After decades of enduring almost unimaginable barbarism and cruelty, a small cadre of brave prisoners succeeded in bringing the brutal Pennsylvania Department of Corrections into court. That was way back in 1970.
For years the prisoners, calling themselves the 'Imprisoned Citizens Union,' struggled in court. They managed to prove the inhumane viciousness of their prison keepers, the pathological manias of the guards and the social blight that the Pennsylvania prisons had become.
Realizing that they were beaten and that they'd have to pay enormous cash damage awards, the thugs of the Department of Corrections entered into a contract with the prisoner victims. The terms of the contract were fairly straightforward. In exchange for the prisoners giving up the damage money, early release and other 'good and valuable considerations,' Corrections pledged to treat the prisoners decently...or as decently as Corrections could bring itself to behave.
The contract was accepted by the court as a settlement of the prisoners' suits and, in 1976, it was formalized as a 'consent decree.' For 21 years the contract (now called The ICU Consent Decree has been an annoying hindrance to the insidious abuses and excesses of Corrections.
Now it's the 90's and Corrections is sick of being compelled to treat prisoners decently. This is the era of Ridge and cruelty, of Republicans and the new slavery, of the neo-Nazi state and its fetish for victimizing the under-class.
In September 1997 Corrections asked Federal Judge Jan E. Dubois in Philadelphia to let them slither out of their contract. Their Chief Counsel, Sarah Vandenbraak, filed an amazing brief trying to convince the judge that it's not necessary to hold Corrections to its word or to the decent treatment of prisoners. Yes, it's true, lawyers will do and say just about anything for a buck!
Sarah's brief is rife with the typical Corrections' misrepresentations. If Corrections is nothing else, it's obsessed with the big-lie. Their brief whines about having to give prisoners' medical care, not that decent medical care is available now. It goes on to complain about legal books and legal papers. Why should prisoners be allowed to defend themselves or their interests?
One of the most amusing sections is Sarah's argument against letting prisoners continue to possess some personal clothing. Corrections' imaginative brief perpetuates the lie that prisoners at Pittsburgh used civilian clothing to help affect their ingenious escape. Of course, it's not true, but it makes a clever legal deception.
There are now 5 citizens in prison cages for every one who was imprisoned in 1976 when the decency-contract was adopted. Now there's five times as much need for the protection that the contract affords. The mentality of oppression and viciousness is even worse now than it was 21 years ago.
Sarah and her Corrections clients feel that they can squirm out of their contract because of a law enacted by the right-wing control-freaks in Congress. The 'PLRA' for 'Prison Litigation Reform Act (18 USC 3626) purports to allow the government to escape its solemn agreement with its citizens.
The prisoners hope that they have a chance to cling to the buffer that the consent decree gives them to the worst of the Corrections jackals. The Constitution has a clause which seems to make contracts binding even on a fanatical government. Corrections hates things like the Constitution. It's so damn democratic!
Hopefully, the Honorable Judge Dubois (12613 United States Courthouse, 601 Market Street, Philadelphia, PA 19106) will see through Corrections' deceit.
Return to News Items Menu
Return to HOMEPAGE.