The Cruelty Is the Point: How the Extreme Psychological Effects and Punitive Ineffectiveness of Solitary Confinement Culminate in an Unconstitutionally Disproportionate Punishment

Authors

• Zachary Bosak

Abstract

(Excerpt)

This Note will propose that solitary confinement can be wholly abolished under the Eighth Amendment to the Constitution. This Amendment provides in full that “[e]xcessive bail shall not be required, nor excessive fines imposed, nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted.” When taken in a broad, isolated sense, the meaning of and purpose behind this Amendment are straightforward and uncontroversial; the founders meant to protect Americans from “methods of punishment” considered unreasonably severe and inhumane. However, when one attempts to place this Amendment within the context of a legal issue, its clarity erodes, and questions arise as to its applicability. Specifically, the question of what constitutes “cruel and unusual punishment” has been subject to significant jurisprudence over time.

Part I of this Note will delve into the background of the issue, with sections exploring the frequency of solitary confinement; the severity of the negative psychological effects, fiscal wastefulness, and punitive inefficiency of the system; and how this practice can be classified within both the statutory definition of torture and the current caselaw surrounding the Eighth Amendment. Part II will center around proposed solutions to this issue and address potential counterarguments.