MIM(Prisons) is a cell of revolutionaries serving the oppressed masses inside U.$. prisons, guided by the communist ideology of Marxism-Leninism-Maoism.
Under Lock & Key is a news service written by and for prisoners with a focus on what is going on behind bars throughout the United States. Under Lock & Key is available to U.S. prisoners for free through MIM(Prisons)'s Free Political Literature to Prisoners Program, by writing:
MIM(Prisons) PO Box 40799 San Francisco, CA 94140.
The Governor of California has decided to rename San Quentin “Prison” to “Rehabilitation Center.” This is just one more appeasement given to the millions of Californians who have suffered the injustice of incarceration. Politics has no more place in the justice system than religion has in government. However, the injustice system remains more political than the legislative branch.
Governor Newsom’s play at “restorative justice,” AKA rehabilitation for “some of the less dangerous criminals,” is as false as his smile. For instance, the old lady that was hypnotized as a child by Manson to commit a murder of someone famous has been granted parole (found suitable for release from prison) no less than 15 times by a board of experts in evaluating that kind of thing (Parole Board). However, Governor Newsom, who is not an expert, has taken it upon himself to deny (veto the Parole Board’s decision) each and every time!
That is only one instance where this two-faced politician has denied parole to people. This makes clear that Newsom’s notion of rehabilitation is purely symbolic. Nothing more than the smile; handshake of Satan himself.
Funny, this morning on the mainstream news, Mike Pence is accusing the Manhattan District Attorney of politicizing the law for charging a former President Trump. Funny, politics in the law? How can a prosecutor have so much power to arrest a former President of the United $tates? Funny because these same rich assholes gave that enormous power to prosecutors and police and judges when it was used to arrest the poor man. But now that it is used to arrest the rich man, it is politics?! Did these rich people really think that if they built a monster that the monster could be controlled? Did they really think that the injustice system would only be applied to hurt and kill poor people?
Pence and Trump should not be surprised now. Politics have always been part of the law for the poor man. Despite the image of a blindfold on Lady Justice, the proletariat knows all too well that the law is political. Now the injustice system monster will show its ugly belly to anyone and everyone because that is how much power the pigs have been given.
Perhaps now we can see what California Governor Newsom’s motivations are in pretending to abolish prison. Is he afraid of the monster he created? We all heard him say on T.V. that he is tired of paying the trillions of dollars his prison industrial complex eats up.
His notions of restorative justice are a little misplaced though. Rather than educate prisoners he should be defunding his prison system monster and putting the trillions back into the community – after all he can’t have his cake and eat it too. But that seems too much to ask of the Devil. He already said his rehabilitation is only for some and “not the more dangerous criminals.”
Anyone with half a brain knows that the real cause of crime is poverty. Poverty caused by the trillions of dollars going to the police and prisons and not to the community.
MIM(Prisons) adds: We agree that all prisoners are political. The state paints itself as being an arbiter of blind justice as this comrade states, when in reality it is the tool of one class to use against others. That is why real change requires changing the state from the hands of the bourgeoisie to that of the proletariat, not just shifting tax money around from prisons to more social services.
What’s good to all my Sisterz and Brotherz on the inside. My name is Motivation. I am a certified paralegal incarcerated in the Texas Department of Criminal Justice. I was moved to write this article because I’ve experienced TDCJ’s arbitrary and unconstitutional censorship under Board Policy - 03.91 (BP-03.91), and I’ve also witnessed the same with other men on my unit. Therefore, I’ve filed a §1983 civil complain. See Linzale Greer V. Bryan Collier, et al., 4:21-cv-03976. So, if you are a TDCJ inmate and you are experiencing improper denials because the TDCJ claims the material contains a sexually explicit image, then here’s some information to guide you on defending your rights and legally combating BP-03.91.
Know the Policy
First and foremost, find out what the policy is and how the policy defines a “sexually explicit image.” This is easy. Just go to the law library and request BP-03.91(rev.5). For those of you who may not know, BP-03.91 was revised on 25 June 2021 by the Texas Board of Criminal Justice, and the revision expanded the definition of a sexually explicit image. It essentially bans any image which depicts sexual behavior and/or is intended to sexually arouse. This means TDCJ inmates cannot possess or receive by mail any image deemed sexually explicit. In my view, this is unconstitutional because BP-03.91 is impermissible and vague, over broad, and unreasonable on its face and as applied.
You have the right to appeal
Secondly, whenever the mail room denies material, you shall be provided a sufficient notice in writing and a detailed reason for the denial. You also have the right to appeal the denial to the Director’s Review Committee (DRC) and the DRC shall render its decision within two weeks after receiving the appeal. However, if the material has been previously banned by the DRC, then the denial will be non-appealable. I don’t agree with this practice but the reality is, this is what the TDCJ does. Keep copies of all documents for your records.
Exhaust all available remedies
The Prison Litigation Reform Act (PLRA) requires prisoner’s to “Exhaust all available remedies” within TDCJ before filing a §1983 civil complaint. What this means in some cases is that you must file a step 1 and step 2 grievance before you can go to court. Remember you must exhaust only “Available remedies” and need not exhaust “unavailable remedies.” In my opinion, there are no available remedies within the TDCJ grievance procedure concerning mail room censorship because the grievance office routinely returns inmate grievances and states that the issue is not grievable. Also TDCJ grievance procedures states that inmates may not grieve matters for which other appeal mechanisms exist. Nevertheless, you should still file a step 1 and/or step 2 to be on the safe side. Now, if your step 1 is returned because the issue is not grievable then, you do not have to file a step 2 because there are not available remedies. You can now go straight to court.
