About | HeinOnline Law Journal Library | HeinOnline Law Journal Library | HeinOnline
LOG IN
LOG IN

51 UCLA L. Rev. 1505 (2003-2004)
The Culture of Judicial Deference and the Problem of Supermax Prisons

handle is hein.journals/uclalr51 and id is 1535 raw text is: THE CULTURE OF JUDICIAL DEFERENCE AND THE PROBLEM OF SUPERMAX PRISONS Mikel-Meredith Weidman Ever since the prison reform movement ended in the early 1980s, it has become increasingly difficult for inmates to challenge their conditions of confinement under the Eighth Amendment. Supreme Court rulings, statutes, and lower courts' conservative applications of precedent have worked together to create a culture of deference that constrains federal courts from intervening in prison affairs. At the same time, the controversial model of the supermax prison has flourished over the past twenty years, earning notoriety for its harsh regime of extreme isolation and sensory deprivation. Conditions in supernax facilities test the boundaries of the Eighth Amendment more than any other contemporary prison conditions. Cases challenging supermax conditions therefore illustrate courts' struggle with the culture of deference more dramatically than do other Eighth Amendment cases. This Comment analyzes three recent cases in which federal courts facing Eighth Amendment challenges to supermax prison conditions granted inmates relief, and concludes that all of these courts relied on the same strategy to defuse the tension between their desire to intervene and their obligation to defer. Rather than engaging in a detailed analysis of the challenged conditions, these courts shifted their focus to the characteristics of the inmates and tied relief to the vul- nerability of a subgroup of mentally ill prisoners. The author argues that this strategy threatens prisoners' rights in the long term because it prevents courts from policing the constitutionality of new types of prison conditions. Based on another recent supermax case, Austin v. Wilkinson, the author concludes that Fourteenth Amendment procedural due process challenges may help counter the culture of judicial deference and mitigate the constricted state of Eighth Amendment jurisprudence by providing a crucial forum for ongoing constitutional analysis of innovative prison conditions. IN TRO DU CTIO N ............................................................................................................. 1506 I. JUDICIAL D EFERENCE .................................................................................................. 1509 A . The Supreme Court and Deference .............................................................. 1512 * Comments Editor, UCLA Law Review, Volume 51. J.D., UCLA School of Law, 2004; M.A., University of Arizona, 2000; B.A., St. John's College, 1996. I am grateful to Professor Sharon Dolovich for her persistent encouragement and her generosity with her time and advice. I would also like to thank the members of the UCLA Law Review for their work on this Comment, and Gabriel Silvers for his help and patience. 1505

What Is HeinOnline?

HeinOnline is a subscription-based resource containing thousands of academic and legal journals from inception; complete coverage of government documents such as U.S. Statutes at Large, U.S. Code, Federal Register, Code of Federal Regulations, U.S. Reports, and much more. Documents are image-based, fully searchable PDFs with the authority of print combined with the accessibility of a user-friendly and powerful database. For more information, request a quote or trial for your organization below.



Short-term subscription options include 24 hours, 48 hours, or 1 week to HeinOnline.

Purchase Access

Contact us for annual subscription options:

Contact Us

Already a HeinOnline Subscriber?

Log In

profiles profiles most