[HN Gopher] 25 years of evidence for repealing the Prison Litiga...
       ___________________________________________________________________
        
       25 years of evidence for repealing the Prison Litigation Reform Act
        
       Author : nickysielicki
       Score  : 35 points
       Date   : 2022-07-30 19:57 UTC (3 hours ago)
        
 (HTM) web link (www.prisonpolicy.org)
 (TXT) w3m dump (www.prisonpolicy.org)
        
       | tomohawk wrote:
        
       | btilly wrote:
       | I consider every part of our jail system a travesty.
       | 
       | We have the highest incarceration rate in the world, have an
       | abusive plea bargain process to more efficiently railroad people
       | in, avoid oversight of our prisons, and once prisoners get out
       | they are often unemployable.
       | 
       | Just to offer one example, until 1970 plea bargaining was
       | generally considered unconstitutional because it offers such
       | large incentives for innocent people to not even attempt to
       | defend their rights, no matter how flimsy the evidence against
       | them. Today over 95% of cases are decided by plea bargains. The
       | rate varies by crime. For drug offenses it is around 97%. And yet
       | in most cases the actual investigation is no more than a faulty
       | field test that is inadmissible in court. See
       | https://www.nytimes.com/2016/07/10/magazine/how-a-2-roadside...
       | for verification of that.
       | 
       | Whatever your opinion on our war on drugs, it is clear that a lot
       | of people going to jail for drugs are actually innocent.
       | 
       | See https://innocenceproject.org/an-end-to-plea-bargains/ for
       | more.
        
         | [deleted]
        
         | phpisthebest wrote:
         | This is my primary reason for supporting drug legalization. I
         | am not sure why more people do not see the massive damage done
         | to society over all, and the massive risk even non-drug users
         | have to being abused. I can point to countless cases where
         | people have been arrested for legal activity, one case where a
         | family was harassed because they visited a garden store, and
         | had loose leaf tea in their garage that triggered one of those
         | field tests.
         | 
         | When ever this issue is debated the supporters of the drug laws
         | often claim only people that want to get high support
         | legalization, I have no desire to use drugs, I want to have my
         | rights protected, and not be railroaded by a flawed legal
         | system or have my house raided under flimsy "evidence"
        
         | CogitoCogito wrote:
         | This is depressing. I've always thought plea bargains should be
         | disallowed for all these totally obvious reasons, but I can't
         | believe they actually used to be before being allowed in.
         | Hopefully plea bargains will someday once again be illegal.
        
       | TedShiller wrote:
        
       | omginternets wrote:
       | What were the arguments in favor of this in the first place?
       | Reading the article, it seems like an absolute travesty -- and it
       | may well be -- but still, I like to understand why the fence was
       | installed before advocating its removal. What problem was this
       | legislation trying to solve? Can anyone provide context?
        
         | getcrunk wrote:
         | Second paragraph:
         | 
         | "When the PLRA was being debated, lawmakers who supported it
         | claimed that too many people behind bars were filing frivolous
         | cases against the government."
        
           | omginternets wrote:
           | Sorry, I should have been clearer. This is a rather
           | superficial explanation. I'm curious about the details of
           | political discourse around the law when it was signed.
        
       | LinkLink wrote:
       | Lawmakers really used to, and still do, just blatantly disregard
       | the interests of the people for the interests of the state.
        
         | [deleted]
        
         | btilly wrote:
         | Don't forget that for many decades "tough on crime" was an easy
         | ticket to reelection for politicians.
         | 
         | The same era saw the 3 strikes law. Which saw relative
         | progressives like Hillary Clinton giving speeches about how it
         | was needed to get "black super-predators" off of the streets.
         | And if you were accused of being soft on crime, well,
         | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Willie_Horton demonstrated that a
         | Republican could win in 4 out of 5 states (despite starting
         | behind in the popular vote) by harping on that enough.
        
           | sarchertech wrote:
           | Clinton never said "black" super predators.
           | 
           | > "But we also have to have an organized effort against
           | gangs," Hillary Clinton said in a C-SPAN video clip. "Just as
           | in a previous generation we had an organized effort against
           | the mob. We need to take these people on. They are often
           | connected to big drug cartels, they are not just gangs of
           | kids anymore. They are often the kinds of kids that are
           | called superpredators -- no conscience, no empathy.
        
             | btilly wrote:
             | Fair point. She didn't use those words. But everyone
             | understood her to mean that.
             | 
             | Which is why
             | https://www.politifact.com/factchecks/2016/aug/28/reince-
             | pri... calls this claim mostly true.
        
               | sarchertech wrote:
               | Regardless of what she meant, my issue was with putting
               | it in quotes.
               | 
               | I also doubt she was targeting black kids consciously.
               | Even if many people (including herself) tended to think
               | of gang members as young and Black.
        
               | nyokodo wrote:
               | > I also doubt she was targeting black kids consciously .
               | Even if many people (including herself) tended to think
               | of gang members as young and Black.
               | 
               | If she thought gang members were predominantly young and
               | black and she talked about combating them like the mob,
               | labeling them as super predators with no empathy or
               | conscience etc... what do you think she was consciously
               | imagining? This is a weak defense if ever there was one.
        
             | tunesmith wrote:
             | What's funny is that this feels somehow related to when she
             | later referred to the "basket of deplorables". Like in some
             | way she tried to carve out room for common ground in a
             | group of people she disagreed with, by slicing them into
             | two groups, one of which could be disregarded in her view.
             | And in both cases it backfired.
        
       | tiahura wrote:
       | My understanding is that most judges use their clerks (not the
       | real ones, the unpaid ones) to handle (ie deny) these.
       | 
       | It seemed unfair that a 3L was dismissing habeas petitions
       | without the underlying case file, but the alternative didn't seem
       | real workable either.
        
         | kelseyfrog wrote:
         | When the status quo and all alternatives aren't workable, the
         | only option is to zoom out a level until there is something to
         | change.
        
       ___________________________________________________________________
       (page generated 2022-07-30 23:01 UTC)