Skip to main content

Obstacles to Proving 24-Hour Lighting is Cruel and Unusual Under Eighth Amendment Jurisprudence

By December 1, 2022January 17th, 2023No Comments

Abstract: Twenty-four-hour lighting causes sleep deprivation, depression, and other serious disorders for incarcerated individuals, yet courts often do not consider it to be cruel and unusual. To decide if prison conditions violate the Eighth Amendment’s prohibition against cruel and unusual punishment, courts follow a two-part inquiry that requires examining the intent of prison officials (known as the subjective prong) as well as the degree of seriousness of the alleged cruel or unusual condition (the objective prong). Incarcerated individuals often file complaints challenging 24-hour lighting conditions. Whether they succeed on these claims may depend on the circuit in which they reside. Judges have broad discretion in deciding what type of evidence satisfies each prong of the inquiry, and there is great room for differing opinions and outcomes based on how judges view a particular set of facts.

This unpredictability and inconsistency in outcomes could be improved by eliminating the subjective component of the Eighth Amendment test and focusing solely on objective harm resulting from constant illumination, similar to the approach taken with respect to reasonableness inquiries under the Fourth Amendment. Shifting the focus of the analysis to whether 24-hour lighting causes a sufficiently serious deprivation of basic human rights would result in a more objective approach and provide plaintiffs with a clearer understanding of the proof needed to secure a favorable outcome. A plaintiff who can show objectively serious or extreme harm suffered as a result of constant illumination should prevail on an Eighth Amendment challenge.

Download the Full Article

Other Articles from WLR Print Edition

March 1, 2023 in PRINT EDITION

Evaluating Congress’s Constitutional Basis to Abolish Felony Disenfranchisement

Abstract: In the past three years, members of Congress unsuccessfully introduced a series of federal voting rights legislation, most recently the Freedom to Vote Act. One goal of the legislation…
Read More
March 1, 2023 in PRINT EDITION

Law’s Credibility Problem

Abstract: Credibility determinations often seal people’s fates. They can determine outcomes at trial; they condition the provision of benefits, like social security; and they play an increasingly dispositive role in…
Read More
March 1, 2023 in PRINT EDITION

Beyond Title VII: Litigating Harassment by Nonemployees Under the ADA and ADEA

Abstract: Employees in the United States are protected from unlawful harassment that rises to the level of a “hostile work environment.” Federal circuits recognize that employers could be liable under…
Read More