Legal Research
Another vital tool is conducting legal research. This is where you roll up your sleeves and get down to business. This will be your prerequisite before filing suit. I didn’t have anyone to hold my hand during my legal research process or to help me file my suit. I can admit that legal research is an arduous task, but more importantly, it’s vital before filing a complaint. However, to point you in the right direction, here’s some relevant case laws that will be important to your fight against TDCJ:
Turner V. Safley, 482 U.S. 78 (1987)
Thornburg V. Abbott, 490 U.S. 401 (1989)
Guajardo v. Estelle, 543 F. Supp. 1373 (S.D. Tex. 1977)
Guajardo v. Estelle, 580 F.2d 748 (5th Cir. 1978)
Guajardo v. Estelle, 568 F Supp. 1354 (S.D. Tex. 1983)
The Guajardo cases specifically applies to TDCJ’s correspondence rules. It will give you historical and present insight on the promulgation of BP-03.91, and how to legally proceed to challenge it in federal court. You should also get very familiar with the PLRA because it controls prisoners litigation and the types of relief we are entitled to. The federal statue can be found at 42 U.S.C. 1997e and 28 U.S.C. 1915A9c). If you need additional case law, just ask the law library to shepardize the above cases for you, and you will find more jewelz than you can use.
Filing a §1983 Civil Complaint
After doing all of the above, your next step is to file a §1983 Civil Complaint. You can file it in either state or federal court depending on your situation. However, because you will be complaining of First Amendment violations under the U.$. Constitution, you should file in federal court. Federal court has jurisdiction over federal law. But again, depending on your case and the facts of your case, sometimes filing in state court is the better route. You will have to research this issue to decide which route fits you.
You can get two §1983 civil complaint forms from the law library. One is for you to send to the court and the other is for your copy. Remember always keep copies of everything you send to the court. The most important part of filing a complaint is stating sufficient facts, which is “enough facts to state a claim to relief.” If you do not state enough facts, there’s a chance your complaint will be dismissed for failure to state a claim upon which relief may be granted.
If you can get an attorney to file your complaint that will be great. However, the reality is, the vast majority of prisoners are left to litigate pro se. So, do your homework and learn the law.
My Last Wordz
So, to all my Brotherz and Sisterz that are willing to legally fight the arbitrary censorship system nationally, I tip my hat to you all and wish you courage, patience, and persistence. Also, for those of you who are in the process and those that have already begun the process of litigation, WE are not doing this just for Us. WE are more on the front line for the voiceless and the ones that may not have the ability to STAND UP. So, I ask that WE ALL DO OUR BEST AND NOTHING LESS! Stay Blessed No Stress!
Sincerely, Motivation Equalz Elevation
MIM(Prisons) adds: We have a more extensive guide to fighting censorship that is applicable for all states that we send to anyone facing censorship of our correspondence or literature. We print the above as a concise summary with some specific info for Texas.
This is also part of an ongoing campaign among Texas prisoners to fight the rewritten BP-03.91 mentioned above. One of the lawsuits around this campaign is Martinez v. TBCJ, et al. #3:21-CV-00337. The judge has since denied to issue summons to each member of the Texas Board of Criminal Justice. This is being appealed. The plaintiff is requesting more support from prisoners in TDCJ in the form of affidavits and/or unsworn declarations. These affidavits/declarations will help make the argument for a statewide injunction of BP-03.91 and can be sent to MIM(Prisons) to forward to the plaintiff.
For years we have offered the Texas Department of Criminal Justice’s (TDCJ’s) Offender Grievance Operations Manual (OGOM) for sale to Texas prisoners. As we’ve reported previously, the manual has been removed from all Texas law libraries. The OGOM is a crucial reference for prisoners to understand and utilize the grievance process to address staff abuse and misconduct. Yet the TDCJ has deemed it illegal for us to mail it to fellow prisoners at their own cost.
Of the many copies we’ve sent to Texas prisoners in the last two years only one was confirmed received. A third were confirmed to have been censored by the TDCJ. The rest are of unknown fate because almost everyone we sent the OGOM to never wrote to us again.
Since we have been told by the TDCJ countless times that they will not allow us to mail their own manual to prisoners (and since this has not proven an effective organizing tool – almost everyone we send it to never contacts us again) we are not going to mail this publication again until someone can successfully challenge the decision by the TDCJ.
We did have one comrade who requested the OGOM on the premise that they will file a lawsuit once it is censored. The OGOM we sent was censored in November, appealed, and denied by the Director’s Review Committee on 6 February 2023 with the justification of “in contradiction with BP-03.91”. The comrade should be prepared to go to court now that the appeals process has been exhausted per the Prison Litigation Reform Act (PLRA). We will report any updates on this battle in ULK.
UPDATE: As we go to press in April 2023, the last OGOM we mailed out was received by the prisoner who ordered it. We are glad to hear it. But for now we are sticking with our decision above.
On 10 January 2023, a new legislative session convenes.
Several state representatives have committed to utilizing proposals
from Texas prisoners to implement reforms. Rep. T. Meza has stood out
with her zeal to end solitary confinement throughout Texas’ prisons and
jails. She previously introduced a bill along those lines that didn’t
make the floor. However, this session with more support from her
colleagues, and with a litany of Texas citizens concerned about this,
things look to possibly end differently.
