Safety Regarding the First Amendment In Prison
The First Amendment of the constitution allows us the freedom to practice the religion of our choosing, the right to speak freely in public and in press, as well as the right to assemble and peacefully protest issues of which we feel strongly. However, the rights we have as free citizens differ considerably in comparison to that of prisoners. Prisoners are allowed these rights, but only to an extent to which it does not affect the safety of themselves or other inmates, nor cause an overwhelming burden on prison administrators. There are many cases won and lost by prisoners regarding the First Amendment, and within the following paragraphs I will discuss these cases in depth. First, I will discuss
…show more content…
In Knuckles v. Prasse, the "clear and present danger" test was created by the United States Supreme Court. This states that religious freedoms could be impeded in some cases in which "clear and present danger of a breach of prison security or discipline or some other substantial interference with the orderly functioning of the institution." Such instances can be found in the cases of Wojtczak v Cuyler and McDonald v. Hall, in which it was viewed as 'not arbitrary or capricious' that prison administrators did not allow prisoners kept in segregation to leave their cell and join religious services. Similarly, in Cooper v. Pate, inmates were restricted of practicing their religion when prison officials proved that they had prior record of abusing that right. It is also prison policy that a prison official always oversee prisoners meeting for religious congregation. This is to ensure that the meet up does not give heed to violent ideology which may incite a riot, nor promote terroristic extremism or gang related
Pell v. Procunier is a significant case in corrections as it confirms that denying media interviews with inmates does not violate the inmates’ or journalists’ constitutional rights, as long other means of communication, such as mail and visitation, are permitted. This case controlled the First Amendment rights of the inmates and the media, but the court justified it because it reduced the rights
In the case of Sandin v. Conner, DeMont Conner, an inmate at a maximum security correctional facility in Hawaii, was subjected to a strip search in 1987. During the search he directed angry and foul language at the officer. Conner was charged with high misconduct and sentenced to 30 days of segregation by the adjustment committee. Conner was not allowed to present witnesses in his defense. Conner completed the 30-day segregation sentence, after which he requested a review of his case. Upon review, prison administration found no evidence to support the misconduct claim. The State District Court backed the decision, but the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals found that Sandin had a liberty interest in remaining free from disciplinary segregation. This case is significant because it confronts the question of which constitutional rights individuals retain when they are incarcerated. In Sandin v. Conner, the Supreme Court ultimately ruled that prisoners have a right to due process only when “atypical and significant deprivation” has occurred. Prisons must now be vigilant in protecting the rights of inmates. It is a delicate matter in the sense that, when an individual enters prison, their rights to liberty are by and large being forfeited. The rights in question are important to prisoners because prisons are closed environments where by nature their freedoms are already very limited. They need a well-defined set of rights so that prisons do not unduly infringe on their liberty. Without court intervention, prison administrators would likely not have allowed this particular right, as it adds another layer of bureaucracy that can be seen as interfering with the efficiency of their job. Also, it could lead to a glut of prisoners claiming violations of their rights under the court ruling.
Petioner Nazari as will be call here in-after, asserts that while in Prison, inmates retain their right to exercise their rel'igious beliefs. Petitioner contends that Bureau of Prisons denies the basic rights of conscience to Rastafarian. Puisuant to Equal Protection Under the Law, requires that all persons similarly situated be treated alike. Within the Bureau of Prisons, religious diets are recognized for Jews, Muslims and so forth. But the Rastafarian Dietary Tenets are challenged at every door.
The 6th amendement of the U.S. Constituion gurantees the acussed the right to a speedy trial. In New York more specifically, the prosecution must be ready for trial on all felonies except murder within six months, or the charges aginst a defendant can be dissmissed. However, an article written in The New Yorker by Jennifer Gonnerman about a young man named Kalief Browder, sheds light on a situation that is should have been handled more differently. Kalief browder spend three years on Rikers Island in what could only be described as horrible conditions, and suffered appalling violence, without ever being convicted of a crime. The failure of our Criminal Justice System not only deprived Kalief Browder the right to a speedy trial, but also robbed such a young man of an education, and most importantly his freedom. - Thesis Statement .
In the 21 first Century, the United States still has an extremely large number of individuals in the penal system. To this day, the American country still contains the highest prison population rate in the world. Although mass incarceration rates are extremely high, decreases in this number have been made. Since the first time since the 1970s, the imprisoned population has declined about 3 percent. This small step seemingly exemplifies how a vast majority of individuals who becoming aware of these issues and performing actions to decrease these numbers. In the Chapter 13 of James Kilgore’s Understanding Mass Incarceration: A People's Guide to the Key Civil Rights Struggle of Our Time, he asserts how individuals who oppose mass incarceration
How the judicial branch rules in cases relating to the 1st and how they relate that to all the rights of public school students. This includes anything from flag burning to not saluting the flag to practicing religion in school. The main point of this paper is to focus on the fact that schools have a greater ability to restrict speech than government.
