Google+

Law Review Articles

This collection of law review articles relevant to solitary confinement was compiled and annotated by Solitary Watch Research Associates Daniel H. Goldman and Ryan Brimmer, students at the Virginia Capital Case Clearinghouse, Washington & Lee University School of Law.

Judith Resnik (2010). Detention, the War on Terror, and the Federal Courts. 110 Colum. L. Rev. 579: http://www.columbialawreview.org/assets/pdfs/110/2/Resnik.pdf.

Margo Schlanger and Giovanna Shay (2009): Preserving the Rule of Law in America’s Jails and Prisons: The Case for Amending the Prison Litigation Reform Act. 11 J. Const. Law: http://www.acslaw.org/files/Schlanger%20Shay%20PLRA%20Paper%203-28-07.pdf.

Sharon Dolovich (2009). Incarceration American Style (Forward to Confronting the Costs of Incarceration.) 3 Harv. L. & Pol’y Rev. 237: http://www.hlpronline.com/Vol3_2-Dolovich_HLPR.pdf.

Alexander Reinert (2009). Eight Amendment Gaps: Can Conditions of Confinement Litigation Benefit From Proportionality Theory? 35 Fordham Ur. L.J. 53: http://law2.fordham.edu/publications/articles/400flspub16760.pdf.

Jules Lobel (2008). Prolonged Solitary Confinement and the Constitution. 11 U. Pa. J. Const. L. 115: http://www.supermaxed.com/NewSupermaxMaterials/Prolonged-Solitary-Constitution-Lobel.pdf. [Best overview of SCOTUS cases. Also includes materials on international treaty obligations and their impact on US standards of decency.]

Amy Smith (2008). Not “Waiving” But Drowning: The Anatomy of Death Row Syndrome and Volunteering For Execution. 17 B.U. Pub. Int. L.J. 237: http://www.bu.edu/law/central/jd/organizations/journals/pilj/vol17no2/documents/17-2SmithArticle.pdf.

Christopher Smith (2007), Justice John Paul Stevens and Prisoners’ Rights. 17 Temp. Pol. & Civ. Rts. L. Rev. 83. [Traces Stevens’ opinions on prisoners’ rights cases.]

Fred Cohen (2006). Prison Reform: Commission on Safety and Abuse in America’s Prisons: Isolation in Penal Settings: The Isolation-Restraint Paradigm. 22 Wash. U. J. L. & Pol’y 295: http://law.wustl.edu/Journal/22/p295Cohen.pdf. [Presents an excellent set of arguments against solitary confinement. Uses the ban on physical restraints for discipline to argue for similar treatment of isolation, making a strong case that the practices are sufficiently similar to be treated equally.]

Tracy Hresko (2006). In the Cellars of the Hollow Men: Use of Solitary Confinement in U.S. Prisons and Its Implications under International Laws against Torture. Pace Int’l L. Rev. Paper 259: http://digitalcommons.pace.edu/intlaw/259.   

Sally Mann Romano (2006). If the SHU Fits: Cruel and Unusual Punishment at California’s Pelican Bay State Prison. 45 Emory LJ 1089: http://www.fedcrimlaw.com/visitors/PrisonLore/romano1.html.

Maximilienne Bishop (2005). Supermax Prisons: Increasing Security or Permitting Persecution. 47 Ariz. L. Rev. 461: http://www.arizonalawreview.org/ALR2005/vol472/Bishop%20Final%20Note.pdf

David C. Fathi (2005). The Common Law of Supermax Litigation. 24 Pace L. Rev. 675: http://www.prisonlegalnews.org/includes/_public/_publications/control%20units/the%20common%20law%20of%20supermax%20litigation,%20david%20fathi.pdf.

Elizabeth Vasiliades (2005). Solitary Confinement and International Human Rights: Why the U.S. Prison System Fails Global Standards. 21 Am. U. Int’l L. Rev. 71: http://www.auilr.org/pdf/21/21-1-5.pdf.

Michael Z. Goldman (2004). Sandin v. Conner and Intraprison Confinement: Ten Years of Confusion and Harm in Prisoner Litigation. 45 B.C.L. Rev. 423: http://lawdigitalcommons.bc.edu/bclr/vol45/iss2/4.

Norman L. Greene et al. (2003). Dying Twice: Incarceration on Death Row (Symposium Held at the Association of the Bar of the City of New York, June 17, 2002). 31 Capital U. L. Rev. 853: https://culsnet.law.capital.edu/LawReview/BackIssues/31-4/DyingTwiceSympArt.pdf.

Charles Pettigrew (2002). Technology and the Eighth Amendment: The Problem of Supermax Prisons. 4 NC. J. L. & Tech. 191: http://www.supermaxed.com/Pettigrew-Tech-8thAmendmt.pdf.

Christopher Smith (2001). The Malleability of Constitutional Doctrine and Its Ironic Impact on Prisoners’ Rights. 11 B.U. Pub. Int. L.J. 73.

Christine Rebman (1999). The Eighth Amendment and Solitary Confinement: The Gap in Protection from Psychological Consequences. 49 DePaul L. Rev. 567.

Craig Haney and Mona Lynch (1997). Regulating Prisons of the Future: A Psychological Analysis of Supermax Prisons and Solitary Confinement. 23 N.Y.U. Rev. L. & Soc. Change 477. [Extensive overview of solitary confinement practices and their psychological and legal implications.]

John K. Edwards (1997). A Prisoner’s Threshold for Procedural Due Process After Sandin v. Connor: Conservative Activism or Legitimate Compromise? 33 Hous. L. Rev. 1521.

David Heffernan (1996). America the Cruel and Unusual? An Analysis of the Eighth Amendment Under International Law. 45 Cath. U. L. Rev. 481.

Nan D. Miller (1995). International Protection of the Rights of Prisoners: Is Solitary Confinement in the United States a Violation of International Standards? 26 Cal. W. Int’l L.J. 139.

Matthew J. Giacobbe (1991). A Prisoner Must Prove that Prison Officials Acted with Deliberate Indifference to Confinement Conditions for Such Conditions to Constitute Cruel and Unusual Punishment – Wilson v. Seiter 11 S.Ct. 2321.  22 Seton Hall L. Rev. 1505.

Mary A. Luise (1989). Solitary Confinement: Legal and Psychological Considerations. 15 New. Eng. J. on Crim. & Civ. Confinement 301.

Anthony F. Granucci (1969). Nor Cruel and Unusual Punishment Inflicted: The Original Meaning. 57 Cal. L. Rev. 839.