Document: 490 U.S. 454 109 S.Ct. 1904 104 L.Ed.2d 506 KENTUCKY DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS, et al., Petitionersv.James M. THOMPSON al. No. 87-1815. Argued Jan. 18, 1989. Decided May 15, Syllabus Following the District Court's issuance of a consent decree settling class action brought by Kentucky penal inmates under 42 U.S.C. § 1983, Commonwealth promulgated "Corrections Policies and Procedures," which, inter alia, contain nonexhaustive list prison visitors who "may be excluded," including those "would constitute clear probable danger to institution's security or interfere with [its] orderly operation." The State Reformatory at LaGrange subsequently issued its own "Procedures Memorandum," in addition language virtually identical that state regulations, sets forth procedures which visitor "may" refused admittance have his her visitation privileges suspended reformatory officials. After admit several denied them future visits without providing hearing, representatives an inmate filed motion Court, claiming, among other things, suspensions violated Due Process Clause Fourteenth Amendment. court agreed directed minimal due process developed. Court Appeals affirmed remanded, concluding, relevant policies created liberty interest protected Clause. Held: regulations do not give receiving is entitled protections Pp. 459-465. (a) In order create context, must use "explicitly mandatory language" connection establishment "specific substantive predicates" limit official discretion, thereby require particular outcome reached upon finding criteria been met. Hewitt v. Helms, 459 460, 472, 103 864, 871, 74 675. 1908-1910. (b) Although issue provide certain "substantive guide decisionmakers determining whether allow visitation, lack requisite language, since "may," but need not, excluded they fall within one listed categories excludable visitors. Thus, are worded such way could reasonably form objective expectation visit would necessarily allowed absent occurrence conditions expect enforce against officials should allowed. 463-465. 833 F.2d 614 (CA 6 1987), reversed. BLACKMUN, J., delivered opinion REHNQUIST, C.J., WHITE, O'CONNOR, SCALIA, KENNEDY, JJ., joined. concurring opinion, post, p. ----. MARSHALL, dissenting BRENNAN STEVENS, joined, Barbara Willett Jones, for petitioners. Joseph S. Elder, II, Louisville, Ky., respondents. Justice BLACKMUN Court. 1 this case we consider inmates, purposes Amendment, 2 * September 1976, federal 1983 challenging confinement Penitentiary Eddyville. Other cases, relating La Grange, were consolidated concerning penitentiary. litigation was settled dated 28 1980, supplemented 22 July containing provisions governing broad range conditions. App. 2-44, 45-55. See Kendrick Bland, 541 F.Supp. 21, 27-50 (W.D.Ky.1981); see also 740 432 (C.A.6 1984). Of sole relevance here, provides: "The Bureau Corrections encourages agrees maintain least current level, restrictions," "continue open visiting policy." F.Supp., 37. 3 1981 Procedures" general may excluded.1 Four years later, more detailed Memorandum" on subject "Visiting Regulations." memorandum begins Statement Policy Purpose: "Although administrative staff reserves right disallow visits, it policy respect spirit decisions Consent Decree, while insuring safety institution." 106. then goes entry if presence "clear institution operation ¶ K(1)(a), 133. A nine specific reasons excluding set forth.2 states decision exclude rests duty officer, consulted any member "feels admittance." K(3), 134. 4 This prompted large part two incidents when applicants opportunity reformatory. mother six months because she person had barred smuggling contraband. Another inmate's woman friend limited time found contraband after women. both instances hearing. prevented from 5 Kendrick-inmate United States Western (the decree), claiming suspension hearing these By June 26, 1986, did violate decree, 147, concluded "mandatory character," id., 148, that, standards articulated 675 (1983), respondents "possess visitation." petitioners develop "minimal procedures," "an informal, nonadversary review prisoner receives notice for" visitor, as well respond. 148. formal accordingly. Id., 149. Sixth Circuit remanded case. (1987). Relying only stated policies, held sufficiently interest. "placed 'substantive limitations discretion.' " 618-619, quoting Olim Wakinekona, 461 238, 249, 1741, 1747, 75 813 (1983). "[d]efendants shall continue their policy" (emphasis supplied Appeals), 37, coupled provision statement "[a]n three (3) separate . per week" added Procedures B(3), 108, satisfied requirement our prior cases. F.2d, 618. 7 Because appeared raise important issues administration, granted certiorari. 