Susler: THE WOMEN'S HIGH SECURITY UNIT IN LEXINGTON, KY THE WOMEN'S HIGH SECURITY UNIT IN LEXINGTON, KY By Jan Susler* This article centers on Baraldini v. Meese, 691 This program sets up a hierarchy of objectives. The F.Supp. 432 (D.D.C. 1988), a case that arose as a result first of these is to reduce prisoners to the state of of Congressional and public inquiry into the conditions submission essential for their ideological conversion. at the Federal Correctional Institution at Lexington, That failing, the next objective is to reduce them to Kentucky, Female High Security Unit ("Lexington a state of psychological incompetence sufficient to HSU" or "the HSU"), a subterranean unit housing a neutralize them as efficient, self-directing antago- small population of political and social prisoners in a nists. That failing, the only alternative is to destroy segregated and highly restricted setting of small group them, preferably by making them desperate enough isolation. The combination of public pressure and Con- to destroy themselves.' gressional inquiry produced only minor changes in the conditions. A team of lawyers' filed suit on behalf of Under the laws of the United States, the government three women, Silvia Baraldini, Susan Rosenberg, and can imprison those convicted of crimes, and where there Sylvia Brown, seeking immediately to enjoin continued is evidence that a prisoner has posed a threat to security placement in the HSU.2 The suit asserted that placement in previous institutions, can increase security. However, in the unit violated the prisoners' First Amendment labelling a prisoner a security threat based solely on as- rights of expression and association, that placement sociations she had prior to conviction with organizations without prior hearing violated Fifth Amendment due called "terrorist" by the government is unconstitutional. process rights, and that the conditions violated the Prison officials may impose restrictions tailored to meet women's Eighth Amendment right to be free from cruel real threats to security, but may not impose restrictions and unusual punishment. based on a prisoner's political beliefs or associations, or based merely on speculation and conjecture. As Alejan- A correctional psychologist concluded after evaluating the Female High Security Unit at Lexington HSU: placed in the unit on May 7, 1987. The Bureau of Prisons ("BOP") rejected her for placement after the first referral in spite of her numerous escapes. She has no political affiliations. * Jan Susler is an attorney at the People's Law Office in Likewise, Debra Brown, the only woman in the U.S. facing Chicago, IL. three death sentences, was the fifth prisoner placed in the unit 1. The team of lawyers included Jan Susler and Michael on January 15, 1987. Two other women arrived shortly before Deutsch, Peoples Law Office, Chicago, IL; Adjoa Aiyetoro and the unit closed: Bonnie Kelley, placed as a witness protection Alexa Freeman, ACLU National Prison Project, Washington, case, not a high security case, based on her cooperation with the D.C.; Elizabeth Fink, Brooklyn, NY; Mary O'Melveny, New government against a co-defendant; and Lynette Fromme, as- York, NY; Margaret Ratner and Joan Gibbs, Center for Con- signed following her conviction for a walk-away escape from stitutional Rights, New York, NY. FCI Alderson, W. Va., which was not alleged to have had assis- 2. Susa iRosenberg and Alejandrina Torres were the first tance from outside groups. These social prisoners chose not to to arrive at HSU on October 29, 1986. They were later joined participate in the litigation. by Sylvia Baraldini. All three women are in prison for politi- 3. The development of psychological syndromes resulting cally motivated acts or conspiracies to act against the United from isolation has been documented in the 19th and early 20th States government. Alejandrina Torres, is a Puerto Rican in- centuries in Europe and with U.S. prisoners of war in Korea. dependentista who claimed status under the international law of See Stuart Grassian, A REVIEW AND DELINEATION OF A prisoners of war and refused to recognize the jurisdiction of the CLINICAL SYNDROME (unpublished). Such brainwashing tech- United States courts. She did not participate in the litigation. niques have also been used in Korean and Chinese prisons. See The third plaintiff, Sylvia Brown, was placed in the unit be- Richard Korn, The Effects of Confinement in HSU, August, cause of a history of escapes from several prisons. Brown was 1987, 15 SOCIAL JUSTICE 8-19 (Spring, 1988). Published by Yale Law School Legal Scholarship Repository, 1989 1 Yale Journal of Law and Liberation, Vol. 1 [1989], Iss. 1, Art. 5 Law and Liberation drina Torres, Susan Rosenberg, and then Silvia The United States has historically asserted that the Baraldini, the first women to be placed in the Lexington treatment of its prisoners is humane, and that it has no HSU, had no record of posing a security threat in prison, political prisoners. Looking to Cuba and other countries, but instead were political activists affiliated