In conjunction with the efforts of state politicians on the 10th of
January, supporters of this campaign will be protesting on both sides of
the walls. Around the state prisoners are showing their support by
hunger striking. People on the outside will protest in Austin at the
state Capitol.
Lastly, there continues to be civil lawsuits filed against TDCJ and
its practice of indefinite solitary confinement. One of Our comrades has
filed suit and that’s been reported on in previous ULK’s.(1) There is
also Hanson v. Barnett, CA No. 1:21-cv-629-RP-DH, an
extensively detailed complaint filed in the Western District of Texas,
Austin Division.
We encourage all similarly situated people to file 1983 lawsuits, and
if you need advice or assistance the address to Tx Team One’s legal
representative is: 113 Stockholm #1A, Brooklyn, NY 1121
UPDATE As we go to press prisoners are wrapping up
week 2 of the hunger strike. The TDCJ has verified 72 participants,
while supporters say at least twice that number are on strike across the
state prison system. In their defense the state also says that the
number of prisoners in isolation has decreased from 9,186 in 2007 to
3,172 in 2022.(2) We say that is still too much torture!
Texas Prison Reform, the prisoner organization, gave the state 90
days notice before initiating this latest action in their campaign. In
that statement they mirror their demands off the infamous Ashker
v. Governor of California case, which settled for some minor
reforms in how people are put in the Security Housing Units rather than
abolishing the practice altogether. Abolishing torture is a winnable
battle, that continues to gain attention and support. Anything less than
a complete ban on solitary confinement across Texas prisons and jails is
a failure of basic humyn rights.
It is with immense frustration that I write to you on the behalf of
ALL offenders that are in the Indiana Department of Corrections (IDOC)
prisons that are run and operated by The Geo Group Inc. (a private
prison corporation). Prisoners here are receiving “State Pay,” which
consists of the following:
The level of unequal wages from The Geo Group Inc. regarding this
effort is appalling. Indiana Government Officials have unfortunately
failed to address the problem and have allowed the “State Pay” wage
disorder to continue.
In the State of Washington, on 27 October 2021, a Federal Jury
ordered The Geo Group Inc. at the ICE Processing Center (formerly the
Northwest Detention Center) liable under the State Minimum Wage Act
(MWA). In Washington, Attorney General Bob Ferguson filed a lawsuit
alleging that The Geo Group Inc. was violating the state minimum wage
law. The U.S. District Judge Robert Bryan ordered The Geo Group in
Tacoma, Washington to pay their detainees $13.69 hour. These are
immigrant detainees. These immigrant detainees were represented by four
(4) law firms. Names of the law firms are as follows;
Schroeter Goldmark & Bender – Seattle, WA
Open Sky Law PLLC – Kent, WA
Menter Immigration Law PLLC – Seattle, WA
Law Offices of Robert A. Free – Nashville, TN(1)
We believe that our pay here, less than 2% of the pay received in
Washington, is discrimination by The Geo Group Inc. here at the Indiana
Geo Facilities.
On 26 January 2021, President Joseph R. Biden, Jr (D) signed an order
and stated… “to stop corporations from profiting off of incarceration
that is less humane and less safe”. We believe that The Geo Group
Inc. is violating Title VII of the Civil Rights Act, which prohibits
racial discrimination in the workplace. State prisoners may not be
entitled to State Minimum Wage, but there is NO exception for private
for-profit detainees, prisoners, or offenders here. The Geo Group
prioritizes profits over rehabilitation, making us ALL less safe.
Indiana Government Officials and The Geo Group Inc. have to remember
that we are in an inflationary economy. Us prisoners here at The Geo
Group Inc. facilities here in Indiana are getting overwhelmed,
over-worked, and frustrated simply because we do not have the same
income or access to resources as others. We have material needs such as
hygiene, property, food, etc. that cannot be met due to the “State Pay”
wages that have NOT kept up with the exorbitant price of living.
At the Indiana Department of Corrections commissary from the Indiana
Correctional Industries Plainfield, IN Distribution Center, the prices
of our needs are increasing dramatically due to the inflationary factor.
NO prisoner in The Geo Group Inc. private run prison(s) who gets State
Pay should ever cower in fear of his/her employer‘s power to silence
legitimate points of view of their wages.
The State of Indiana and/or The Geo Group Inc. needs to raise the
starting pay wage significantly to a reasonable wage. It is time for the
State of Indiana and/or The Geo Group Inc. to make the financial
adjustments and changes.
We believe that there are laws, ordinances, policies, rules, acts,
statutes, procedures, or even regulations that have been violated or
criminalized by our Constitution in the Fair Labor Standards Act
(F.L.S.A), Administrator of Wages & Hour Division, U.S. Deptartment
of Labor, Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, Labor Management
Relations Act, etc. We know Indiana Government officials Governor Eric J
Holecomb, Commissioner Robert E Carter Jr, Deputy Commissioner/Chief
Financial Officer Dan Brassard, are the individuals who control our
scale wage that makes the financial adjustments and changes in our
“State Pay” for the The Geo Group Inc. to pay our wages.
A raise in starting pay will be a positive thing allowing more
offenders to find satisfaction in their careers and it can allow more
workers to make a living wage and contribute to the broader economy. Our
facility jobs are not a free pass to wipe our slates clean, they are an
acknowledgment that we have to change our lives to be more accountable
and the State of Indiana and/or The Geo Group Inc. is what will allow us
to do that. A productive offender in the Geo Group facility with a fair
wage will perform better work ethics, do things properly, and have
better responsibility.