487 1217, 108 2869, 101 905 (1988). II 8 Amendment reads part: "nor deprive life, liberty, property, law," protects "the individual arbitrary government," Wolff McDonnell, 418 539, 558, 94 2963, 2975, 41 935 (1974). We examine procedural questions steps: first asks there exists property has interfered State, Board Regents Colleges Roth, 408 564, 571, 92 2701, 2706, 33 548 (1972); second examines attendant deprivation constitutionally sufficient, U.S., S.Ct., 871. types interests "liberty" "property" unlimited; rise than abstract desire," 577, 2709, based "a unilateral hope," Connecticut Pardons Dumschat, 452 458, 465, 2460, 2464, 69 158 (1981). Rather, legitimate claim entitlement it. Protected arise sources—the itself laws States." 466, 868. 9 Respondents argue—nor can seriously contended, light cases—that unfettered guaranteed directly rejected notion "any change having substantial adverse impact involved sufficient invoke Clause." (Emphasis original.) Meachum Fano, 427 215, 224, 96 2532, 2538, 49 451 (1976). say valid conviction extinguishes every direct protection; "consequences visited qualitatively different punishment characteristically suffered convicted crime" even absence state-created right. Vitek 445 480, 493, 100 1254, 1263, 63 552 (1980) (transfer mental hospital). However, "[a]s long degree subjected sentence imposed him otherwise violative Constitution, does treatment authorities judicial oversight." Montanye Haymes, 236, 242, 2543, 2547, 466 denial access "is terms ordinarily contemplated sentence," 468, 869, therefore independently 10 held, however, law enforceable setting. found, example, parole, Allen, 482 369, 107 2415, 303 (1987); Greenholtz Nebraska Penal Inmates, 442 1, 99 2100, 60 668 (1979), good-time credits, 556-572, 2974-2982, freedom involuntary transfer hospital, 487-494, 1260-1264, restrictive forms prison, supra. contrast, statutes another prison. 225, 2538 (intrastate transfer); supra (interstate transfer). fact protection, others result judgment what significant others; rather, method inquiry cases always closely regulations.3 11 Stated simply, creates placing discretion." 1747. number ways. Neither drafting nor interpretation reduced exact science. Our past suggest, most common manner establishing govern decision-making, and, further, mandating 12 Most context turned creating discretion. For failure statute commutation sentences "particularized [to] State's decisionmakers," 467, 2465 (BRENNAN, concurring), defeated 2464 (majority opinion). 249-250, 1748 left "completely unfettered" discretion administrator); 228, 2540 officials); 243, 2547 (same). instances, decisionmaking serve See, e.g., U.S , 871 (administrative segregation proper predicates); 381, 2422 (parole unless met, though 'necessarily subjective predictive' "). 13 requirement, implicit earlier decisions, language," i.e., directives decisionmaker regulations' predicates present, follow, 471-472, 871-72. mandated followed, "that will occur specified predicates." supra, "use[d] ('shall') 'creat[e] presumption parole release granted' designated findings made," 377-378, 2420-2421, 12, 2106. 11, 2105 (statute board "shall order" four found). sum, "specified forces conclusion III 14 decisionmaker. nn. 2, excluded" when, find reasonable grounds believe "visitor's n. Among denying visitor's criminal behavior, disruptive behavior refusal submit search show identification, being influence alcohol drugs. Ibid. nearly identical, include prohibition former inmate, approval warden. These applied refer situation officer resolution, notify feels admittance. same undoubtedly intended officer's making ultimate decision. 15 language. They stop short requiring met.4 Memorandum caveat "administrative visits," note "it "to visits." mandatory. Visitors described categories, be. Nor excluded. overall effect Or, differently, officials.5 16 here establish Clause, 17 It so ordered. 18 concurring. 19 I concur fully write separately involves visitors, ban all visitation. Nothing forecloses regulation permanently forbidding some prisoners implicates precise individualized restrictions not. 20 whom STEVENS join, dissenting. 21 As today's decision, correctional free deny parents, spouses, children, clergy members, close friends reason whatsoever, no all. Prisoners learn reason, any, why away. my view, exercise unbridled governmental power over basic human family members strikes heart Recognizing "unfettered visitation," ante, merely afford rudimentary safeguards retaliatory denials visits. majority refuses take small step, dissent. analysis conceding, precedents, shed constitutio al rights gate, instead retain residuum independent regulations. 