ENG - College Writing 4 In this course, students acquire the writing competence necessary for conducting and presenting research. A variety of assignments, beginning with personal reflections, build upon one another, as students develop ideas that respond to, critique, and synthesize the positions of others.
How Charging Inmates Fees Behind Bars May Violate the Excessive Fines Clause Lauren-Brooke Eisen looks at the historical and present day practice of prisons charging inmates fees for costs related to their incarceration, including related case law. Introduction Inthe United States saw the birth of the first correctional fee law when Michigan enacted legislation authorizing counties to charge sentenced jail inmates for the costs of medical care.
However, less work has been done to challenge the legality of this practice, perhaps because courts have historically been so unfriendly to these types of challenges. This essay proceeds in three parts. Part II provides a brief overview of the historical and present day uses of Management challenges in criminal justice essay fees along with a discussion of policies advocates cite when arguing to eradicate these practices.
Part III then reviews the limited case law in this area and suggests new litigation strategies using the Excessive Fines Clause of the Eighth Amendment. History of Inmate Fees A.
Unfortunately, no national database exists that would indicate how many jurisdictions across the country utilize this practice.
The first rationale, already discussed in this article, is that the revenue stream helps to offset expensive incarceration budgets. The second rationale is punitive in nature and focuses on teaching inmates a lesson for their criminal acts. Some policy makers and correctional officials make the argument that charging inmates for their stay is grounded in rehabilitation or deterrence.
However, because it is often difficult and costly to collect the revenue, many commentators have dismissed the idea of charging inmates for their stay behind bars as political grandstanding. One might ask why law-abiding citizens should be burdened with the cost of incarceration when they never use that service, or why taxpayers should be further victimized by supporting inmates who have the wherewithal to pay.
Policy Objections There are myriad reasons why charging inmates is a shortsighted public policy. Perhaps one of the most compelling reasons not to charge these fees is that citizens chose to remove these individuals from society.
Therefore, collectively, our society needs to bear the brunt of the fiscal costs that feeding, housing, and providing medical attention to this group of people brings with it.
Shifting even just a portion of the burden of the cost to inmates, eighty percent of whom are indigent, 57 is not only bad fiscal policy, but also provides less incentive to policymakers to keep down costs associated with incarceration.
Advocates contend that charging individuals fines in jail imposes an unnecessary burden on inmates, disproportionally affecting indigent populations 58 along with racial and ethnic minorities, 59 all of whom are disproportionately represented among the prisoner population.
Advocates further point out that these policies generate barriers to reentry 60 and encourage a cycle of poverty that is difficult to escape. For example, inmates and correctional staff who have contact with an inmate who forgoes a sick visit are all in danger of contracting a communicable disease.
If a prison fee delays an inmate seeking treatment, consequences may reverberate throughout a correctional facility. Incarcerated people who re-enter society are less likely to successfully reintegrate with hundreds of dollars in fines hanging over their heads.
A number of agencies have noted their lack of staff capacity to effectively monitor and collect fees. Litigants have raised a litany of constitutional challenges to health care fees, 68 booking fees, 69 room-and-board fees, 70 and charges incurred while inmates were held pre-trial.
In almost all cases, the courts have sided with the agencies that implement these practices. Many litigation strategies - from challenges against cruel and unusual punishment to arguments about equal protection - have proven unsuccessful.
However, from this unfavorable case law advocates opposing these fees have overlooked doctrinal openings to conduct challenges under the U.
This essay will specifically explore the potential to challenge inmate fees under the Excessive Fines Clause of the Eighth Amendment.
Advocates, in particular, would benefit from utilizing litigation as part of their reform strategy. Although successful in getting their objections written about by the media, news articles have a limited ability to change these practices.
The media covers these stories relentlessly, but advocates see almost no impact as more and more jurisdictions implement fee practices each year.
Litigation utilizing the Excessive Fines Clause offers a unique opportunity to argue that charging inmates fees while incarcerated violates the U.
However, some limitations on fine amounts are found in the Magna Carta. However, to the extent that the Supreme Court has interpreted the Excessive Fines Clause, it has done so primarily in civil and criminal forfeiture cases over the last two decades.
Inin Alexander v.
The amount of the forfeiture must bear some relationship to the gravity of the offense that it is designed to punish. Lebanon County Correctional Facility.
Further Litigation Inquiries New constitutional arguments can bolster advocacy by questioning the legitimacy of jail fees for prisoners. Particularly, academics and creative litigants should look carefully at the cases that have discussed whether fees in jail are rehabilitative or punitive.
In the forfeiture line of cases, the Supreme Court has held that the amount of forfeiture must bear some relationship to the gravity of the offense that it is designed to punish.
Supreme Court has noted that the history of the Excessive Fines Clause, although pointing toward a proportionality view, does not suggest how disproportionate to the gravity of the offense a fine must be in order to be deemed constitutionally excessive.
Litigants should continue to argue that there are numerous cases where inmate fees are disproportional to their crime. Another strong challenge to these practices lies with litigants who can challenge fees where officials have described their intent as punitive.Criminal Justice and Security Goals and Challenges.
When Would Different Research Methods be Appropriate in Criminal Justice and Security Management Research Introduction The social sciences employ three main types of research methodologies: qualitative research, quantitative research, and mixed-methods research.
More about Criminal. Challenges of Leading Groups in Criminal Justice Leaders of criminal justice organizations have complex challenges that require creative and innovative approaches and solutions. Future leaders in corrections will need to consider how to respond to and incorporate the benefits of various trends.
The Criminal Justice System in USA - The Criminal Justice System in the United States of America was established with noble intentions.
The basis of the system can be traced back from the first book of the Bible Genesis, and the story of Cain and Able. The academic field of criminal justice explores how laws are created, interpreted, and enforced within different countries, states, municipalities, and other jurisdictions.
Management in a criminal justice agencies is a challenge all its own, managing smaller groups that carry specified responsibility within an organization carry different set of challenges.
We will write a custom essay sample on Management Challenges in Criminal Justice specifically for you. Challenges in the Justice System: Case Management of Drug Crimes Words Jan 7th, 2 Pages The question of whether drug abuse should be viewed as a medical issue, a criminal issue, or a unique combination of both remains hotly-debated question, particularly in regard to juvenile offenders.