Abstract
Kalief Browder’s name endures as a chilling reminder of the human cost of pre-trial solitary confinement. His story reveals the constitutional paradox and moral failure at the heart of this practice: Individuals who remain legally innocent are subjected to one of the harshest punishments the state can impose. This practice strips people of their liberty twice over, first through incarceration itself, and again through prolonged isolation that inflicts devastating psychological harm. Despite its severity, the use of solitary confinement against pre-trial detainees remains largely overlooked in legal scholarship and reform, even as it undermines the presumption of innocence, exacerbates systemic inequities, and contradicts the criminal legal system’s professed aim of rehabilitation. This Note argues that pre-trial solitary confinement violates core protections of the Eighth and Fourteenth Amendments and perpetuates broader injustices, particularly against low-income defendants and communities of color. After tracing the historical rise of solitary confinement and evaluating its modern use, the Note advances a comprehensive solution: The adoption of uniform legislation to prohibit solitary confinement for pre-trial detainees. Ending this practice is both a constitutional necessity and an essential step toward ensuring that no one is punished before conviction.
Recommended Citation
Symone R. Gibbs,
Imprisoned Without a Verdict: The Constitutional Crisis of Pre-Trial Solitary Confinement,
32 Wash. & Lee J. Civ. Rts. & Soc. Just. 239
(2026).
Available at: https://scholarlycommons.law.wlu.edu/crsj/vol32/iss1/6
Included in
Civil Rights and Discrimination Commons, Constitutional Law Commons, Criminal Law Commons, Criminal Procedure Commons, Fourteenth Amendment Commons, Human Rights Law Commons, Law Enforcement and Corrections Commons