459-4611908.1 balance proceeds prove emptiness initial gesture. concluding implicate retained interest, applies following oft-cited test: 'As oversight.' Ante, 1908, quotingMontanye On face, "within sentence" test knows few rivals vagueness pliability, typical says little defendant spend period behind bars. applied, offers scant Justices employing rarely scrutinized actual faced institutions issue. Under approach, therefore, crosses into limbo he enters confinement." 482, 877, (1983) (STEVENS, dissenting). theory retains practice crystallizes infrequent occasions happens so.2 23 previously alter prisoner's confinement, question 'grievous loss' trigger protection process." 252, 1749, (MARSHALL, dissenting), 488, 1261, (1980); Morrissey Brewer, 471, 481, 2593, 2600, 484 (1972). answer depends nature gravity change, singled out arbitrarily disparate treatment. "For essential attribute Constitution kind provides similarly situated persons. felon, properly placed disfavored class, right." Hewitt, 485-486, 879 dissenting) (footnote omitted); Olim, 1749 Put way, encompasses affecting personal interests. 571-572, 19, 2982, 24 Prison recognized critically importan communities ultimately return.3 Without entirely cut off contacts outside world." 253, 1750 Confinement 25 "brings alienation longer greater alienation. There little, disagreement relatives beneficial confined communication. 26 "Ample person. Preservation unit reintegration decreases possibility recidivism release. [V]isitation demonstrated positive effects person's ability adjust life ." National Conference Commissioners Uniform Laws, Model Sentencing Act 4-115, Comment (1979) (hereinafter NCCUSLA) (citations omitted).4 27 Consistent numerous private organizations deal designed maximize opportunities inmates." Dept. Justice, Federal Standards Prisons Jails, Standard 12.12 (1980).5 details vary, uniformly except good cause shown. itself, statewide (Commonwealth Procedures), recognizes permit Kenneth Bobbitt Kevin Black morale contact community," thus "are success community release." 98. intimates actions taken cause, very essence prisoners' factual allegations existed. 57-58, 61, 66-68, 70-71. If correct, "grievous loss" unjustifiably harsh No evidence whatsoever indicates ever enumerated institution-specific (Reformatory Memorandum). 456-458, 2. nowhere suggested, furthermore, nonenumerated reasons, 'well contemplated' 461, 869. majority's disposition, neither contest authorities' account. One hardly cynical about administrators recognize distinct groundless deprivations calls modicum guard behavior. 29 Even believed nonetheless "created" Commonwealth's policies.6 notes, 'a 462, agree "[t]he predicates' decisionmaker." 463. But cannot Kentucky's "lack language." matter, fail element Once assume—as does—that applying likely ignore undefined quantity words "shall" "must." Drafters view mere surplusage. Absent concrete routinely (and here), assume regularly employed practice, expectations worthy Common sense suggests stem re ulations. 489, 1261 (approving lower courts' reliance "objective expectation, firmly fixed Complex practice").7 point escapes majority, apparently harbors "unrealistic [belief] variations 'may' rather 'shall' negate derived experience [prison] system criteria. 29-30, 9, 2115 (citation omitted). 30 thought rely still disagree determination language.8 relies primarily important, put "caveat," 464, context. Memorandum's section occupies pages joint appendix. appears just once general, introductory paragraph includes 106 added). Over next pages, lays great detail "procedures enforced regard added).9 states, "[v]isits conducted seven (7) days week," added); "[t]here maintained specifies inmate," ibid. adult visit," 108-109 "will one-half hours," "[e]ach (1) outdoor 125 31 Only enumerate 132-134, quoted 457-458, "has responsibility above [enumerated] reasons." 134 When denied, documented." Presumably means keep record reasons" caused visitor. expressly references American Correctional Association's standards, "visits schedule, space, personnel constraints, justify limitations." Association, Adult Institutions, 2-4381 (2d ed. 1981) added), cited remotely contemplates exclusion 32 commands read conjunction rules Procedures,10 inconceivable "reasonably conditions." 465. inexplicably ignores commands, despite considered "overall regulations," ibid., striking concession "repeatedly 'will', 'shall', similar directive effort advise potential expected." Brief Petitioners 13, Tr. Oral Arg. 5-6 ("[O]ur limiting officials").11 caveat, suggest "fall amount nothing boilerplate. reject "state impose elaborate requirements conduct solely remains act end 258-259, 1752 (discussing holding ); 259, 1752, (1979); cf. Brennan Cunningham, (C.A.1 1987). Finally, falls misplaced. word simply possess persons categories. Surely defeat regarding deemed predicates. 