Latest news with #EighthAmendment
Yahoo
3 days ago
- Health
- Yahoo
Prison heat lawsuit gets go-ahead
A federal judge has rejected a request by Florida corrections officials to dismiss a potential class-action lawsuit alleging the state has violated inmates' rights because of hot conditions at a prison in Miami-Dade County. U.S. District Judge Kathleen Williams on Wednesday issued a 30-page ruling that said inmates at Dade Correctional Institution can pursue claims under the U.S. Constitution's 8th Amendment, the Americans with Disabilities Act and a disabilities-related law known as the Rehabilitation Act. The 8th Amendment bars cruel and unusual punishment. Williams' ruling described a prison with a large number of older inmates that does not have air conditioning or adequate ventilation in dormitories or in the dining area. It also detailed heat indexes that often top 100 degrees in South Florida and said inmates are 'regularly and consistently exposed to heat indexes within the NWS (National Weather Service) danger zone during the summer months.' 'Plaintiffs further allege that the issue of excessive heat at Dade CI is exacerbated by insufficient ventilation systems,' Williams wrote. 'Plaintiffs allege that the ventilation systems in the dormitories, which were installed decades ago, have not been adequately maintained and are missing critical components, such as fans and motors.' Attorneys for three inmates filed the lawsuit in October against the state Department of Corrections, Corrections Secretary Ricky Dixon and Dade Correctional Institution Warden Francisco Acosta. It seeks class-action status, though Williams has not ruled on that issue. The prison has a capacity of 1,521 inmates. The named plaintiffs are Dwayne Wilson, who was described in the lawsuit as a 66-year-old inmate with hypertension, an enlarged prostate and a burn scar over much of his body that impairs his ability to sweat; Tyrone Harris, a 54-year-old inmate who has conditions such as hypertension and asthma; and Gary Wheeler, a 65-year-old inmate who has chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. In a December motion to dismiss the case, the state's attorneys argued, in part, that the 8th Amendment argument 'fails because the facts do not give rise to a substantial risk of serious harm to plaintiffs, nor demonstrate that Secretary Dixon or Warden Acosta has been deliberately indifferent to the conditions and risks faced by these (named) plaintiffs in particular.' 'By itself, the lack of air conditioning does not pose a substantial risk of serious harm. The deprivation required to allege an Eighth Amendment claim must be objectively 'extreme' enough to deny an inmate 'the minimal civilized measure of life's necessities.' The allegations of the complaint (the lawsuit) have not 'cleared this high bar.'' the motion said, partially quoting legal precedents. But Williams wrote that the lawsuit 'alleges a wide range of heat related injuries: heat exhaustion, heat cramps, heat stroke, and death. Plaintiffs also extensively detail how excessive heat can exacerbate underlying medical conditions, in a facility where over 50 percent of all prisoners are over the age of 50. Finally, plaintiffs allege that, since 2021, extreme heat has contributed to the deaths of at least four individuals at Dade CI.' She also said that attorneys for the plaintiffs wrote to Acosta in September 2023 'detailing concerns about the extreme heat, lack of ventilation, and the serious threat of medical harm posted to the inmates based on those conditions. The court finds that the allegations plaintiffs raise about the ongoing excessive heat issues at Dade CI easily support the plausible inference that defendants were subjectively aware of the risks of heat-related harms.' The Miami-based judge also cited a report published in 2023 by the KPMG consulting firm, which had received a state contract to develop a master plan for the Department of Corrections. 'The report concluded that most FDC (Florida Department of Corrections) dormitories, including those at Dade CI, require retrofitting to comply with current ventilation standards, and that over one-third of FDC facilities were assessed to be in 'critical' or 'poor' condition,' Williams wrote. Click here to download our free news, weather and smart TV apps. And click here to stream Channel 9 Eyewitness News live.
