This case in the Oregon Supreme Court centers on whether Article I, Section 41(3) of the Oregon Constitution, which provides that Oregon prisoners lack legally enforceable rights to prison jobs and training, bars prisoners from collecting damages relating to lost prison jobs and training caused by the alleged breach of a settlement agreement by prison officials. The ACLU’s State Supreme Court Initiative, alongside the ACLU of Oregon, filed an amicus brief arguing that that plaintiff Arnold Huskey, an incarcerated individual whose identity was used in Department of Corrections training materials, is entitled to damages notwithstanding Article I, Section 41(3), because plaintiffs in contract disputes never have to show standalone legal rights to the damages they claim. Instead, they need only show that the damages were reasonably foreseeable consequences of the alleged breach of contract.

This case in the Ohio Supreme Court concerns the scope of the state constitutional right to counsel. The police in this case interrogated the defendant, Isaiah Morris, without mentioning his already-appointed counsel or asking him to waive his right to counsel. This procedural circumstance risks confusing criminal defendants and undermining their state constitutional rights. The ACLU’s State Supreme Court Initiative, alongside the ACLU of Ohio and WilmerHale, filed an amicus brief arguing that merely providing a defendant notice of Miranda rights falls short of the bare minimum requirements for a valid waiver.

The CDC estimates that 1 in 3 people in U.S. jails and prisons have Hepatitis C virus (“HCV”), a rate exponentially higher than the general population. Recent medical advances have made HCV a curable condition, and treatment can be completed in a matter of weeks. But jails and prisons have been far too slow to adopt the new community standard of care. The ACLU is working to ensure that all incarcerated patients with HCV have access to life-saving treatment.

Pretrial detainees cannot be punished because they have not been convicted of any crime. Yet until recently, courts have applied the Eighth Amendment’s heightened, subjective legal standard applicable to convicted prisoners to claims brought by pretrial detainees. The ACLU is working to ensure that courts apply a lower, objective standard to Fourteenth Amendment claims brought by pretrial detainees.

The Prison Litigation Reform Act (“PLRA”) requires incarcerated plaintiffs to exhaust the prison’s internal grievance system before they can file suit in federal court. But these procedures may be difficult or impossible for people with mental disabilities to complete. The ACLU is working to ensure that the PLRA’s requirements don’t bar people with mental disabilities from court.