Document ID: ./input/supremecourt_opinions/opinions/10pdf/09-1233.pdf
Page Number: 54.0

48 

BROWN v. PLATA 

Opinion of the Court 

urgent than previously believed.  Were the State to make 
this  showing,  the  three-judge  court  in  the  exercise  of  its
discretion  could  consider  whether  it  is  appropriate  to  ex-
tend or modify this timeline.

Experience  with  the  three-judge  court’s  order  may  also 
lead  the  State  to  suggest  other  modifications.    The  three-
judge  court  should  give  any  such  requests  serious  consid-
eration.  The  three-judge  court  should  also  formulate  its 
orders  to  allow  the  State  and  its  officials  the  authority 
necessary  to  address  contingencies  that  may  arise  during 
the remedial process.

These  observations  reflect  the  fact  that  the  three-judge
court’s  order,  like  all  continuing  equitable  decrees,  must
remain  open  to  appropriate  modification.  They  are  not 
intended to cast doubt on the validity of the basic premise 
of the existing order.  The medical and mental health care 
provided by California’s prisons falls below the standard of 
decency  that  inheres  in  the  Eighth  Amendment.    This 
extensive  and  ongoing  constitutional  violation  requires
a  remedy,  and  a  remedy  will  not  be  achieved  without  a 
reduction  in  overcrowding.  The  relief  ordered  by  the 
three-judge court is required by the Constitution and was 
authorized  by  Congress  in  the  PLRA.    The  State  shall 
implement the order without further delay. 

The judgment of the three-judge court is affirmed. 

It is so ordered.