We as prisoners are entitled to be paid minimum wage or a fair wage
for our labor keeping The Geo Group Inc. facilities up and running, like
preparing and serving food, running laundry, maintenance, landscaping,
mowing, sanitation, administration clerks, etc. We are not asking to be
put on an indefinite leave of absence means or that ALL Geo Group
contracts be terminated. We are exercising our rights, which are workers
rights, and show that we have a right to stand up for each other and for
justice for Geo Group Inc. prisoners who work at their facility and
receive state pay wages.
Please take into consideration, when we do get our “State Pay” the
I.D.O.C takes 15% right off the top. This money goes into our re-entry
account which we receive back upon our release back into the community.
This gives us a little financial assistance. Now here is this Geo Group
Inc. offender who has a C-Pay job, which is $0.15 an hour, works 6.5
hours a day, 5-days a week, comes out to be $19.50 per month. Now the
State takes 15% for re-entry which comes out to $2.89. This leaves you
only $16.32 a week to buy hygiene, property, food, paper, pens, etc. And
if you went to go to medical or dental, that’s a $5.00 charge and the
medication is $5.00.
Please also investigate the Geo Group Inc. in Tacoma, Washington
where they are paying immigrant detainees $13.69 an hour. This is
discriminating against us offenders and manipulating us due to what they
pay us as “State Pay” here in Indiana.
State of Washington Attorney General – Bob Ferguson filed lawsuit
against The Geo Group Inc. in 2017 [Washington v. Geo Group, USDC,
W. Dist. WA. Case No. 3:17-cv-05806RJB]
Detainees filed lawsuit in 2017 with assistance of Schroeter
Goldmark & Bender and Robert Andrew Free [Nwauzor v. Geo Group,
USDC, W. Dist. WA, Case No. C17-5769RJB]
Thank you for your time and patience.
MIM(Prisons) responds: First, we want to remind our
readers that a very small percentage of prisoners in this country are in
private prisons, and most of them are immigrant detention centers like
the one in Washington discussed. As the author above argues, there are
potential legal differences in how labor is considered in private
prisons compared to most prisons. And economically it is very different
because corporations like Geo Group are making money running prisons for
the state, but using basically free labor to do much of that work. This
is a very dangerous combination that economically incentivizes mass
incarceration.
In our 2018
survey of prison labor across the United $tates we found that wages
for maintenance work typically ranged between $0.14 and $0.63 per hour.
Though of course in some states prisoners do not get paid at all for
working to maintain the prisons. This puts Indiana at the low end of
states that do pay. But as this comrade and others have recently pointed
out, inflation is hitting hard in the form of commissary prices.
Therefore to have wages at the low end from 5 years ago is far from
adequate when most prisoners need to buy supplemental hygiene and food,
not to mention minor comforts.
Based on the information we can find online, the Geo Group stopped
having prisoners work right after the court decision, so no prisoners
are getting paid minimum wage. In addition they appealed to delay
back-paying those who had already worked in the past.(2)
Notes: 1. Prison Legal News, December 2021 Vol. 32
No. 12 pg. 26 and April 2022 Vol. 33 No. 4 pg. 30. published by the
Human Rights Defense Center 2. Alanna Madden, 6 October 2022, Ninth
Circuit takes up Geo Group appeal over underpaid detainees,
Courthouse News Service.
In prisons, there are venues for prisoners who have been abused or
treated unfairly or inhumanely. When things like this happen, a prisoner
has a right to sue, but only if he can get his case to court.
The problem is that because of PLRA, or Prison Litigation Reform Act,
it’s much more difficult for a prisoner, even if he is right, to get his
case to court. In essence, PLRA requires prisoners to first exhaust the
Administrative Remedy procedure… or a grievance procedure. In Federal
Prisons, it is known as a BP.
So quick scenario; a Black prisoner is being harassed by white
officers, who: constantly use racial slurs and trash his cell, taking
his family pictures and other valuables. The prisoner tries to file a BP
to get to court. Months pass, with no success, so he tries to take it
straight to court. The court shoots down his claim, because he did not
go through proper procedure of filing a grievance. So, even if the
prisoner is right, the courts won’t acknowledge his lawsuit because he
didn’t go by the rules.
But, is the prison going by them? Let’s talk about that, and how
prisons like USP Tucson are actually breaking the rules, making it very
difficult for prisoners to properly file a lawsuit, because the
Administrative Remedy procedure is horribly flawed.
To begin, let me pull up a statement from a case law, Woodford v.
Ngo 548 US 81, 126, S. Ct 2378, 165 L.Ed 2d 368 (2006). I want to
share with you an argument a prisoner had about the grievance procedure,
and what the argument against it was:
“Respondent contends that requiring proper exhaustion will lead
prison administrators to devise procedural requirements that are
designed to trap unwary prisoners and thus to defeat their claims.
Respondent does not contend, however, that anything like this occurred
in his case, and it is speculative that this will occur in the future.
Corrections officials concerned about maintaining order in their
institutions have a reason for creating and retaining grievance systems
that provide — and that are perceived by prisoners as providing - a
meaningful opportunity for prisoners to raise meritorious grievances.
And with respect to the possibility that prisons might create procedural
requirements for the purpose of tripping up all but the most skillful
prisoners, while Congress repealed the “plain, speedy, and effective”
standard, see 42 U. S. C. §1997e(a)(1) (1994 ed.) (repealed 1996), we
have no occasion here to decide how such situations might be addressed.”
