Rehabilitation Act Case Summary

In 2011, Brown v Plata was a decision by the United States Supreme Court that held that a court-mandated population limit was necessary to remedy a violation of the inmate’s Eighth Amendment constitutional rights. This federal class action civil rights lawsuit alleged that the California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation’s (CDCR) medical services were inadequate for the inmates. The lawsuit stated that the CDCR violate not only the Eighth Amendment, but also the American with Disabilities Act and section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973. The United States Supreme Court stated that California failed to provide adequate health care to the inmates because of overcrowding in the prisons. The Brown v Plata case was formed as one by two class action suits filed by two different California inmates. The first was the Coleman v. Wilson in 1990 by inmates who suffered from serious mental disorders. Plata v. Schwarzenegger was the other case filed in 2001 by prisoners who had serious medical conditions. Both cases claimed that the California prison system violated the Eighth Amendment’s prohibition of cruel and unusual punishment with the inadequate treatment for prisoners who had serious …show more content…
The United States Supreme Court analyzed three main components that were required in the PLRA outline: first, did the lower court find convincing evidence that overcrowding was the major cause of the Federal right violations, second, did the lower court have no other way to remedy the violations, and third, would the remedy go no more than what was required to fix the violations. The United States Supreme Court believed that the three-judge panel’s decision did certainly meet the requirements to authorize the prison release order. The Supreme Court stated that these rights were constantly violated for years and were