Most prisoners that are in prison now are more than likely to be free one day where some will spend the rest of their living life there. When they enter into the prison system, they lose more than just being able to wear what they want. They even lose more than just their civil liberties. Gresham Sykes was the first to outline these major deprivations that prisoners go through in his book The Society of Captives. His five major pains, which he calls “pains of imprisonment”, were loss of liberty, loss of autonomy, loss of security, deprivation of heterosexual relationships, and deprivation of goods and services. Matthew Robinson adds onto Sykes’ five pains with three more of his own. His additional pains are loss of voting rights, loss of dignity,
"Update: Prisoners' Rights." Issues & Controversies On File: n. pag. Issues & Controversies. Facts On File News Services, 17 Nov. 2006. Web. 21 Nov. 2013. .
Citizens are sold on the idea that criminals must be keep off the streets that the punishment must be harsh regardless of the crime, that three strikes and they are out. The justice system does not seem to focus on rehabilitation, rather in the punishment. The public constantly listens to slogans such as “protect our children”, “protect your rights”, and the public recognizes that maybe some of this laws, yet some of the harshest penalties have an ulterior motive. Can society endorse the fact that criminals should rot in jail, regardless of the crime? Think of the impact of an increased jail population on our taxes. For a moment consider the incarcerated population growing because of an increase in crime or
The United States Supreme Court, in Howes v. Fields, rejected a per se rule that questioning a prison inmate in a room isolated from the general prison population about events occurring outside the prison is custodial interrogation. The Fifth Amendment of the Constitution requires that a person in “custodial interrogation” be read Miranda rights, those rights which come from the case of Miranda v. Arizona. The Sixth Circuit affirmed, holding that a prisoner is in custody within the meaning of Miranda if the prisoner is taken away from the general prison area and questioned about events that occurred outside the prison. The Sixth Circuit held that the interview of Fields in the room was a “custodial interrogation” because isolation from the rest of the prison combined with questioning about allegation outside the prison makes such an interrogation custodial per se. The term “custody” refers to circumstances where the danger of coercion is present. A court will look to the objective circumstances of the interrogation to find whether a person is in custody. In order for statements made ...
The number of Americans that are in prison has elevated to levels that have never been seen before. Prisons in the US have always been crowded ever since the first prison was invented (Jacobs and Angelos 101). The first prison in the US was the Walnut Street Jail that was built in Philadelphia in 1773, and later closed in the 1830’s due to overcrowding and dirty conditions (Jacobs and Angelos 101). The prison system in modern US history has faced many downfalls due to prison overcrowding. Many private prison owners argue that the more inmates in a prison the more money they could make. In my opinion the argument of making more money from inmates in prisons is completely unconstitutional. If the private prisons are only interested in making
Prisons have been around for decades. Keeping housed, those of our society who have been convicted
Prison Guards, also acknowledged as correctional officers, are employees of the government and are responsible for the monitoring the inmates of a jail or prison. People see jails and prisons reenacted on the television, but the way they portray the facilities does not compare to how they are in real life. In television shows, it seems as if the building runs itself. The inmates stay inside the walls, and do whatever they feel like doing. This, however, is not how jails/prisons work. Having correctional officers is crucial for the upkeep of prisons and jails. One of a correctional officer’s main jobs is to validate that all of the inmates are safe and accounted for, and that the prison facilities are hygienic and under control.
Solitary confinement is a penal tactic used on inmates who pose a threat to themselves or other inmates. Solitary confinement is type of segregated prison in which prisoners are held in their cell for 22-24 hours every day. If they are allowed to leave their cell, they will silently walk shackled and in between two guards. They can only leave for showers or exercise. Their exercise and shower are always done alone and inside. They can exercise in fenced in yards surrounded by concrete. Solitary confinement is either used as a punishment for prison behaviors, a protection method for targeted inmates, or a place to keep prisoners who are a threat to the general prison population. Many prisoners are put in Administrative Segregation for their protection. Many prisoners in this type of segregation are teenagers, homosexuals, and mentally ill prisoners. Many mentally ill prisoners are sent to solitary confinement because there are not rehabilitation services available, and prison officials have run out of options (Shalev, 2008, p [1-2]). Solitary confinement is a convenient method for prison systems, but the detrimental effects on inmates make it an unsuitable option for inmate control.
Given from what I have researched for this paper the restrictions on freedom of speech is agreeable. The restrictions are dependent on context and variable situations. From my past experiences, people cannot tell the difference between regular speech and those that inspire aggressiveness. There should be a balance between citizen’s freedoms of speech. An example is that different people should have different levels of freedom of speech. For those who write, print, or speak to the public should have the greatest amount of speech freedom. They should be able to voice out their opinions and fact to the public. Those who have criminal records should have their speech right limited because they will the most likely candidates to spark disorder and endanger public safety. In a different perspective using convicts, we will examine how inmates rights are effected after incarceration. The overall objective needs of a prison is to be secure and at ease. In 1987 Supreme Court Case Turner v. Safley argued that the prison guards were limiting their free speech by not allowing them to send letter mails to each other. The ruling of this case lead to the creation called the “Turner Standard.” The Turner Standard consist of a series of four questions that depicts whether the contents of speech or prison policy is considered constitutional. The four standards are: the policy in question must address a valid issue of prison security or rehabilitation, inmates must have alternate means of communication, courts must consider the impact of speech on other prisoners, guards, and prison resources, and are there other alternatives that would not restrict a prisoner’s freedom of expression. In another Supreme Court case there was a questioning of reading materials in prison library. In this case each prisoner has the right to get readings like books and magazines. The limitations is