U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government, Department of Justice.

NCJRS Virtual Library

The Virtual Library houses over 235,000 criminal justice resources, including all known OJP works.
Click here to search the NCJRS Virtual Library

Constitutional Limits on the Power To Restrict Access to Prisons - An Historical Re-Examination

NCJ Number
100021
Journal
Harvard Civil Rights-Civil Liberties Law Review Volume: 18 Issue: 2 Dated: (Summer 1983) Pages: 409-455
Author(s)
L G Leverson
Date Published
1983
Length
46 pages
Annotation
This historical analysis of the modern penitentiary's development and U.S. Supreme Court decisions in cases concerning access to criminal trials (Richmond Newspapers, Inc. v. Virginia and Globe Newspaper Co. v. Superior Court) argues that the first amendment also creates a right of public access to prisons.
Abstract
The holdings of Richmond Newspapers and Globe are in tension with Supreme Court cases decided in the 1970's that restricted public access to prisons. Historical analysis, however, shows that the first amendment was adopted against a backdrop of public access to English and American jails. The founders of the American penitentiary were aware of the importance of publicity in preventing abuse and made specific provision for public inspections. This historical openness of the penal system fulfills the first element of the Richmond/Globe test for a right of access which states that access to criminal trials is constitutionally mandated because trials historically have been open. The paper contends that the demonstrated value of access to prisons in facilitating the exercise of prisoners' rights to petition meets the second element of the Richmond/Globe test, that access preserves the fairness and integrity of the judicial process. The paper also discusses the Court's treatment of prison access cases; development of the right to petition; and principles for formulating procedures to govern prison access while protecting prison security, rehabilitation, and inmate privacy. 196 footnotes.