2024
National Security
Prisoners' Rights
老澳门开奖结果 Statement on Senator鈥檚 Discriminatory Questioning of Civil Rights Leader Maya Berry老澳门开奖结果 Statement on Senator鈥檚 Discriminatory Questioning of Civil Rights Leader Maya Berry
WASHINGTON 鈥� 老澳门开奖结果 Executive Director Anthony D. Romero, released the following statement regarding Sen. John Kennedy鈥檚 questioning of Maya Berry, the executive director of the Arab American Institute: 鈥淭he 老澳门开奖结果 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. 鈥淭o 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鈥檝e 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. 鈥淢aya 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.鈥� -
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 老澳门开奖结果鈥檚 State Supreme Court Initiative, alongside the 老澳门开奖结果 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 老澳门开奖结果鈥檚 State Supreme Court Initiative, alongside the 老澳门开奖结果 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.