|
|
A Failure to Protect the Most Vulnerable Population Behind BarsRegular readers of The New York Times know that columnist Nicolas Kristof is a forceful advocate on behalf of human rights around the world. In his column on Thursday, January 28th — “Kids in Crisis (Behind Bars)” — he addresses serious human rights abuses that don’t require a trip half-way around the world to discover. Instead, he addresses one of the most gut-wrenching aspects of our broken, dysfunctional criminal justice system — the physical and sexual abuse of children in juvenile and adult correctional facilities across the country. To illustrate just how serious this problem is, he provides a heartbreaking example which I think is almost beyond the scope of what most people can imagine Consider Rodney Hulin, Jr., who was a 16-year-old when he was convicted of arson. A first-time offender and a slight figure at 5 feet 2 inches tall and some 125 pounds, he was sent to a men’s prison. There, he was the smallest person around. Within a week, he was raped, according to an account by Human Rights Watch, an advocacy group. The prison doctor ordered an H.I.V. test, since up to one-third of the inmates were H.I.V.-positive.It would provide some measure of comfort to assume that such examples, while horrific, are rare. A recent report from the Department of Justice’s Bureau of Justice Statistics, however, provides conclusive evidence that the sexual abuse and rape of children in juvenile correctional facilities is a widespread problem. The report found that 12 percent of youth in custody reported being sexually abused one or more times within the previous year, with the majority of these assaults being committed by facility staff members. One of the report’s most shocking findings, however, was that numerous facilities had victimization rates over 20 percent, with a few with rates of 30 percent or higher! Last year, the National Prison Rape Elimination Commission issued a report and recommendations for ways government and correctional facilities can crack down on the staggering rates of sexual abuse and rape in our nation’s jails, prisons and detention facilities. Those recommendations are currently being reviewed by the Obama administration. They should be adopted without delay; however, there is another critical area for reform that Congress must address this year. The Prison Litigation Reform Act (PLRA), which was signed into law in 1996, was originally intended to prevent the federal courts from being overwhelmed with “frivolous” prisoner lawsuits. However, over a decade of experience with the law has shown that it has too often been used to deny justice to victims of prison rape and assault, as well as other serious rights violations. In essence, the PLRA has served to prevent the courts from fulfilling their proper and critically important role of protecting the most vulnerable individuals behind bars — children. Youth are, as clearly established by the recent Justice Department report, an extremely vulnerable population behind bars, and forcing them to jump through very complex and burdensome administrative hoops in order to access the protections of the courts makes them even more susceptible to abuse. Unfortunately, the PLRA also prevents instances of abuse from ever being uncovered in the first place because in many instances it virtually immunizes prison officials from accountability to the Constitution and federal laws. Thankfully, Rep. Robert Scott (D-Va.), Chair of the House Judiciary Committee’s Subcommittee on Crime, introduced legislation in December — the Prison Abuse Remedies Act (PARA) — which would help to fix the worst problems caused by the PLRA, such as the eliminating the hurdles to children accessing the protections of the courts by exempting those under the age of 18. A broad coalition of lawyers, judges, former prisoners, advocacy groups and the faith community are pushing for passage of this common-sense legislation. Congress needs to move forward with a supportive vote on PARA this year. As Nicholas Kristof’s column makes strikingly clear, too much is at stake to wait. |
|
|
© ACLU, 125 Broad Street, 18th Floor New York, NY 10004 |
One important law in that regard is the prohibition on politically partisan activity. Given our nonprofit status, we may not endorse or oppose candidates for elective office. That means we cannot host comments on our site that show a preference for one candidate or party. Although we in no way wish to discourage you from that activity elsewhere, we ask that you not engage in that activity on our website (or include links to other websites that do so). Additionally, given that we are subject to very specific rules concerning the collection of personally identifying information through our website (names, email addresses, home address, financial information, etc.), we ask that you not use the comments portion of this blog to solicit this information from users of our website. We also ask that you not use the comments portion for advertising or requests for legal assistance, and do not add to your comment links to other websites, as we cannot be responsible for the content on other websites.
We are not able to respond to unsolicited inquiries, complaints or requests for assistance sent to this blog. Please direct your complaint or request for assistance to the ACLU affiliate in your state. Requests for legal assistance left in the blog comments will not receive a response or be published.
Finally, the ACLU cannot guarantee the accuracy, completeness or usefulness of any information in the comment section and expressly disclaims any liability for any information in this section.