After the riots in the “Tombs” (the Manhattan House of Detention, which one court described as “a fortress in bedlam”), PRP commenced a litigation program, consolidated in Benjamin, that challenged a broad range of inhumane conditions and practices in the New York City jail system. This litigation resulted in the closing of the Tombs and, later, the closure or complete renovation of several modular jail units hastily purchased during the 1980s incarceration epidemic. It also resulted in landmark consent decrees that established the current standards for many aspects of jail life, including clothing, laundry, family visitation, attorney access, restraint procedures, food service, classification, due process in disciplinary proceedings, and overcrowding.

Many of the decrees were terminated in 2001 pursuant to the 1996 Prison Litigation Reform Act, a federal law intended to discourage and even prevent incarcerated people from seeking judicial protection and redress of their legal rights. The PLRA was upheld against PRP’s constitutional challenges in Benjamin, but PRP had substantial litigation success elsewhere in obtaining favorable interpretations of the law that blunted its disastrous effects.

Plaintiffs proceeded to hearings on the non-terminated issues, and obtained judgments finding continuing violations in the areas of counsel visiting, restraint practices, and various aspects of environmental conditions (lighting, noise, ventilation, excessive heat and cold, sanitation, medical clinic conditions), which were almost entirely affirmed on appeal.

An independent monitor, the Office of Compliance Consultants, was created, and PRP continues to enforce orders related to sanitation, ventilation, lighting, and fire safety—areas that continue to pose serious risks to the health and safety of people in custody.

Reported decisions are too numerous to list, but include:

• Benjamin v. Malcolm, 803 F.2d 46 (2d Cir. 1986) (affirming entry of preliminary injunction, over Eleventh Amendment objections, that required New York State prison officials to accept into their custody “state-ready” individuals in order to alleviate overcrowding in DOC facilities);
• Benjamin v. Sielaff, 752 F.Supp. 140 (S.D.N.Y. 1990) (holding City in contempt for disobeying order concerning housing of newly admitted detainees).
• Benjamin v. Malcolm, 156 F.R.D. 561 (S.D.N.Y. 1994) (holding City in contempt for disobeying order regarding jail food service).
• Benjamin v. Jacobson, 124 F.3d 162 (2d Cir. 1997) (upholding constitutionality of Prison Litigation Reform Act’s termination provision but reversing order vacating consent decrees), vacated, affirmed in part and reversed in part, 172 F.3d 144 (2d Cir. 1999) (en banc) (affirming constitutionality of statute, but holding “that plaintiffs should be afforded an opportunity to show that, under the Prison Litigation Reform Act’s criteria, the continuation of prospective relief is warranted”);
• Benjamin v. Kerik, 1998 WL 799161 (S.D.N.Y. Nov. 13, 1998) (finding unconstitutional fire safety conditions in several jails).
• Benjamin v. Fraser, 264 F.3d 175 (2d Cir. 2001) (affirming District Court’s entry of prospective injunctive relief, and holding that in challenging regulations that adversely impact pretrial detainees’ Sixth Amendment right to counsel by impeding attorney visitation, pretrial detainees were not required to show actual injury); Benjamin v. Fraser, 343 F.3d 35 (2d Cir. 2003) (holding, among other things, that inadequate ventilation, lighting, and exposure to extremes of temperatures in city jails violated detainees’ due process rights to safe prison conditions, warranting continuation of prospective relief);
• Benjamin v. Fraser, 2002 WL 31845111 (S.D.N.Y. Dec. 6, 2002) (holding City in contempt for disobedience of order concerning restraint practices).
• Benjamin v. Fraser, 343 F.3d 35 (2d Cir. 2003), aff’g in part, vacating and remanding in part 161 F.Supp.2d 151 (S.D.N.Y. 2001) and 156 F.Supp.2d 333 (S.D.N.Y. 2001) (mostly affirming findings of unconstitutional environmental conditions).
• Benjamin v. Horn, 353 Fed. App’x. 473 (2d Cir. 2009) (summary order) (holding that District Court abused its discretion in denying discovery and evidentiary hearing in response to a termination motion under the Prison Litigation Reform Act);
• Benjamin v. Schriro, 370 F. App’x 168 (2d Cir. 2010) (affirming entry of 2001 remedial orders concerning “the evaluation, repair, maintenance, and monitoring of ventilation systems in New York City jails”) (summary order).