California considers restricting solitary confinement. It’s ‘cruel,’ lawmaker says
.JPG "A guard tower stands at Folsom State Prison on Aug. 24, 2021.")
California is considering ending its use of long-term solitary confinement in prisons, jails and private immigration detention centers.
A new bill is proposing to restrict these facilities from holding people in solitary confinement, or nearly all day isolation, for more than 15 consecutive days. The California Mandela Act, AB 2632, would also prohibit the practice entirely for several groups, including pregnant women, people with certain disabilities and individuals under 25 and over 65.
Solitary confinement is generally defined as 22 to 24 hours per day spent alone in a small cell.
The legislation mirrors recent changes in several states that limit solitary confinement.
Colorado stopped its use of long-term isolation in prisons in 2017. Since then, another 13 other states have limited or banned the practice for certain groups.
If the bill passes, California would be the first state to curb the practice in private immigration detention facilities. It is set to be heard in the California Senate Appropriations Committee on Monday.
“Solitary confinement is cruel and a racial justice issue that does nothing for the rehabilitation of a person… Not only is it deemed as cruel and unusual punishment by the United Nations, but it deeply damages the psyche of a person,” said Assemblyman Chris Holden, D-Pasadena, who introduced the bill in February.
The bill’s title is inspired by Nelson Mandela and the United Nations’ standards on treatment of prisoners, which are named in his honor. In 2015, the United Nations prohibited any period of isolation beyond 15 days and defined it as torture.
The bill has been pushed for years by state advocates, who raise concerns about racial inequity and health ramifications.
A 2015 report from Yale Law School found that Hispanic men make up 42% of the prison population, but 86% of those in restricted housing. Growing research also links solitary confinement to increased violence in facilities, worsened mental illness and higher rates of death after release.
Advocates point to long-standing evidence on the effects of the practice.
A 2019 Journal of American Medical Association study found people who had spent time in solitary confinement were 78% more likely to die from suicide within the first year of release compared to people incarcerated but not placed in solitary. The practice also resulted in a 5 to 7.5% increase in being convicted of a new crime after release, according to a 2020 study published in Criminology.
Corrections leaders argue the bill will further complicate housing decisions and lead to more dangerous environments for detainees and staff. Cory Salzillo, legislative director for the California State Sheriffs’ Association, called the bill’s mandates “concerning” and said its definition of special populations is “broad.”
“It’s got potential implications for the safety of incarcerated persons as well as staff within the facilities,” Salzillo said.
Other critics insist the bill may result in hundreds of millions of dollars in costs and construction. But some experts and public defenders say those claims are simply not true.
“That’s a bad faith argument,” said Hamid Yazdan Panah, the advocacy director at Immigration Defense Advocates, which aims to “end policies that detain, dehumanize and destroy immigrant communities,” according to the group’s website.
Panah noted that critics raised similar concerns in New York during the initial opposition to the Halt Act, the 2021 law that restricted solitary confinement in that state. Since the passage of the bill, New York has closed down six prisons and not dedicated costs to construction.
Immigration Defense Advocates and Berkeley Underground Scholars recently drafted a fiscal report to highlight potential savings by the Mandela Act. The report used the 2016 state budget and cost estimates from the California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation. It predicts savings between $60 and $300 million, while impacting more than 150 facilities in the state.
Panah said the estimates factor in a possible 70% reduction in the solitary confinement population and the increased costs of the practice. A person in solitary confinement costs at least 18% more than the general population. The higher costs typically stem from increased staffing for individuals in isolation, Panah said.
“The record for California and other states is clear, limiting solitary confinement saves money and saves lives,” said Panah.
