Document Type
Article
Publication Date
2008
Abstract
This Article will address whether the increasing practice of prolonged or permanent solitary confinement constitutes cruel and unusual punishment in violation of the Constitution, and whether it violates the due process rights of the prisoners so confined. It will not only look at United States case law, but at the jurisprudence of international human rights courts, commissions, and institutions. As the U.S. Supreme Court has noted, international jurisprudence can be helpful in determining the scope and meaning of broad terms in our Constitution such as “cruel and unusual punishments” or “due process,” as those terms ought to be understood in the context of what has been deemed unacceptable by the world community. This practice of long-term solitary confinement constitutes cruel and unusual punishment and violates the due process rights of prisoners, yet the unfortunate trend in the United States has been to downplay and ignore the cruel and inhuman effects of psychological abuse to prisoners where there is no long-term physical injury.
Recommended Citation
Jules Lobel,
Prolonged Solitary Confinement and the Constitution,
111
University of Pennsylvania Journal of Constitutional Law
115
(2008).
Available at:
https://scholarship.law.pitt.edu/fac_articles/196
Included in
Comparative and Foreign Law Commons, Constitutional Law Commons, Criminal Law Commons, Fourteenth Amendment Commons, Human Rights Law Commons, Law and Psychology Commons, Law and Society Commons, Law Enforcement and Corrections Commons, Other Psychiatry and Psychology Commons, Psychiatric and Mental Health Commons, Public Law and Legal Theory Commons