Is Solitary Confinement a Punishment?

John F. Stinneford

Journal: Northwestern University Law Review

Volume: 115

First Page: 9

Year: 2020

Bluebook Citation: 115 NW. U. L. REV. 9 (2020)

Author: John F. Stinneford: all 5 publications


Citation analytics

How this journal article sits in the citation network, derived from CiteLaw's graph of published opinions.

1
Citing decision
1
Courts citing
Most recently cited by1
  • 2026Calm v. Taylor Del. Ch.

Counts reflect decisions in the CiteLaw corpus and may lag very recent opinions.


Abstract

The United States Constitution imposes a variety of constraints on the imposition of punishment, including the requirements that the punishment be authorized by a preexisting penal statute and ordered by a lawful judicial sentence. Today, prison administrators impose solitary confinement on thousands of prisoners despite the fact that neither of these requirements has been met. Is this imposition a “punishment without law,” or is it a mere exercise of administrative discretion? In an 1890 case called In re Medley, the Supreme Court held that solitary confinement is a separate punishment subject to constitutional restraints, but it has ignored this holding in recent decades, treating the imposition of solitary confinement as though it were a mere act of administrative discretion.

This Essay asks whether the Medley Court or the modern Court is correct as a matter of constitutional law and concludes that the Medley Court is correct.

Chat with this journal article using AI

Ask CiteLaw's AI Navigator anything about this journal article, verify citations, and research related authorities. Sign up for CiteLaw free today to get started.