Yahoo
3 days ago
- General
- Yahoo
King County Court backs Burien's sweeping camping ban as constitutional
This story was originally posted on Burien's camping ban, one of the strictest in the state, will not be struck down by the King County Superior Court as the ban does not violate the state constitution. The City of Burien prohibits sleeping outside within city limits. Initially, this ruling applied only between 7 a.m. and 6 p.m. and was punishable only if there was available room at shelters. But after a 5-2 vote in late January, Burien's city council ruled that sleeping outside is prohibited at all times. The decision shortly followed the Supreme Court's ruling in Grants Pass v. Johnson, a case that ultimately led to the decision on whether cities can prohibit sleeping in public spaces. The Supreme Court ruled that cities can, stating that it does not violate the Eighth Amendment's protection against cruel and unusual punishment. At least seven other jurisdictions in Washington created or expanded camping bans in the last year, according to The Seattle Times, including Auburn, Bremerton, Chelan County, Lakewood, Washougal, Wenatchee, and Spokane Valley. Approximately 140 cities have enacted similar regulations nationwide. 'The City of Burien agrees with the Court that much work remains to be done to address the crisis of homelessness and looks forward to returning its full attention back to these immediate challenges facing Burien,' the City of Burien stated in a prepared statement. 'City staff, along with the Burien City Council, have responsibly used all tools available to help the most vulnerable in our community.' Among the city's goals is to expand the co-response program partnership with the King County Sheriff's Office and to establish a dedicated contract with a service provider to make more space available within emergency overnight shelters. The City of Burien wants $1 million from King County to support the work performed by Mary's Place and Mercy Housing, which provides shelter for homeless individuals. The city also wants to update its housing and zoning regulations to ensure that STEP (emergency shelters, transitional housing, emergency housing, and permanent supportive housing) housing is available throughout Burien. The Seattle/King County Coalition on Homelessness revealed it is 'disappointed—but not deterred—by the court's decision. 'We took up this case to affirm that all people should enjoy protection from injustice and cruelty under our state Constitution,' Alison Eisinger, the executive director for Seattle/King County Coalition on Homelessness, said. 'Threatening people with arrest, fines, or jail time for sleeping in public or otherwise trying to survive is cruel, unjust, and unreasonable. I am profoundly troubled that the court seems to interpret our state Constitution as unable to offer protections to people who are too poor to have a place to live.'
Yahoo
23-05-2025
- Politics
- Yahoo
Dehumanization of homeless population causes violence against it, homeless advocate says
May 22—Violence is no stranger to Spokane's homeless population. Besides Thursday's murder sentencing of Aaron R. Holder, a judge sentenced Steven P. White, 48, last month to 30 years in prison for fatally stabbing 44-year-old Shan Anderson, who was lying on the ground possibly sleeping, more than a dozen times in 2023 in downtown Spokane. Last month, three teenagers brutally attacked a homeless man on the ground outside the downtown Spokane Public Library, leaving the man with skull fractures and brain bleeding, according to court documents. About 30 minutes later, one of the teens threw an electric scooter at a man sleeping in a sleeping bag on Sprague Avenue and Wall Street, court records show. Donald Whitehead, executive director at National Coalition for the Homeless, described attacks on homeless people as a "crime of opportunity." Homeless people often don't have ties to the larger community and are not connected to their relatives, so the crimes may go unnoticed or may not be adjudicated in the same manner, he said. Whitehead said the homeless population is more susceptible to violence because communities push to dissolve encampments, forcing them into isolated locations where they are more prone to be victims of violence. Last year, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled in Grants Pass, Oregon v. Johnson that municipalities can criminalize sleeping outdoors on public property because it does not violate the Eighth Amendment's prohibition on cruel and unusual punishment. Last month, the Spokane City Council voted to not move forward with reinstating Proposition 1, the voter-approved anti-homeless camping law that the Washington Supreme Court had recently struck down. Proposition 1 banned camping within 1,000 feet of parks, schools and licensed day care facilities, making violations a misdemeanor offense. The state Supreme Court argued the proposition had gone outside the legal bounds for a local initiative, though it did not make a ruling on the merits of the law, leaving it open for the City Council to reinstate the law, according to previous Spokesman-Review reporting. Whitehead said many people who attack homeless people view them as less human, a narrative that has ramped up in certain states and led to more attacks on the homeless population. Oregon has one of the highest levels of crimes against unsheltered people, Whitehead said, and attributed it to the negative publicity around the Grants Pass v. Johnson case, noting the direct correlation between dehumanizing homeless people and the violence that's perpetrated upon them. The Oregonian reported in February 2024 that a growing number of homeless people were being shot and killed in Portland. Five of the 15 homicides at that point in the year in the city involved a homeless person, the publication reported. Whitehead said he expects the homeless population and violence against it to dramatically increase if President Donald Trump's budget proposal and the reconciliation bill, the latter of which cleared the House this week, are approved. Trump proposed dramatic cuts to the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development. That includes eliminating HUD's rental assistance program, including Section 8 vouchers, and allowing states to make their own rental assistance programs instead. The plan would include a two-year cap on rental assistance for able-bodied adults. Whitehead said the cuts to HUD will make it much harder to get people out of homelessness. The reconciliation bill proposes several changes to Medicaid, including work requirements for able-bodied adults. Whitehead said medical expenses are one of the reasons people can't afford housing. The "cascading list of changes" will have negative effects, he said. "People will die because of these changes," Whitehead said.
