How Ashker v. Governor Plaintiffs Drove California’s Anti-Solitary Movement from Within Secure Housing Units

• In Event: Roundtable: Contemporary Issues in Corrections

Abstract

California’s Ashker v. Governor suit centered the leadership and agency of people challenging their indefinite supermaximum solitary confinement. Todd Ashker and Danny Troxell filed the case without attorney representation. They participated in building a cross-racial coalition of incarcerated and non-incarcerated supporters. The multi-pronged strategy utilized hunger strikes, organizing, legislative and administrative advocacy, public education, and media work to win conditions reform. After allowing attorney intervention, plaintiffs pushed attorneys to center incarcerated leaders in negotiations with the California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation (CDCR). This discussion will compare the demands and multi-faceted approaches of the diverse stakeholders to other prison reform campaigns. It will compare and contrast Ashker plaintiff and attorney behavior with that of other prisoner’s rights cases. It will explore how the holistic strategy resulted in a settlement and monitoring agreement that mandates unparalleled plaintiff leadership and participation in strategy and enforcement from behind prison walls. It will examine how Plaintiffs forced CDCR to make cultural and policy shifts to CDCR’s gang and solitary practices not previously achieved by litigation-only strategies. The topic is ripe for exploration as the settlement agreement expires in September 2017.

Author

• Caitlin Henry, Sonoma State University