Deterring Prison Versus Police Civil Rights Violations: Legal Challenges, Public Policy, and Institutional Failures

Authors

Natalie Kemper, University of Miami School of Law

Document Type

Notes and Comments

Abstract

The status of incarcerated individuals falls categorically below that of non-incarcerated individuals in our society, yet most would agree they deserve protection from governmental abuses of power. This Note evaluates the current legal, institutional, political, and societal circumstances that contribute to the immense difficulties faced by individuals alleging civil rights violations under the Eighth Amendment, primarily through the avenue of U.S.C. § 1983. Due to similarities in civil rights claims, this Note compares the barriers faced by incarcerated plaintiffs to those encountered in police misconduct claims, highlighting key discrepancies that undermine accountability and deterrence.

A primary barrier is the significantly higher burden of proof imposed on convicted prisoners, whose claims must satisfy the stringent Eighth Amendment subjective intent standard. Further complicating justice for prisoners are procedural obstacles such as the Qualified Immunity Doctrine and the Prison Litigation Reform Act (PLRA). These legal and procedural challenges are compounded by severe evidentiary difficulties stemming from the inherently closed and isolated nature of prisons. Cumulatively, these factors, coupled with a lack of public awareness, result in an absence of deterrence for correctional officers' misconduct, as financial and employment consequences are largely non-existent. The violations and inhumane treatment of incarcerated individuals will remain largely unchecked unless major legal and policy reforms rooted in justice and basic human rights are enacted to bring greater transparency, accountability, and independent oversight to correctional institutions.

Recommended Citation

Natalie Kemper, Deterring Prison Versus Police Civil Rights Violations: Legal Challenges, Public Policy, and Institutional Failures, 16 U. MIA Race & Soc. Just. L. Rev. 85 (2025)
Available at: https://repository.law.miami.edu/umrsjlr/vol16/iss1/5