- Justice Samuel Alito
In short, this argument claims that the prisoner was incorrect that
prisons could – and do – make it much harder for prisoners to file a
grievance. After all, if the prisoner can’t file the grievance, he can’t
get to court to sue the officers. In the above case, the Black prisoner
is trying to go through the procedure, meaning he has to exhaust the
grievance procedure, before he can go to the courts. This kinda makes
sense, because one intent of the PLRA is to prevent a lot of frivolous
lawsuits by prisoners.
But in doing this, there is a flaw, one prison has used a cheat in
the procedure. Let me explain:
To begin the BP, or grievance process, a prisoner must first have an
issue… ok, check. The prisoner claims discrimination against officers,
so he has a right to file a grievance. Well, step one, as I use USP
Tucson as an example, is to get what is called a BP-8. This is the
lowest form of the grievance, and it should be available upon
request.
Problem: Here at USP Tucson, it isn’t. The prison makes a policy that
ONLY the Counselor can hand out a BP-8. So, what if the Counselor isn’t
there? You have to wait to find the Counselor, because apparently no
other officer in the world can get that piece of paper. This is already
an obstacle of due process. In other states, you can get a grievance
form from any officer, especially the ones working in your dorm. It
makes sense, they are there all day, why not allow them to pass out the
grievances?
But, if you change the rules, you then regulate how often you pass
out the grievances. Now, you can’t get a BP unless there is a certain
officer there. And if he/she isn’t there, they don’t pass them out. So,
in theory, a Counselor can stiff-arm prisoners from getting a BP, by
making excuses of not being there, or “not having any”.
I say this from a LOT of experience… this happens a lot here at USP
Tucson. Many prisoners are frustrated with the Administrative Remedy
because for most, it simply does not work. The case law implies that all
prisons want to make the grievance procedure available for the
maintaining of order, this is not necessarily true at all.
Another technique for obstructing the grievance procedure is to
simply “lose” the grievance. If you manage to corner the Counselor and
get a BP-8 form, you then have to fill it out and hand it back to them.
Problem: The BP-8 is a single white piece of paper, and once you hand it
to the Counselor, you have NO copy. So how do you know they actually
processed it? In many cases, they don’t. They either “lose” it, or
simply trash it.
So, if you can get past the BP-8, there then is a formal BP-9, which
is on carbon paper. You have to fill out the form (if you’re lucky
enough to even get one), then turn it in to the Counselor (if you can
find “Waldo”), and wait for them to give you a carbon copy, if they
don’t lose it or trash it.
Additionally, the carbon paper on the BP-9 is so poor, you have to
have the strength of the Hulk to press down, to make the copy on the
second page, let alone the third or fourth. So, the BP-9 is almost
worthless after the first copy is torn off.
If you get no responses from the BP-9, then you have to go to the
BP-10, which goes over the heads of staff. But rinse and repeat on the
procedure. It is incredibly difficult to get the forms, when in
actuality, it should ALWAYS be available to any prisoner, at any time,
by most staff members. But staff plays keep away, from prisoners, to
prevent them from getting the BP’s, so they cannot timely file.
I say all this from experience. In February, I filed a BP-9 against
staff in my dorm because they refused to give us chemicals to clean the
showers during a lockdown. Over that period of time, an average of 30
prisoners used each shower cell, and not one drop of chemicals were used
to clean it. Think about that, how many of you would walk into a shower
after 30 other people had already used it? How about 10? Even 5? No one
here should have to do that, but staff knew about it, and did
nothing.
So, I wrote a BP-9 and the Case Manager took it and “turned it in” to
the Counselor, long story short, as of this date, 9 September 2022, I
have heard nothing, and they had only 30 days to respond. My guess, they
threw it away.
This is much like cheating at chess, where we have to match wits
against a facility that seems to be dead set on preventing prisoners
from properly (and legally) filing a grievance. Let us not lose the fact
that the grievance procedure is Constitutionally protected; no officer
or staff has the right to prevent prisoners from filing.
But, if you cannot complete the grievance, you cannot get to court,
because they will claim, as the case law showed, that the inmate didn’t
do the proper work, when in fact he did all he could do, but staff
aggressively prevented him from being able to file. The courts seem to
be blind, or naive, that prison officials would actually HONOR the
grievance system.
Think about that, why would they honor a system that holds their
staff accountable? Do you really think they are going to play fair if,
in the example I gave, a Black Prisoner is trying to sue racist
officers? Do you really think they are going to let the BP’s go through,
when they can block it at every turn?
It’s like cheating at chess, and it’s also why so many grievances
fail, because places like USP Tucson have figured out the loopholes and
are exploiting them to prevent prisoners from their constitutional
rights. It happens all the time, and nobody is doing anything about
it.
I mean, take out my queen, rooks and bishops, and yeah, it’s hard for
me to win too.
MIM(Prisons) adds: This is why comrades in United
Struggle from Within initiated the campaigns “We Demand Our Grievances
are Addressed.” Comrades developed petitions for many states as well as
the Feds to appeal these issues to higher and outside authorities to try
to bypass the problem described above. This campaign has included other
tactics like filing group grievances and even taking other group actions
when grievances are ignored. In many states comrades have called for an
outside review board to address these complaints. But ultimately, there
are no rights only power struggles, so leaving these issues in the hands
of the state will only do so much. The solution to the problem is coming
together as prisoners, as the oppressed and fighting for these rights
every step of the way. That is why we must build peace and unity among
prisoners to get grievances addressed.
[The following complaint was served to the Department of Justice.]
