<html>
<body>
<font size=3> <br>
<br>
<b>ACLU and Center for Constitutional Rights Argue Prison Rights Case
Before U.S. Supreme Court</b> <br>
</font><font face="Arial, Helvetica" size=2>March 30, 2005<br><br>
</font><font face="Verdana" size=2><b>FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE</b> <br>
Contact: <a href="mailto:media@aclu.org">media@aclu.org</a> <br><br>
WASHINGTON -- The American Civil Liberties Union of Ohio and the Center
for Constitutional Rights today presented oral arguments before the
Supreme Court in <i>Wilkinson v. Austin</i>, a case that will determine
the due process rights of prisoners at Ohio’s notorious
"Supermax" prison. <br><br>
"This case presents the same issue as the Guantanamo cases decided
last spring," said Staughton Lynd, an ACLU of Ohio volunteer
attorney and trial counsel in <i>Austin</i>. "What due process is
required before indefinite solitary confinement can be imposed on any
human being?" <br><br>
In 2002, a federal district judge held that confinement at the Ohio State
Penitentiary creates an "atypical and significant hardship."
Prisoners housed in the high maximum-security unit are subject to extreme
isolation in tiny cells that fail to meet national standards established
by the American Correctional Association. <br><br>
When it was first built, officials sent 100 prisoners to the Penitentiary
without notice or hearing, and before the state had written guidelines
for the classification of high maximum-security prisoners. Thereafter,
the vague guidelines adopted in August 1998 did little to prevent
continued arbitrary and haphazard placement. The Supreme Court agreed to
hear <i>Austin</i> on the question of whether this lack of procedure
amounts to a violation of prisoners’ right to due process. <br><br>
"The question is whether prison officials can continue to
arbitrarily assign prisoners to long-term solitary confinement without
basic due process protections such as notice of the charges against them
and a decision explaining the reasons for such placement," said
Jules Lobel, a Professor at the University of Pittsburgh School of Law
and counsel for the Center for Constitutional Rights. Lobel delivered
oral arguments today before the Court. <br><br>
The ACLU has successfully challenged "Supermax" confinement in
several states including Connecticut, Virginia, Wisconsin, New Mexico and
Ohio since 2001. These institutions commonly require 23-hour solitary
confinement in cells with limited access to rehabilitative programs. The
stark living conditions have led to mental deterioration in some
prisoners and have proven dangerous to prisoners with preexisting mental
illness. In February, the ACLU’s National Prison Project and Indiana
affiliate filed a lawsuit regarding Indiana’s Supermax unit because
conditions at that facility had spurred four suicides and numerous
self-mutilations by mentally ill prisoners. <br><br>
More information on the Indiana lawsuit is available at:
<a href="http://www.aclu.org/Prisons/Prisons.cfm?ID=17413&c=121">
http://www.aclu.org/Prisons/Prisons.cfm?ID=17413&c=121</a>. <br><br>
The ACLU’s brief in today’s case is online at:
<a href="http://www.aclu.org/court/court.cfm?ID=17857&c=286">
http://www.aclu.org/court/court.cfm?ID=17857&c=286</a>. <br><br>
</font><x-sigsep><p></x-sigsep>
<font size=3 color="#FF0000">The Freedom Archives<br>
522 Valencia Street<br>
San Francisco, CA 94110<br>
(415) 863-9977<br>
</font><font size=3>
<a href="http://www.freedomarchives.org/" eudora="autourl">
www.freedomarchives.org</a></font></body>
</html>