Irish Examiner
21-05-2025
- Politics
- Irish Examiner
Marriage equality 10 years on: 'I lost count of how many times I was called a pervert in my home town'
In May 2015, we made history. We said 'Yes' to marriage equality - a moment of jubilation, national pride, and profound relief. It was a beautiful day. Tear filled. Joyous. But that day came at a cost that has been ignored. The months leading up to that vote were filled with noise, emotion, and exhaustion. The chaos of the campaign has obscured a fact worth remembering: the referendum was not necessary. It was an act of political cowardice. I acknowledge Ireland has a tradition of using referenda to expand rights. Divorce and abortion are clear examples - but those votes were constitutionally required. Divorce was explicitly prohibited in the 1937 Constitution (thanks Dev) and abortion became a constitutional issue after the Eighth Amendment was introduced to prevent the expansion of rights. Marriage equality was different. The Constitution never prohibited same-sex marriage. The KAL case didn't find a right to marriage equality, but it didn't establish a prohibition either. Legal scholars were clear at the time: the government could have legislated for marriage equality. There was no constitutional requirement for a referendum. That didn't matter, as soon as the possibility of a vote presented a potential political cover, politicians ran for it. They could have used their power to grant equal rights, but shirked that responsibility. Instead they made a community plead for equality on the doorsteps of their neighbours. Then they wrapped themselves in the rainbow flag, claimed the victory, and ignored the damage their decision had caused. That moment of Yes was extraordinary. But it didn't belong to them. And the moment doesn't erase the difficult path to get there. A survey conducted after the referendum found that fewer than one in four LGBT+ people would be willing to go through it again. More than two-thirds of LGBT+ people reported experiencing distress during the campaign period. For us, it was not ordinary advocacy. It was painful, exhausting, and, at times, dehumanising. Don't misunderstand me, I was proud to campaign with Yes Equality Galway - it was one of the best groups I've ever belonged to. There was joy in the solidarity. We ate a lot of ice cream. We laughed, a lot. Galway women are the funniest people on the planet, and if you disagree I will point out that Nicola Coughlan and Pauline McLynn were among our volunteers. It was a special community. But make no mistake: it was also an emotionally challenging and deeply unfair experience. Knocking on doors as a single queer 20-something to ask strangers if you could hypothetically be allowed to marry someday was both surreal and humiliating. I lost count of how many times I was called a pervert in my hometown. A decade on, I still feel a little unwell walking down some particularly difficult streets. And because of the nature of a public vote, we had little choice but to smile through it all. To be polite and positive when people told us we were unnatural, a danger to children, or simply 'wrong'. We were constantly assessed - our rights debated, our lives scrutinised. And while we kept it together, it hurt. And that hurt left a mark. One of the most damaging dynamics of the time was the pressure to come out. This hit all LGBT+ people, not just advocates. The narrative shifted in those months. It stopped being 'come out when you're ready' and became 'talk to your family. Make it personal. Challenge their thinking.' I still think of those young people. It won't have gone well for all of them. And even where it did, I regret that their coming out will have been tied to a plea for compassion rather than a desire to be your true self with the people you care about. The politicians who celebrate the marriage equality vote as their legacy still refuse to acknowledge the unfairness attached to the referendum, and their role in it. They acted out of a desire for public approval, not political courage. Despite the pride flags they donned on stage, they continue to ignore the inequalities still facing LGBT+ families. The referendum's affect globally We also need to confront what our referendum symbolised globally. Ireland's vote became a blueprint for other countries. In Australia, a postal survey replaced a referendum. They cited Ireland as their inspiration. In Taiwan, the popular vote on marriage equality failed - devastating for that community. On the other