RE: California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation (CDCr) and
Richard J. Donovan Correctional Facility (RJDCF) Systemic Scheme of
Fraud to Misappropriate Federal Funds
I am requesting an investigative audit of all Federal Funds received
by CDCR specifically for mental health programs, services, and
activities here at RJDCF because it is clear that those funds are not
being used for intended purposes. As a participant in CDCR’s Mental
Health Services Delivery System (MHSDS) at the Enhanced Out Patient
(EOP) level of care under the Coleman v. Newsom,
2:90-cv-00520-KJM-DB(E.D.Cal) injunction, MHSDS EOP participants
are required to receive 10 hours a week of ‘structured therapy’, and
receive federal funds to provide such to prisoner participants.
Here at RJDCF EOP there are no specialty, or core, therapy groups
which treat or target the diagnosis and symptoms of MHSDS EOP
participants because mental health care providers continue to tell us
that they’re short of staff and resources.
To create the illusion of providing the 10 hours a week of required
‘structural therapy’ as so CDCR may continue to receive federal funds
for RJDCF EOP program, prisoners regular exercise yard time is being
documented as recreational therapy,(or R.T. yard), where recreational
therapist’s (R.T.’s) assigned to supervise R.T. yards are being
explicitly instructed by CDCR Mental Health Program overseers and
supervisors to embellish R.T. yard notes to give any reader the
impression that the R.T. yard activity itself was/is therapeutic, when
fact is, aside from walking around to record which MHSDS EOP prisoners
attend regular exercise yards, the R.T.’s have no contact with
any of us, yet a significant amount of such fraudulent hours are and
have been used to report compliance.
There are many MHSDS EOP participants who report receiving a regular
schedule to attend particular mental health therapy groups which does
not even exist, as there is no facilitator to provide treatment.
Then, the gist of the described systemic scheme involves CDCR’s use
of a ruse to misappropriate federal funds intended for MHSDS EOP
programs, services, and activities, thereby using such funds to pay the
salaries of its subordinates who directly supervise the EOP,
subordinates who are correctional officers (C.O.s) providing
security.
With the aid of the California Correctional Peace Officers
Association (CCPOA), CDCR and RJDCF has manufactured a need for more
C.O.s in the MHSDS EOP Psychiatric Services Unit (PSU), and divert
federal funds intended for mental health programs, services, and
activities, to custody, while these same custody C.O.s then convert the
PSU into a ‘lounge area’ where surveillance cameras throughout the PSU,
initiated by the Armstrong v. Newsom, no. 94-cv 02307-CW,
injunction, regularly record C.O.s blatant inefficiency, hosting
fiesta’s and other celebratory gatherings, and constant use of big
screen televisions intended for MHSDS EOP groups, to watch sporting
events and other shows. All this occurs in the PSU while on duty in
direct violation of well established CDCR policy at California Code of
Regulations, CCR. Title 15, sections 3394, and 3395.
With this described systemic scheme, C.O.s may continue to exploit
the MHSDS EOP, profit from such, while CDCR continues to orchestrate the
diminishing of mental health programs, services, and activities, blaming
the failure on any and everything else except the truth, which is,
despite being member of a protected class requiring mental health
services and treatment, to CDCR and it’s employees we are only a
financial asset. A prisoner’s mental health challenges are nothing more
than a bargaining chip to use to extort more money from the federal
government, to fund and fuel an already debauch state system.
Please Help Us!
MIM(Prisons) adds: Over 1.1 million people have died
from the COVID-19 pandemic in the United $tates (more than from drug
overdoses). This hit hardest among the elderly, those with pre-existing
health conditions, and since the advent of vaccines, the unvaccinated.
Strong resistance to vaccines among law enforcement has led to
disproportionate deaths. Meanwhile many who could retired early. Like
many industries, the state has struggled to replace the prison staff it
has lost due to the pandemic.
This situation has allowed for extra leverage, from the already
powerful CCPOA in California, meaning many are doing their jobs even
less than before. People are sitting in their cells, people aren’t
receiving care, people are eating sack lunches, and people aren’t
getting access to grievances. And like so many capitalists have done
during the last few years, the CDCR has cashed in on state funds that
they do not deserve.
These are signs of a struggling system. The criminal injustice system
is functioning worse and with less credibility than it has in decades.
Meanwhile, greedy kleptocrats are stealing from the state, weakening it
further. We must study these cracks in the system and find ways to
operate that push the agenda of the oppressed through independent
institutions.
Do you have any case decisions of the stimulus checks. I just
received a check for the first two payments plus interest. It totaled
$1,900.76. Of this amount TDCJ deducted $1,786.11 leaving me with
$114.65.
This is the first money I’ve had where I could go to “store” since I
got here in 2015. The deductions were for medical co-pay, indigent
correspondence and postage, and federal court fees. Another prisoner
told me that there was a federal court decision in Arkansas against the
prison system forcing them to return money deducted from prisoners’
accounts. I’m rough drafting a Step 1 grievance right now to start the
exhaustion process, then I’ll add it to the suit I’ve already started. I
intend to do the same on this censorship of ULK 79 as well. Any
information will help.
Clay v. Director of IRS Mnuchin No4:21-CV-08132-PJH
Sub Class Representative Thomas H. Clay advises all prisoners who
filed for EIP from Oct. 2020 – August of 2021 and did Not receive any
check in mail or Direct Deposit. After filing Form 1040/1040SR or letter
with SSI# and copy of such to show proof of filing; then write To:
United States District Court Northern District of California Oakland
Division Attn: Hon. Clerk/Presiding Judge 1301 Clay Street Ste 400 S
Oakland California 94612-5212
If you are filing the following criteria below:
1.Non-disabled or physically or mentally impaired prisoner in State
or Federal Prison Institution in the United States
2.Correctly filing legal letters to IRS or 1040/1040SR Form 2019/2020
from October 15,2020 thru tax season of January – August 17, 2021
3.Utilizing only Institutional Regular Legal/or Indigent Legal Mail
System in State of Federal Prisons.
