Document ID: ./input/supremecourt_opinions/opinions/10pdf/09-1233.pdf
Page Number: 77

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

3 

ALITO, J., dissenting 

I would reverse the decision below for three interrelated 
reasons.  First,  the  three-judge  court  improperly  refused
to  consider  evidence  concerning  present  conditions  in  the 
California prison system.  Second, the court erred in hold-
ing that no remedy short of a massive prisoner release can 
bring  the  California  system  into  compliance  with  the
Eighth  Amendment.    Third,  the  court  gave  inadequate 
weight to the impact of its decree on public safety. 

I 
Both  the  PLRA  and  general  principles  concerning  in-
junctive relief dictate that a prisoner release order cannot 
properly be issued unless the relief is necessary to remedy
an ongoing violation.  Under the PLRA, a prisoner release 
may be decreed only if crowding “is the primary cause” of 
an  Eighth  Amendment  violation  and  only  if  no  other  re-
lief  “will  remedy”  the  violation.    §3626(a)(3)(E)  (emphasis 
added).  This  language  makes  it  clear  that  proof  of  past 
violations  alone  is  insufficient  to  justify  a  court-ordered
prisoner release.

Similarly,  in  cases  not  governed  by  the  PLRA,  we  have
held  that  an  inmate  seeking  an  injunction  to  prevent  a
violation of the Eighth Amendment must show that prison 
officials are “knowingly and unreasonably disregarding an
objectively  intolerable  risk  of  harm,  and  that  they  will
continue to do so . . . into the future.”  Farmer v. Brennan, 
511  U. S.  825,  846  (1994).    The  “deliberate  indifference” 
needed to establish an Eighth Amendment violation must 
be  examined  “in  light  of  the  prison  authorities’  current
attitudes and conduct,” Helling v. McKinney, 509 U. S. 25, 
36 (1993), which means “their attitudes and conduct at the 
time  suit  is  brought  and  persisting  thereafter,”  Farmer, 
supra, at 845. 

For  these  reasons,  the  propriety  of  the  relief  ordered
here  cannot  be  assessed  without  ascertaining  the  nature
and  scope  of  any  ongoing  constitutional  violations.    Proof