|
Supreme Court Ruling Limits CDC Segregation
|
February 24, 2005 - The official ruling came down from the Supreme Court, California's Department of Corrections cannot temporarily segregate inmates by race "except under the most extraordinary circumstances" - ending the long-standing policy which was implemented in order to reduce gang-related violence. This decision to limit and review this policy was approved 5-3, setting aside a lower court ruling in favor of CDC, which had argued that a leeway should be provided to set race-based restrictions to promote safety. [Supreme Court Decision: Case 03-636: PDF File]
Now the 9th US Circuit Court of Appeals will be charged with reviewing the 24-year-old policy for evidence that the segregation policy is necessary - and that it works.
The justices stated that racial segregation is "unconstitutional unless there is a compelling reason," and Justice Sandra Day O'Connor went on to say that racial classifications "raise special fears that they are motivated by invidious purpose." Others who voted with the majority were Justices Anthony Kennedy, David Souter, Ruth Ginsburg and Stephen Breyer. Chief Justice William H. Rehnquist did not participate because the case was first heard in November 2004, when he was being treated for thyroid cancer. [Argument Transcript: Case 03-636: PDF File]
Garrison Johnson, a black inmate who has been incarcerated in the California penal system since 1987 for murder, robbery and assault, brought this lawsuit to court. His contention that he was "humiliated by the segregation" after each of his 5 prison transfers throughout the state, and said that the segregation "violated his 14th Amendment right to equal protection." The Johnson case was backed by the Bush Administration, who stated that racial discrimination in America's prisons needed "remedy." California is the only state that segregates prisoners by race, a policy that officials have stated was necessary due to the high level of race-based street gangs that proliferate the state's system - such as the black Crips and the white Aryan Nations groups.
In the minority, Justice Clarence Thomson argued in favor of the Department saying that these deciding whether these policies are necessary were "better left in the first instance to the officials who run our nation's prisons. The majority is concerned with sparing inmates the indignity and stigma of racial discrimination," he went on. "California is concerned with their safety and saving their lies." Justice Antonin Scalia also sided with Justice Thompson.
Justice Stevens has since filed a separate dissent arguing that the policy should be declared "discriminatory" without further review. Ginsburg stated in a concurring statement that the department "made a stereotypical classification that warrants rigorous scrutiny."
Hailing the decision, California State Senator Gloria Romero (Romero's Bio @ ca.gov), a Democrat from East Los Angeles and Senate majority leader, released a letter calling upon Governor Schwarzenegger to dismantle the policy rather than return to the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals in an effort to justify it. She also requested a meeting with him on the subject.
"Today, I am calling on you to move 'with all deliberate speed' in ordering an end to this practice of state-sponsored racial segregation, which is practiced by no other state in the nation except California. As a Governor who prides himself on his commitment to prison reform, I ask you to bring California into the 21st century by ending what may be the last remaining vestige of racial segregation in California. If our nation could desegregate our military, our schools, our workplaces, and our eating establishments, then we can also desegregate our prisons."
Updates will follow on this website as they become available.
Related Articles: Racial Segregation in CDC
* Sources: www.metnews.com, www.supremecourtus.gov and www.ca.gov.
|
|
