By Brandon L. Garrett & Lee Kovarsky

The COVID-19 pandemic blighted all aspects of American life, but people in jails, prisons, and other detention sites experienced singular harm and neglect. Housing vulnerable detainee populations with elevated medical needs, these facilities were ticking time bombs. They were overcrowded, underfunded, unsanitary, insufficiently ventilated, and failed to meet even minimum health-and-safety standards. Every unit of national and sub-national government failed to prevent detainee communities from becoming pandemic epicenters, and judges were no exception. This Article takes a comprehensive look at the decisional law growing out of COVID-19 detainee litigation and situates the judicial response as part of a comprehensive institutional failure. We read hundreds of COVID-19 custody cases, and our analysis classifies the decision-making by reference to three attributes: the form of detention at issue, the substantive right asserted, and the remedy sought. Several patterns emerged. Judges avoided constitutional holdings whenever they could, rejected requests for ongoing supervision, and resisted collective discharge—limiting such relief to vulnerable subpopulations. The most successful litigants were detainees in custody pending immigration proceedings, and the least successful were those convicted of crimes , 

110 California L. Rev 117 (2022)   

By Maxim Ananyev, Mikhail Poyker:

Inmates' informal code regulates their behavior and attitudes. We investigate whether prisons contribute to the spread of these norms to the general population using an exogenous shock of the Soviet amnesty of 1953, which released 1.2 million prisoners. We document the spread of prison norms in localities exposed to the released ex-prisoners. As inmates' code also ascribes low status to persons perceived as passive homosexuals, in the long run, we find effects on anti-LGBTQ+ hate crimes, homophobic slurs on social media, and discriminatory attitudes.

IZA DP No. 17138\ Bonn: Institute of Labor Economics, 2024. 

By Dominique Moran, Jennifer Turner, Yvonne Jewkes and Matt Houlbrook

Over 20% of people in prison are currently housed in prisons with Victorian-era accommodation. This significant part of the prison estate is a legacy of Victorian policy and ambition, both in terms of construction, and in the creation of a new social institution, the modern prison. Both the physical infrastructure and the ideological foundations of the Victorian prison persist today. This once ‘visionary’ prison design has been widely regarded as an historical relic, a barrier to progress and innovation. These establishments can be characterised by poor-quality accommodation and a relative shortage of opportunities for purposeful activity. The Victorian estate can exhibit some of the worst conditions across the prison system, with HMIP frequently reporting dark, damp cells with poor ventilation and drainage. Despite these challenges, the Victorian prison remains a significant component of the urban prison estate, located close to courts and communities. Our research, conducted with those living and working in Victorian prisons, highlights some ways in which these challenging buildings may be reimagined and re-deployed. The persistence of the Victorian prison also has conceptual implications. This ‘modern’ prison was conceived in part to resolve a ‘penal crisis’ beginning in the 1770s, following the suspension of The challenges evident in the Victorian prison often bring it into the public eye. Today, the prison estate in England and Wales is experiencing acute pressure, with the population currently at its highest ever level, reaching a peak of 88,225 in October 2023 (and closely matched in March 2024). The Victorian prison estate arguably persists in part because these pressures prevent serious consideration of closure of establishments of any era. The prison system is already operating above the Ministry of Justice’s own measure of safe and decent accommodation and is set to reach capacity in summer 2024. Criminal justice stakeholders and oversight bodies have repeatedly raised concerns about the levels of crowding and the impact on safe, decent, and purposeful environments for those living and working in prisons. Prison population projections indicate that this is a long-term problem, with the prison population set to grow to up to 114,800 by March 2028. The Ministry of Justice have announced a raft of emergency measures aimed at increasing capacity, including the renting of police custody cells and cells abroad, and the construction of ‘rapid deployment cells’, prefabricated temporary accommodation with a 15-year lifespan. Draft legislation has proposed scrapping custodial sentences of 12 months or less, and the early release scheme continues to expand. Whilst efforts to reduce the prison population are welcome, short term measures are limited in their effectiveness in addressing longer-term challenges. These pressures tell us that the system requires a rethink, both in terms of its infrastructure and, more abstractly, its purpose. Tackling the challenges faced by the Victorian prison estate, and the system more broadly, will require ambition, a clear vision for the future of the whole prison system, and the foresight necessary to effectively deploy Victorian prisons to support rehabilitation and promote reintegration. 

London: Howard League for Prison Reform, 2024. 11p.