with radical the U.S. has claimed that prisoners there, especially po- groups, the treatment of these women indicates that the litical prisoners, are abused and treated inhumanely. United States treats prisoners differently - in fact, inhu- However, a recent human rights report on Cuban prisons manely - because of their political affiliations and reveals that the women's prison, which houses a popula- beliefs. tion of 600, boasts not only good facilities for activities, In Baraldini v. Meese, Judge Barrington D. Parker working conditions and cells (including punishment accepted the claim made by plaintiffs Baraldini and Ro- cells), but also courteous and respectful relations between senberg that they had been placed in the HSU solely be- officials and prisoners.' Furthermore, in Cuba, "political cause of their associations with groups identified by the prisoners" are not singled out for different punishment.' government as "terrorist," and rejected the BOP's claim The fundamental issue presented by Baraldini v. that the plaintiffs were assigned to Lexington HSU be- Meese is the failure of the United States government to cause they posed a security threat - a threat of escape admit to the existence of political prisoners and the exis- by external assault on the prison from outside groups." tence of a policy to single them out for special - and The government was unable to show that assignment to harsher - treatment because of their beliefs and the restrictive setting bore any rational relationship to a affiliations. legitimate penological objective. Accordingly, the district court found that the placement of the prisoners in the Lexington high security unit was "an exaggerated response," in vio- HSU in its Historical Context - One Phase in lation of their First Amendment rights.5 a Continuing Strategy The conditions in the unit demonstrated that the pro- Torres, Baraldini, and Rosenberg are not the first po- gram was designed not to thwart external assault to free litical activists to be singled out for punitive treatment. the women but to effect their psychological and ideologi- Retaliatory prison conditions for political people are part cal breakdown. The restricted sensory environment, small of the U.S. government's historical efforts to destroy group isolation, ill-fitting clothing, limited and censored those who oppose the U.S. government as well as the reading material, shackling and handcuffing, and strict movements they represent. While the HSU and other limitation on telephone calls and visitors, as well as strip prisons, such as USP Marion, 10 are architecturally adapted to accomplish this objective, a physical plant is not crucial to meeting the government's end. Other effec- The conditions in the unit demonstrated tive tactics include placing long term prisoners in pretrial that the program was designed not to detention facilities or frequently shuffling prisoners from one cell to another, one prison to another. thwart external assault to free women The U.S. has a long history of attempts to crush the but to effect their psychological and ide- Puerto Rican independence movement." The indepen- dence movement has been a focus of government repres- ological breakdown. sion since the U.S. invaded in 1898. Within the last sev- eral years, Puerto Rico has been considered by the searches, patdown searches, voyeurism and general har- assment by guards, had little or no relation to the govern- 6 1988). All depositions, declarations, memoranda, letters, post ment's stated objective of preventing escape. orders, transcript references and testimony refer to evidence The placement of these women was suspect not presented in Baraldini v. Meese, 691 F. Supp. 432 (D.D.C. merely because their prison records did not warrant tight 1988), unless otherwise noted. security, but because other women with prison discipli- 8. The Institute for Policy Studies, PRELIMINARY REPORT OF U.S. DELEGATION TO CUBA, February 26-March 5, 1988. nary records, with histories of escape, and with equally as 7 9. J. Treaster, Cuban Prison Life Is Said to Improve, New lengthy sentences were not placed in the unit. York Times at A6 (May 31, 1988). 10. The U.S. penitentiary at Marion, IL is the most maxi- mum security prison in the federal system. Since 1983, it has 4. Baraldini, 691 F.Supp. at 435, 440. been on lockdown. The men are confined to their single cells 5. Id. at 442-444. over 22 hours a day, allowed no contact visits, and have no ac- 6. Id. at 444. The plaintiffs also claimed that conditions at cess to programs. Policies at Marion include "cavity-searches," Lexington HSU violated the Eighth Amendment prohibition forced digital probes of the rectum (random in all units except against cruel and unusual punishment. While the inhumaneness the Control Unit, where it is routine and performed without per se of the prisoners' treatment is analytically distinct from probable cause), and shackling prisoners spread-eagled to con- the First Amendment freedom of association issue, and the crete bunks fitted with metal rings for this very purpose.