Who did not receive any payment from IRS of EIP #1 #2
#3
5.In the form of “Check in Mail” or “Direct Deposit to Account”.
6.Who can “Prove upon Request” proof of the correct timely filing by:
copies of letters to the IRS office in your State area, Prison Mail Room
Record of Legal Mail logged letters showing IRS address. Indigent
mailing file showing letter sent to IRS or 1040/1040SR copies or
responses from IRS during that period from any of its offices.
7.And you were not issued any checks for EIP #1 $600.00 EIP #2
$1200.00 or CVRP/EIP #3 $1400.00 totaling $3,200.00
The court is reviewing Contempt of Court Order and Sub Class Action
from prior suit *Scholl v. Mnuchin that does not protect the rights to
amount of payment withheld from prisoners in a discriminatory manner by
IRS.
Section 272(d)(2) of the Consolidated Appropriations Act provides
that the second round of stimulus checks ‘shall not be transferable or
assignable, at law or in equity, and no applicable payment shall be
subject to execution, levy, attachment, garnishment, or other legal
process, or the operation of any bankruptcy or insolvency law.’ This
means that this round of stimulus checks may not be garnished to cover
overdue debts by federal or state prisons.
Scholl v. Mnuchin, et al. No.4:20-cv-05309-PJH ND Cal.; Appeal
Docket No. 20-16915 9th Circuit Court of Appeals ruled in favor of
prisoners getting stimulus checks while incarcerated. The checks in
question should not be confused with the most recent $1400 checks under
current President Joseph Biden. It was the $1200 and $600 checks under
President Donald Trump that were ruled on.
The Court ordered ADC to place any federal relief and stimulus funds
in a sequestered account if it continues to confiscate those funds. It
must maintain records of how much money it confiscates from each
prisoner and what amount is paid for court fines, fees, costs, and
restitution. While ADC may return the confiscated excess funds to
prisoners, it may not otherwise disburse those funds until the end of
the lawsuit. See: Lamar v. Hutchinson, USDC, ED AR, Case
No. 4-21-cv-00529 (2021).
The Court then turned to decide whether confiscation of the money was
a violation of procedural due process. It found no violation when it
came to confiscation for the purpose of paying off court fines, fees,
costs, or restitution.
It did, however, find a violation when it comes to diverting the
excess funds to the inmate welfare fund and the Inmate Care and Custody
Account. The Court noted there were no post deprivation remedies
available, for the ADC’s grievance procedure provides a challenge to
“issues controlled by State or Federal law or regulation” a
“non-grievable issue.” The Court concluded the confiscation of the
monies did not violate substantive due process or the Takings
Clause.
We hope this information is helpful. While we still stand by the
conclusion that these stimulus checks are an attempt to buy off the U$
population at the expense of the third world, we won’t hold unrealistic
notions about how this money can be used for our goals of
Anti-Imperialism and building up USW. We also have a censorship pack
available as well, having relevant caselaw and regulations for fighting
censorship on the legal front.
Notes: Prison Legal News, Nov 1 2021, Preliminary Injunction
Bars Arkansas from Confiscating Prisoners’ COVID Stimulus
Money
“No man can tell the intense agony which is felt by the slave, when
wavering on the point of making his escape. All that he has is at stake…
The life which he has may be lost, and the liberty which he seeks may
not be gained.” -Frederick Douglass, 1845
We are made to persist. That’s how we find out who we are.
The Khufu Foundation thanks you for being part of the solution! The
following is an update on the lawsuit, Hicks v. Guiterrez, et al, 6:
22-cv-134. It contains both good and bad news. The bad news is that
the District Court has dismissed the case with prejudice, which was not
unexpected. The good news is the cases he used are not on point, plus he
failed to thoroughly address an issue of First Impression “The
Cumulative Effect.”
For those of you who have tablets, go to law library and read exactly
what the District Judge has to say for yourself. We have given notice of
appeal, and await a word from the 5th Circuit giving us a number to seek
COA. Before we give our argument in brief, let us give you a word
directed to the right that can save you a few dollars as well as allow
you to move much faster through the Courts than the §1983. We have
learned that these same issues can be attacked with an application for
Writ of Habeas Corpus – see the tablet has a wealth of information,
particularly the Law Library; there are literally thousands of cases at
your fingertips. Yet, the tablet can turn you into a zombie, who feeds
on nothing but music and movies.
Now, here is what we will take to the 5th Circuit:
Whether the Cumulative Effect of the Texas Constitution, Texas
State Law Statutes, the Administrative Procedures Act, and the Rules and
Regulations of the board combine to give a Reasonable Expectation that
the parole procedure will be conducted with a modicum of just and fair
treatment – see Wilkonson v Austin, 125 S.Ct. 2384
Whether Applicant was denied Equal Protection of the Law as
compared to other prisoners who can review their parole-file/transcript,
because they can afford an attorney, see Griffin v Illinois, 76 S
Ct. 585 and Register v Thaler, 681 F. 3d 623
Whether Applicant has been denied a fair and just parole hearing
where the defendants fail to follow the APA and their own rules without
meeting the Constitutional minimum regarding parole review – see
Parrat v Taylor, 101 S. Ct. 1909 and Leggett v Williams,
277 F. App’x 498, 500 (5th Cir. 2008)
Whether Applicant was denied a meaningful participation in his
parole hearings when he was not allowed to review his parole file to
challenge all false and/or derogatory information contained therein,
when Board Members have admitted that there is often false and/or
inaccurate information in parole-files. – see Johnson v TDCJ, 910
F.Supp. 1208
This information is supplied in the hope that each of you will do
your research and continue to fight.
