Personally, I believe that it is the state’s responsibility to maintain a safe environment for all of the people living in it; thus, I believe that punishment is the responsibility of the state, and should not be contracted out. In fact, it is stated in the book, that through instrumental justification, the state is the most appropriate agent to inflict criminal sanctions because of its fair and impartial position” (p. 294).
Private prisons, according to the text, “are a contradiction of sorts for the criminal justice system” (p. 129). Private prisons are “operated and maintained by a privately owned correctional firm;” thus, are scrutinized for many reasons. Partial scrutinizing transpires because the punishments are weak and partially because …show more content…
People are not supposed to incarcerated as a form of profit gain for a private institution, instead people are supposed to be rehabilitated so that they can be reintegrated into society.
3. Describe qualified immunity. Do private prison officials benefit from qualified immunity? Providing evidence from pertinent Supreme Court decisions, trace its application to private corrections employees.
Qualified immunity can be defined as something that “prevents government officials from liability in lawsuits alleging violations of constitutional rights provided a reasonable person would not have otherwise known they were acting in violation of said rights” (p. 295). “Before an inmate may attempt to substantiate [a civil rights damages] claim, however, they must overcome the protections of qualified immunity” (p. 132). In other words, qualified immunity is a protection from civil liabilities that only certain people can benefit from. As stated in the text, “private officials acting as government officials […] have some argument for qualified immunity from section 1983 lawsuits” (p. 133). Unfortunately, however, private prison officials do not benefit from qualified immunity; they are not …show more content…
Why is contract rescission an unrealistic answer to accountability issues in private corrections? Be specific.
When discussing accountability, the author affirms that “for states to maintain effective accountability mechanisms over private prisons, they must retain the ability to rescind contracts” (p. 135). Furthermore, it is strongly believed “that contract rescission is the most effective accountability mechanism for state authorities. However, in order for contract rescission to operate as an effective tool to maintain accountability, competition and the threat of replacement must be realistic concerns for private firms” (p. 135).
Contract rescission is defined as the “removal of contracts with private correctional corporations due to violation of preset terms. States must maintain the ability to resume control over facilities that have been contracted out” (p. 294). Contract rescission is essentially the undoing of an already establish contract; therefore, “contract rescission is of minimal concern to private firms because the correctional corporations are aware of the pressure on states to provide adequate but affordable housing for their inmates” (p.
Private prisons, according to the text, “are a contradiction of sorts for the criminal justice system” (p. 129). Private prisons are “operated and maintained by a privately owned correctional firm;” thus, are scrutinized for many reasons. Partial scrutinizing transpires because the punishments are weak and partially because …show more content…
People are not supposed to incarcerated as a form of profit gain for a private institution, instead people are supposed to be rehabilitated so that they can be reintegrated into society.
3. Describe qualified immunity. Do private prison officials benefit from qualified immunity? Providing evidence from pertinent Supreme Court decisions, trace its application to private corrections employees.
Qualified immunity can be defined as something that “prevents government officials from liability in lawsuits alleging violations of constitutional rights provided a reasonable person would not have otherwise known they were acting in violation of said rights” (p. 295). “Before an inmate may attempt to substantiate [a civil rights damages] claim, however, they must overcome the protections of qualified immunity” (p. 132). In other words, qualified immunity is a protection from civil liabilities that only certain people can benefit from. As stated in the text, “private officials acting as government officials […] have some argument for qualified immunity from section 1983 lawsuits” (p. 133). Unfortunately, however, private prison officials do not benefit from qualified immunity; they are not …show more content…
Why is contract rescission an unrealistic answer to accountability issues in private corrections? Be specific.
When discussing accountability, the author affirms that “for states to maintain effective accountability mechanisms over private prisons, they must retain the ability to rescind contracts” (p. 135). Furthermore, it is strongly believed “that contract rescission is the most effective accountability mechanism for state authorities. However, in order for contract rescission to operate as an effective tool to maintain accountability, competition and the threat of replacement must be realistic concerns for private firms” (p. 135).
Contract rescission is defined as the “removal of contracts with private correctional corporations due to violation of preset terms. States must maintain the ability to resume control over facilities that have been contracted out” (p. 294). Contract rescission is essentially the undoing of an already establish contract; therefore, “contract rescission is of minimal concern to private firms because the correctional corporations are aware of the pressure on states to provide adequate but affordable housing for their inmates” (p.