The Prison Policy Institute gave the state of New Mexico a failing grade for its response to COVID-19 in jails and prisons compared to other states (Prison Policy Initiative, 2020). New Jersey and California took a more comprehensive approach to pandemic-related population reduction in jails and prisons.
In New Jersey, an Executive Order (EO), court case decision, and a new law reduced the prison population by an estimated 35 percent (Tully, 2020). The conviction list for eligibility was narrower than in New Mexico; however, the criteria for release was broader. The state’s EO No 124 considered individuals 60 years and older, those with high-risk medical conditions, people on track to complete their sentences in three months, or those denied parole in the past year in its criteria for release. In addition, the New Jersey EO listed procedures the state’s Department of Corrections (DOC) will enact or consider. A court case decided during summer 2020 assisted in providing due process for incarcerated individuals denied an early release or at-home medical confinement (O’Dea, 2020). Despite these measures, outbreaks in New Jersey prisons spiked, leading to 53 inmate deaths and 202 prison staff deaths. At the end of 2020, the New Jersey State Legislature passed S2519, a bill awarding “public health emergency credits” to commute the sentences of specific incarcerated individuals.
The two graphs below indicate the significant Covid-19 spike in New Jersey prisons as well as reported COVID-19 deaths.
Graphs from The Marshall Project - New Jersey
As of April 2021, California’s COVID-19 prison reduction measures have reduced the prison population by about 9 percent (AP, 2021). In San Quentin prison in California, the negligent transfer of inmates from prison facilities with positive COVID cases caused the deaths of 28 inmates and one staff member (OIG, 2021). The Department of Occupational Safety and Health issued nearly 15 violations and fined the prison a total of $421,880 for this deadly incident (Chavez, 2021).
As of February 2021, state facilities reported about 47,826 cases and nearly 200 deaths (Chavez, 2021). There have been 26 staff deaths due to COVID-19.
Reduction measures included sentence credits, pausing new intakes into facilities, court orders, changes in policing practices, and actions on the county level by jail administrators (Prison Policy Initiative, 2021).
Consideration of release for eligible incarcerated individuals appears to happen on a rolling basis in California. Initially, the state expedited the release of 3,500 individuals. Three months later, the California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation issued 12-week credits to individuals who had “no rules violations,” excluding individuals serving life without the possibility of parole or who are on death row (CDCR).
New Jersey and California have more prison facilities and larger populations than New Mexico, yet they successfully employed various methods to reduce crowding. They did not enact these changes quickly enough to prevent deaths in the community. What have we learned from this about how we can protect incarcerated individuals from the ravages of COVID-19? As a baseline, prisons can provide adequate PPE, test staff and incarcerated folks regularly, and provide access to adequate healthcare. Most practical and just would be the drastic reduction of prison populations with decarceration.
Comments