accordingly i'd like to focus my argument this morning on mr grissom due process claim the pre court recognized over a century ago that solitary confinement bears a further market terror over a prisoner capital sentence and justices of the court have a knowledge the profound psychological and physiological damage that is caused by this form of punishment mr rhythm come before you today having minutes spoke to that dangerous he was exposed to that regime despite the fact that the friends own records reflect the fact that he no longer pose a security risk and that he deserved the opportunities are released to the behavioral  officials did not provide mr grissom with meaningful reviews of that confinement as required by the constitution turning to the clearly established law point contrary to the defendant's argument defendants require mr griffin what is what is the the most in your evaluation of this case the most severe infraction that a to cause or we get in time from the cellphone violations specially and from the initial incident in one thousand nine hundred six the farther away we get in time from those instances the more tenuous the relationship between the incident and the punishment  we found no reversible error in the district court's analysis which included essential things that are unchanged between the time of the events in that case and now for that these conditions were a tip of an extreme by wilkinson that's inconsistent with our saying the district court didn't commit reverse where finding the opposite i don't see how we can be that was five years ago or someone was really thirteen yeah i learned to change by the time of the in this we have we have seven circuits that have analyze the conditions of confinement life mr grissom's and it's not surprising that there are not more of these cases or many of these cases i think your honor the probably well aware of the fact that there are mercifully few examples of terms of solitary confinement there as long as mr grissom recently  here is very disturbing but what we said before wasn't on the length of confinement issue it was whether the conditions are extreme and i thought that was related to the restrictions on his activity at the time that not how long those restrictions are in place i'm i wrong about the i don't disagree with your honor but i think that under wilkinson and under other because otherwise someone who's just in prison for twenty years could say that that's due process has been violated i discover it's gotta be something it's got to be worse than being in prison solitary confinement well you make a distinction well under the demographers there are a number of factors that need to be looked at but if the conditions are extreme if it is just the same conditions as the general population for instance so if you have somebody on people psychologically i mean there may be good reasons to be more restrictive about solitary confinement if we had we'd get the merits of this case i'd have some put in prison for basically their whole life there are no limits to the possibility of that person spending that entire time and s own conduct and the actions that they perform it's your position that based on that condo they could be held in consistent solitary confinement for their entire life th what is the difference if if it's no good in superma i correct that by thinking that there is no difference than what we have in superman it becomes an essence of supermax i mean this face we believe is less extreme than supermax as i mentioned earlier but well yes but every answer includes or demarco so that leads to my question is it a case as you understand it so only about a conditions no standalone right under our american constitution to be free of solitary confinement unless there's cau and thank you thank you thank you thank you for recognizing the clock client is so called supposed to abuse abuse in the system on the basis of what i've counted and i've lost count again of the number of instances let alone also considering group one it would appear to mean that there were were in a logical values and why your client ended up staying in solitary confinement so all now were my missing the boat there i mean there's got to be some responsibility he's already in prison and i have problems with the the twenty years but when you back off and look at it as a whole we've had a gruesome one here and then we see the actions and conduct supposedly of what your client did to stay in control of it then i'm not quite sure i see the error in the the issue that we have on the pain a logical the problem that i or the argument that we present to the court is that during the the ten years that he had no desire for it a certain point in time when you get away from the infraction the just the punishment because not when but i'm justified especially when the defendants themselves are saying he no longer poses a security risk and i take issue with the very last the letter that defense counsel referenced mean if if mr griffin pose a security risk and he manifested these behaviors that show that he's able to compromise security staff and send this letter to a prison guard they let him out nine months after that and yet they held him in solitary confinement for interesting it is very interesting to me your honor i think it presents significant problems with the defense on that score and going back to the conditions of mr griffin confinement wilkinson how the conditions very much