470, 6, 6. Likewise, Vitek, transferred hospital applicable provided director services medical made. 483, 1259, 1. how here. 34 seek All ask warrant ensure denied. extensive, commensurate special "needs exigencies institutional environment." Wolff, 555, 2974. threshold never establishes away, process, notice, due. accept parsimonious reading states: "Certain either threat nonconducive successful re-entry are, restricted to: "A. institution. "B. conduct. "C. "D. search, requested so, identification. "E. related "F. currently probation written permission Probation Parole Officer Superintendent." 403.06 (issued Aug. 28, 1981, effective Sept. 1981); 101-102. "K. Visitor Refused Admittance "1. that: "a. institution, including, "(1) "(2) t e "(3) identification request. "(4) "(5) detrimental rehabilitation. "(6) resident Warden. "(7) maximum expiration "(8) policies. "(9) Former employees authorization Warden visit. "2. master log kept Visiting Desk above. up (6) incident. Persons bring dangerous drugs indefinitely, until Duty reasons. furnished updated required. "3. Any above, Shift Supervisor notified. final Officer. documented. felt presents serious himself Police advised make intervention needed." Memorandum, KSR 16-00-01 30, 1985); 132-134. amici urge us adopt rule regardless character extent "do affect duration 10. argue bright line guidelines minor transforming "liberty interests" accompanying rights. Inasmuch "bright line" necessary ruling favor petitioners, refrain considering time. express proposal leave resolution day. obvious invitation courts imperative might found. requires apply deprived question. examples relied unavailing, is, Building week." 108. admitted, example irrelevant following: "A incident." added.) refers penalty unfit visit, role play guiding officials' deciding instance. policy," prevents entered. Obviously, promise unchanged discretionary transform one. enacted signed already place. 147. briefed argued parties discussed below, "[I]f chooses allow, really slave 19th century think unalienable liberty—at minimum treated dignity ignore." 233, 2542, (1976) unwillingness acknowledge outset frames involving 455. Cf. Leverson, Constitutional Limits Power Restrict Access Prisons: An Historical Re-Examination, Harv.Civ.Rights-Civ.Lib.L.Rev. 409, 413-415 (describing widespread practices early English prisons). also, Sheriffs' NSA), Inmates' Legal Rights 67 (rev. 1987) NSA) (visits "with family, [are] ties knowledge society like"); 12.12, Discussion DOJ) ("Visiting maintaining inmates' society"); ABA Criminal 23-6.2, Commentary 1980) ABA) ("Because almost returned terms, preserve, wherever possible, ties"); Advisory Commission Goals, Corrections, 2.17, (1973) NAC) ("Strained increase difficulty eventual transition back community. critical value offenders program recognized"); Thornburgh Abbott, 401, 407, 1874, 1878, (1989) ("Access [to prisons] families sustain relationships ."); Pell Procunier, 417 817, 825, 2800, 2805, 495 (1974) (noting director's "aid rehabilitation compromising objectives corrections system"). NSA, 67; DOJ, 12.12-12.15; NCCUSL, §§ 4-114, 4-118; ABA, 23-6.2; Assn., Ins itutions, 2-4380 2-4386 ed.1981); NAC, 2.17. somewhat relationship between 255, 1745 880, ("Prison 'provide evidentiary support [adverse prisoner] affects liberty,' 'do interest' ") ). Dace Mickelson, 816 1277, 1279 (C.A.8 (en banc) (a "expectancy" rule, regulation, practice"); Whitehorn Harrelson, 758 1416, 1422 (C.A.11 1985) ("The administering determine [it] place[s] restriction official's Parker Cook, 642 865, 876 (C.A.5 Unit B ("[T]he interaction often produces results apparent examination regulations"); Perry Sindermann, 593, 602, 2694, 2700, 570 (1972) ("[T]here unwritten 'common law' university equivalent tenure"). clearly rationale reformatory, institutions. First, although points cabining 463-464, exclusively statements insufficient 464-465. Second, Black—the case—were incarcerated f giving litigation. Third, before 28. quite possible facilities linguistic approach. noted unclear governs parts System." 614, 619 pertain matters days, lengths, times, places visits; dress code visitors; scope permissible searches type permitted night legal, clergy, 106-132. less elaborate—because charged supplementing ones fit institutions—there shortage Visits promoted facilitated each institution," 98 "[a]t minimum," weekend holiday [be] permi[tted]," "must eight hours month," "[u]nder normal conditions, [regular visitor] visitor" 4. constraints reformatory's invoking unreviewable whenever seeks inmate.

Category: 3