North TX AIPS adds: This is a follow up to Texas
Prisoners Launch Attack on Parole System printed in Under Lock
& Key 78. This lawsuit is an attempt for parole reform in Texa$
and was launched May of last year (2022). It is in response to
continuous denial of parole for many prisoners based on commitment of
the crime, rather than behavior while incarcerated, and to argue that
the Board Members are not protected against suit according to the Ex
Parte Young Doctrine:
“In determining whether the doctrine of Ex Parte Young avoids an 11th
Amendment bar to suit, a federal court need only conduct a
straightforward inquiry into whether the complaint alleges an ongoing
violation of federal law and seeks relief properly characterized as
prospective.” Const. Amend.11 - See Verizon MD. Inc v. Public
Service Commission of Maryland, 535 U.S. 635, 122 S.Ct. 1753 and
McCarthy ex rel Travis V. Hawkins, 385 F.3d 407, 412 (5th Cir.
2000)
While some of the demands as previously stated are in line with the
Juneteenth Freedom Initiative, as revolutionaries our focus is on the
building on independent institutions of the masses, rather than working
for parole reform. We are building on our Re-Lease on Life program and
encourage anyone whose interested to write us and start to work on study
and strategy for revolution.
The truth has finally out come from the darkness and into the light:
people housed within social isolation by the U.$. criminal justice
system are not considered persons protected by the U.$. Constitution,
international agreements against torture, or Human Rights. States across
the United $tates are actively deploying systems and protocols that
suspend persons held in custody, in social isolation from Amerikan
society, away from the protections of law, due process and order.
The criminal justice trend is to eliminate prisoners’ freedom to use
and access Postal Services. It’s like the U.$. Postal Service has
entered into a private agreement with the criminal justice system to
deny mailing services of the traditional sense from all imprisoned.
Correction departments across the U.$. have engaged in concerted acts
of sedition, substituting systems disguised as fun helpful tablet
gadgets and video visitation programs for actual social interactions.
Gone are the days of free assembly/press/congregation and religious
exercise. Now persons are free to shut up, and be retaliated against for
even hoping to benefit from the protections of the U.$ Constitution’s
freedom of speech.
Even the freedom to grieve against the state has been frozen. In
California it is being done under the departments decision to cease
classical mailing processes for email services made available by the Global
Tel Link security corporation. CDCR is planning to phase out all
traditional mailing services in exchange for heavily restricted online
access.
The move by CDCR involves outsourcing labour facilities and
redirecting institutional service agreements to security bonds
controlled by state agencies outside of the department’s jurisdiction,
for example, the Department of Health and Human Services. The moves are
being made under the cover of darkness, better yet the cover of claims
to public safety, and the Center for Disease Control acts as the
shelter. All in the name of mental health and hospitality for Amerikans
with disability? From prisoners of circumstance to residences of
outpatient facilities too doped out of their minds to even know the
value of a traditional letter.
CDCR has began phasing out traditional mailing services using its
Inmate 602 Grievance Procedures, institutions have eliminated
traditional answering and mailing procedures for residence. Not only
does the department rely on a new SOMS computer scanning system that
forecloses any original writings and supporting information attached to
an Inmate grievance, but it is enforcing computer software coding, by
way of its Global-Tel Link tablet emails, that requires California
prisoners to email grievances. This last part connects to the criminal
justice system in the late requirements of U.S District Courts in
California for 1983 Civil complaints filed by prisoners be done via
email. If an individual can’t even write a simple complaint any longer,
it begs to question what is the U.$. standing in justice?
Technological advances are all good and all, but are the residence of
these penal institutions still citizens of the United Snakes of Amerika?
Or does their custody lie somewhere else?
It is important that the public be aware of this very serious dynamic
between themselves, the state and those in custody of state agencies
like CDCR. The state is allowing for those in the custody of CDCR to be
stripped of their civil rights and it all is being done in the name of
the people, under the color of law. Silence is not an answer to the
claims set forth against the people.
MIM(Prisons) adds:Prison Legal News (PLN)
just reported some interesting stats following the Florida Department of
Corrections completing its move to digitizing all regular
correspondence. They found that 1% of the contraband found by the
Florida DOC was through routine mail. Meanwhile, in July 2022, the
Legislative Finance Committee noted that after New Mexico shifted to
digitized mail there was zero effect on the amount of drug use in their
prisons.(1) These statistics back up what we’ve been reporting on
anectdotally for years – that mail restrictions and visitation shut
downs have had no impact on the influx of drugs into prisons across the
country.(2)
According to PLN prison systems and jails in 27 states have
switched to digitized mail. With California gearing up to follow suit,
it seems the tides have shifted in that direction.
Like body cams, some prisoners have asked for digital grievance
systems so the C.O. you submit it too can’t just drop it in the
trashcan. Otherwise, we agree with this comrade’s concerns. Social
isolation is a violation of basic humyn rights and humyn needs. Visits,
phone calls, letter, photos and cards are a must for any system that
hopes to rehabilitate.