Document ID: ./input/supremecourt_opinions/opinions/10pdf/09-1233.pdf
Page Number: 35.0

Cite as:  563 U. S. ____ (2011) 

29 

Opinion of the Court 

federal rights.”  H. R. Rep. No. 104–21, p. 25 (1995). 

Courts should presume that Congress was sensitive to the
real-world  problems  faced  by  those  who  would  remedy
constitutional violations in the prisons and that Congress
did not leave prisoners without a remedy for violations of 
their  constitutional  rights.    A  reading  of  the  PLRA  that
would  render  population  limits  unavailable  in  practice 
would  raise  serious  constitutional  concerns.    See,  e.g., 
Bowen  v.  Michigan  Academy  of  Family  Physicians,  476 
U. S.  667,  681,  n. 12  (1986).    A  finding  that  overcrowding
is the “primary cause” of a violation is therefore permissi-
ble, despite the fact that additional steps will be required
to remedy the violation. 

C 
The three-judge court was also required to find by clear
and  convincing  evidence  that  “no  other  relief  will  remedy 
the violation of the Federal right.”  §3626(a)(3)(E)(ii).

The  State  argues  that  the  violation  could  have  been
remedied  through  a  combination  of  new  construction,
transfers  of  prisoners  out  of  State,  hiring  of  medical  per-
sonnel,  and  continued  efforts  by  the  Plata  Receiver  and 
Coleman  Special  Master.  The  order  in  fact  permits  the
State  to  comply  with  the  population  limit  by  transferring
prisoners to county facilities or facilities in other States, or 
by  constructing  new  facilities  to  raise  the  prisons’  design
capacity.  And  the  three-judge  court’s  order  does  not  bar 
the State from undertaking any other remedial efforts.  If 
the  State  does  find  an  adequate  remedy  other  than  a 
population  limit,  it  may  seek  modification  or  termination
of  the  three-judge  court’s  order  on  that  basis.    The  evi-
dence  at  trial,  however,  supports  the  three-judge  court’s
conclusion  that  an  order  limited  to  other  remedies  would 
not provide effective relief.

The State’s argument that out-of-state transfers provide
a less restrictive alternative to a population limit must fail