Inmate Legal Rights Violation: NYCLU Files Lawsuit Against New York

The New York Civil Liberties Union (NYCLU) has filed a lawsuit against the New York State Department of Corrections and Community Supervision (DOCCS), claiming that the department has unlawfully restricted incarcerated individuals' access to legal counsel and the courts during a series of strikes by correction officers. The lawsuit, filed on behalf of Prisoners' Legal Services of New York (PLS), seeks the restoration of incarcerated individuals' rights to communicate with their attorneys and access the judicial system.

Background: Strikes and Impact on Prison Conditions

The strikes, which began on February 17, 2025, have spread to nearly all of New York's 42 state prisons. Correction officers are protesting conditions within the department, which has led to disruptions in daily prison operations, including limited access to medical care, food, and staffing. There have been reports of individuals not receiving necessary medications such as insulin and blood pressure treatments. Additionally, at least seven individuals have died since the strikes began, including some who reportedly experienced mistreatment by prison staff.

As the strikes have continued, legal communications between incarcerated individuals and their attorneys have been suspended at numerous facilities. The NYCLU argues that these restrictions violate the constitutional right of incarcerated individuals to communicate with legal counsel, a right protected under the First Amendment. They also state that the situation is impeding PLS's ability to provide legal assistance to clients and prospective clients.

Read More: Prison Protests Strand New York Inmates Without Essentials

NYCLU Files Lawsuit Against NY Over Legal Communications Restrictions Amid Correction Officer Strikes

The NYCLU’s lawsuit focuses on the contention that the suspension of legal communications impedes incarcerated individuals' access to justice. The ability to communicate with attorneys is essential for ensuring that incarcerated individuals can challenge conditions in prison, file time-sensitive legal motions, and receive counsel regarding serious issues such as allegations of abuse or inadequate medical care.

Megan Porter, a staff attorney at NYCLU, emphasized the urgency of the situation, stating,

“Every day that passes without counsel is a day that people are being denied their fundamental right to hold their jailers accountable for not receiving necessities like medication and adequate nutrition.”

Impact on Clients and Legal Advocacy

PLS, which provides legal representation to individuals incarcerated in New York state prisons, has outlined several cases where the inability to communicate with clients has led to delays and potential harm. One example involves a client at Mid-State Correctional Facility who was reportedly assaulted by correctional officers and has an upcoming legal filing deadline on March 20, 2025. PLS attorneys have been unable to contact the individual, thus hindering their ability to provide timely legal support.

Read More: 11 Prison Staff On Leave, Mid-State Inmate Who Died Identified

Other cases involve clients with medical needs or safety concerns. Due to the suspension of legal visits and calls, PLS has been unable to adequately address urgent issues, including allegations of abuse and lack of proper medical care.

Call for Immediate Action

PLS and the NYCLU are requesting that the court restore the ability for incarcerated individuals to communicate with their attorneys. The lawsuit calls for an injunction to lift the suspension of legal calls and visits at DOCCS facilities, arguing that the lack of communication is hindering the legal rights of incarcerated individuals and affecting their well-being. The plaintiffs also seek an order for timely processing of legal mail.

Read More: Correction Officers Strike: How Much Is It Costing New Yorkers?

Conclusion

The NYCLU’s lawsuit seeks to address the intersection of correction officer strikes and the constitutional rights of incarcerated individuals. It highlights the importance of maintaining legal access during times of disruption in order to make sure that individuals can protect their rights and address potential violations. The outcome of the case could have broader implications for how incarcerated individuals access legal counsel and the courts in the future.