side, referendums to restrict LGBT+ rights have gained popularity globally. We didn't simply find a novel path to marriage equality, we helped legitimise the idea that minority rights should be subject to popular vote. That's not a legacy we should be proud of. I hope Ireland remembers not just the day we said "Yes", but the workpath that brought us there. I hope we remember the names and faces of those who knocked on doors, who told their stories, and the generations of activists who fought for a fairer, freer Ireland. This victory is theirs, and theirs alone. Maria Ni Fhlatharta is a legal researcher and human rights advocate. She is Deputy Director of the Center for Inclusive Policy and Co-Chair of the Disability Rights Fund
Yahoo
19-05-2025
- Yahoo
How we reported 'Blood Money'
Barbed wire seen behind a fence at an Alabama reporting the "Blood Money" series, reporter Beth Shelburne obtained documents and data from the Alabama Department of Corrections and the Alabama Department of Finance to find stories that might otherwise go untold. (Brian Lyman/Alabama Reflector) The crisis inside the Alabama Department of Corrections (ADOC) has generated extensive reporting on escalating prison violence and deaths, the proliferation of contraband drugs, and squalid conditions inside overcrowded and understaffed facilities. These factors led the U.S. Department of Justice to conclude Alabama prison conditions violate prisoners' Eighth Amendment protections against cruel and unusual punishment, leading to a lawsuit in 2020. Since then, the state of Alabama has spent over $39 million defending ADOC in a handful of complex lawsuits, including the one filed by the DOJ. But these cases represent only a fraction of litigation involving ADOC. During the last decade, an increasing number of individual civil rights lawsuits have been filed against correctional officers and prison administrators over wrongful deaths, failure to protect from violence and excessive force. Unlike the DOJ lawsuit or other large class-action lawsuits, individual lawsuits filed by incarcerated people or their families receive little attention or oversight. These individual lawsuits were the focus of the reporting for this series. We wanted to figure out just how many lawsuits were being litigated against employees of ADOC every year, and learn more about the nature of the lawsuits, the outcomes, and the cost to taxpayers. Just how much public money was ADOC spending on these lawsuits, not just in settlements to plaintiffs, but paying private lawyers to defend sued officers? And beyond settlement payments, was any systemic change resulting from these lawsuits? First, we had to recognize an important distinction in how Alabama pays for legal services. When an entire state agency is named in a lawsuit, like in the DOJ's lawsuit against ADOC, legal services are paid for out of Alabama's General Fund budget. But when state employees are sued as individuals, the General Liability Trust Fund (GLTF) is used to pay for their legal defense and any monetary settlement for the plaintiff. This use of the GLTF was the subject of our reporting. We filed an open records request with Alabama's Department of Finance, asking for a spreadsheet of records connected to all transactions out of the GLTF, as well as total yearly use of the fund by ADOC dating back to 2013. In the spreadsheet, transactions were categorized as either legal expenses or indemnity payments, also known as settlement payments. The transaction records included corresponding case names and numbers, which allowed us to connect each transaction to specific lawsuits. We then located the lawsuits in federal court records, and through reviewing the records, were able to pinpoint lawsuits involving ADOC employees. This is how we identified the 124 lawsuits against ADOC employees that resulted in settlements between 2020-2024. The 124 lawsuits ending in settlement in this five-year period gave us a fixed group of cases to study, not only to help identify issues and trends in the allegations, but also in the amount of time and money spent on the litigation. Through this project, we aimed to increase transparency and accountability regarding ADOC's increasing use of public resources and taxpayer dollars. And in an effort to deepen our understanding of the crisis inside Alabama prisons, we also wanted to report on the lawsuits themselves, and the human beings involved, to lessen the abstractions of incarceration and illuminate what would otherwise remain unseen, unheard and unknown.
