NCJ Number
200200
Journal
Harvard Law Review Volume: 116 Issue: 6 Dated: April 2003 Pages: 1555-1706
Date Published
April 2003
Length
152 pages
Annotation
This article discusses the implications and outcomes of the Prison Litigation Reform Act (PLRA) that was passed by Congress in 1996.
Abstract
The PLRA was a result of discontent on the part of various States to the mounting lawsuits being waged against them by prisoners. Driven by the steep increase in the number of prisoners in State and Federal institutions during the 1980’s and 1990’s, coupled with an active and influential prisoners’ rights movement, civil litigation complaints brought by inmates in Federal court steadily rose over the course of the 1980’s and 1990’s. In 1995, inmates filed 40,000 Federal civil lawsuits. The PLRA worked to discourage inmate lawsuits by placing filing fees on every inmate bringing a lawsuit, requiring inmates to exhaust all administrative remedies prior to filing lawsuits, and limiting damages and attorneys’ fees. Since its passage, lawsuits filed by inmates dropped by 43 percent in 2001, at the same time that nationwide inmate populations increased by 23 percent. This article discusses the implications and effects of the PLRA on inmates and the justice system. Section 1 examines inmate litigation trends, including the subject matter of litigation, litigation rates, and how inmate cases are processed. Section 2 examines outcomes of inmate cases prior to the passage of the PLRA, including issues related to legal rights, access to courts, and obstacles to settlements. Section 3 focuses on how the PLRA changed the face of inmate litigation by imposing filing fees, limiting damages, and placing administrative constraints on inmates. Section 4 describes how the PLRA has affected the justice system by shrinking case dockets and decreasing the success rate of inmate cases. Section 5 takes a broad look at the implications of the PLRA for the justice system as a whole and explores the meaning of deterrence. Finally, section 6 offers conclusions that suggest the justice system indeed needed repair, but the PLRA was not the best solution for the problem.