6

Supreme Court rules California must alleviate overcrowding in prisons

A locked cellblock inside the Los Angeles Men's Central Jail in downtown Los Angeles.

To view this content, Javascript must be enabled and Adobe Flash Player must be installed.

Get Adobe Flash player

Kai Ryssdal: Design capacity for the California state prison system is just about 80,000 people. The actual population among the incarcerated is well beyond that, almost double at one point -- has been for years now. Today, the United States Supreme Court said enough is enough.

In 5-4 ruling this morning, the justices said prison overcrowding here is a "serious constitutional violation." It told the state to reduce its prison population by about tens of thousands of prisoners, in a case that was originally about inadequate medical care for those behind bars.

Sam Stanton covers California prisons for the Sacramento Bee. Good to have you with us.

Sam Stanton: Thank you.

Ryssdal: Give us a sense of what this phrase "serious constitutional violation" means in terms of prisoner overcrowding.

Stanton: Well, the Supreme Court decided that the situation inside California's prisons was essentially medieval. The opinion recounts instances of inmates dying and not being found for hours in crowded gymnasiums, of inmates being stacked in cages. In one instance they recounted, there were 54 inmates using one toilet. And the Court said that enough was enough, and they've either got to increase capacity or release thousands of inmates. And the odds of increasing capacity in this state, obviously, are non-existent, given the budget crisis.

Ryssdal: This is one of those cases that took 20-something years to get to the Supreme Court; along the way, a lot of other states joined in and watching this very closely -- 18 other states are worried about this. Explain that a little bit and talk about how this applies nationally.

Stanton: There, as you say, 18 states that joined in and argued California's point. They're all worried that this will be precedent-setting and that this will result in them facing pressure to release inmates. And anytime you start talking about releasing inmates, there's a huge outcry from the public about public safety. Justice Scalia noted that releasing 46,000 inmates is the equivalent of three army divisions.

Ryssdal: You mention the budget crisis that we're having out here in California. So the question becomes: what can Governor Brown and the Department of Corrections do to relieve the overcrowding?

Stanton: Governor Brown's new plan is that they will take up to 30,000 inmates from the prisons and turn them over to the county jails. But they haven't figured out how to pay for that.

Ryssdal: What about sending prisoners out of state? Governor Schwarzenegger did that; he sent folks to private prisons out of state, didn't he?

Stanton: You're right, that's an option. There are 10,000 inmates out of state right now in various prisons that California has sent. And the Court said they could continue to do that to reduce their populations; they can send them out of state, they could send them to county jails, they could release them, they have all these different options -- or they could build new prisons.

Ryssdal: For all the money that the state of California and states all over this country spend on prisons and incarceration, is there a way to spend more money and make this problem, within the bounds of resources, be taken care of?

Stanton: I don't know; I don't know how you'd do it short of building more prisons or putting a halt to laws that mandate sending you away. The critics complain that the three strikes law, particularly the two-strike reserves, filling up the prisons. And at the same time, because of the budget crisis, they have cut numerous services inside prisons: social services, teaching. A lot of the people who were coming into the prisons and working with inmates no longer have those jobs, so they've got the inmates themselves being trained to perform those services.

Ryssdal: Yeah, there is something of a Gordian knot here, right? Because the services are being cut because of budget cuts, and yet we can't alleviate overcrowding because of budget cuts.

Stanton: It all comes down to the budget, right. You have to expect some movement from Governor Brown's people to try and turn this to their favor in getting the tax extensions that they've been looking for.

Ryssdal: That's the tax extensions the governor wants to take care of the budget crisis we're having out here.

Stanton: Right. The wall of debt.

Ryssdal: Sam Stanton from the Sacramento Bee, on today's Supreme Court ruling on prisoners here in California. Sam, thanks a lot.

Stanton: Thank you.

Michael Dohm's picture
Michael Dohm - May 24, 2011

Using the 20% figure of illegals in prison equals about 24,000 conficts. Build a prison that size plus a factor for growht, near a port city in southern Mexico or another Central American location. The feds could provide transport ships. Let the host nation run the prison with the provision that prisoners serve their sentences. This combined with releasing to treatment any drug offenders not convicted of another violent crime and we control this problem and meet
Supreme Court mandates.

Sam Mandke's picture
Sam Mandke - May 24, 2011

Hopefully this ruling will lead to a broader conversation about our prison systems and criminal justice policies over the last 30 years: is harsh sentencing really a deterrent? and, is prison simply a form of punishment, or should it be a place of reform as well?

Jonathan Lovelace's picture
Jonathan Lovelace - May 23, 2011

California can get little sympathy from the rest of the country, except perhaps New England: this is precisely what anyone with common sense would expect from a state that combines nanny-state criminalization of anything the quote-experts think is bad for you with a three-strikes law.

Danny Kohl's picture
Danny Kohl - May 23, 2011

My main activity outside of my job for years has been Prison Performing Arts (St. Louis, MO). In that capacity, I have gotten to know a lot of incarcerated women and men well.

My personal experiences are consistent with the data that show that the best predictor of successful living on the outside is age. One way to identify those who almost certainly would pose no danger to society if released would be to have Parole Boards evaluate the suitability of returning to society of all inmates over 60.

James Kelley's picture
James Kelley - May 23, 2011

Am I the only one with something to say concerning this issue.Maybe I'm wrong, maybe we should keep people who fit questionable profiles behind bars as long as we can.Where would they work, and how many jobs would be lost in the business of sustaining these prisons?

James Kelley's picture
James Kelley - May 23, 2011

In my opinion, there should be no problem in reducing the prison population.
Just give early release to the thousands of Americans that are in prison for victimless crimes like smoking pot or growing pot.Even selling pot,this is just one example.I'm sure that there are a lot of people taking up space in our prisons that shouldn't be there.I know that people would disagree, however there are so many small time drug offenders, in jails or prisons from laws that are perhaps even unconstitutional.