23/7: Pelican Bay Prison and the Rise of Long-Term Solitary Confinement

Guenther, Lisa

doi:10.1093/jahist/jax550

Cited by 12 publications

(21 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…As in the super‐max, the men held in CSC units were deemed a threat to the functioning of the rest of the prison system based on their custodial conduct (Kurki & Morris, 2001), rather than seen as a danger to the wider public because of their index offense. In Reiter's (2016, p. 131) terms, the rationale for their selection was that they were “institutionally rather than socially dangerous,” based principally on an organizational and managerial logic that enabled the smooth operation of the rest of the system. Yet the culture and practices of the CSC system deviated significantly from the situational‐coercive approach of the super‐max.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Comparing deep‐end confinement in England & Wales and Norway

2022

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Extreme forms of custody represent the boundary points of state power. The configuration of the most restrictive corners of prison systems, and what goes on within them, is highly instructive in exposing the objectives, limits, and implications of state coercion at its most severe. Based on data collected in England & Wales and Norway, this article has two main aims. The first is to explore the degree to which "deep-end" confinement differs between jurisdictions with different penal philosophies. The second is to understand how the most extreme form of confinement in each jurisdiction differs from the more typical carceral experiences within each system and its overall penal ethos. Empirically, then, the article seeks to shine light into the deepest dominions of both prison systems, illuminating the experiential texture of extreme forms of imprisonment. It concludes by asking what can be inferred about Nordic exceptionalism, and about deep-end confinement more generally, by analyzing these domains.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Comparing deep‐end confinement in England & Wales and Norway

2022

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…As is typical of historical research, we analysed both primary and secondary sources. Secondary sources on the history of prisons and incarceration in California -and penal labour camps, in particular -are somewhat fragmentary, but nonetheless can help establish the institutional and organisational histories in which outdoor penal labour is embedded (e.g., Cairns, 2009;Chernin, 1937;Cummins, 1994;Janssen, 2009;Kruttschnitt & Gartner, 2005;McAfee, 1990aMcAfee, , 1990bReiter, 2016;Thorpe, 1972;Viargues, 1960;Yaley, 1980). The primary data for this article are drawn from documents stored in the California State Archives in Sacramento, especially the collections catalogued under the agencies now known as the California Departments of Corrections and Rehabilitation and Forestry and Fire Protection (Goodman, 2010).…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…As is typical of historical research, we analysed both primary and secondary sources. Secondary sources on the history of prisons and incarceration in California – and penal labour camps, in particular – are somewhat fragmentary, but nonetheless can help establish the institutional and organisational histories in which outdoor penal labour is embedded (e.g., Cairns, 2009; Chernin, 1937; Cummins, 1994; Janssen, 2009; Kruttschnitt & Gartner, 2005; McAfee, 1990a, 1990b; Reiter, 2016; Thorpe, 1972; Viargues, 1960; Yaley, 1980).…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

The palimpsest of outdoor penal labour in California, 1915–2000

Goodman

Quinn

2023

Howard J Crime Justice

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In this article we examine the curious stability of outdoor penal labour in California in the 20th century against a shifting social and penal field. Analysing state archival data on prison highway and forestry camps between 1915 and 2000, we frame the persistence of these practices as evidence of a penal labour palimpsest. We demonstrate how the agency and interpretive innovation of penal administrators – as the architects and interpreters of this palimpsest – served as a stabilising mechanism akin to, but distinct from, existing theories of path dependence. Zooming out from the intricacies of the historical record, we position this case as revealing some of the limits of strict theories of path dependence and, instead, as offering a more dynamic understanding of the complex, intersecting and malleable ways in which history matters.

show abstract

“…Scholars agree that solitary confinement, in both the criminal and immigration context, has increased in tandem with mass incarceration (Patler et al, 2019;Reiter, 2016a;Rubin and Reiter, 2018;Sakoda and Simes, 2020;Schwellenback et al, 2019;Woodman et al, 2019). Legal and social science analyses alike demonstrate that solitary confinement, at least in the criminal context, is often imposed arbitrarily, by prison officials in perfunctory administrative hearings (Dolovich, 2012;Reiter, 2016a;Reiter and Coutin, 2017;Resnik, 2020), with disparate use among racial minorities (Pyrooz and Mitchell, 2019;Reiter, 2012Reiter, , 2016bSakoda and Simes, 2020), and those with pre-existing or new physical and mental health problems (Haney, 2018;Kaba et al, 2014;Kupers, 2017;Lovell, 2008;Patler et al, 2019;Reiter and Blair, 2015;Reiter et al, 2020;Williams et al, 2019).…”

Section: The Punishment Status Quo: An Epidemic Of Solitary Confinementmentioning

confidence: 99%

Punishing status and the punishment status quo: Solitary confinement in U.S. Immigration prisons, 2013–2017

Franco¹,

Patler²,

Reiter³

2020

Punishment & Society

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This study provides the first systematic, nationally representative analysis of administrative records of solitary confinement placements in any carceral setting. We examine patterns in who experiences solitary confinement in Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) custody, as well as the stated reason for, and length of, their confinement. We reveal several findings. First, cases involving individuals with mental illnesses are overrepresented, more likely to occur without infraction, and to last longer, compared to cases involving individuals without mental illnesses. Second, solitary confinement cases involving immigrants from Africa and the Caribbean are vastly overrepresented in comparison to the share of these groups in the overall detained population, and African immigrants are more likely to be confined for disciplinary reasons, compared to the average. Finally, placement patterns vary significantly by facility and institution type, with private facilities more likely to solitarily confine people without infraction, compared to public facilities. This study offers a lens through which to more precisely theorize the legal boundary-blurring of crimmigration and the relationship between prison and immigration detention policies, to better understand the practice of solitary confinement across carceral contexts, and to analyze the relationship between national-level policy and on-the-ground implementation.

show abstract

23/7: Pelican Bay Prison and the Rise of Long-Term Solitary Confinement

Cited by 12 publications

References 0 publications

Comparing deep‐end confinement in England & Wales and Norway

Comparing deep‐end confinement in England & Wales and Norway

The palimpsest of outdoor penal labour in California, 1915–2000

Punishing status and the punishment status quo: Solitary confinement in U.S. Immigration prisons, 2013–2017

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About