Is Failure To Protect Inmates From Harm A Violation Of The 8th Amendment?

This post is offered as a discussion topic only and does not represent legal advice. Officers must refer to the laws in their own State as well as their agency's policies, which can be more restrictive on officers than the law requires.

Scenario: An officer working in custody, and an inmate tells them that another inmate threatened his life.  He asks to be moved from his current housing unit and the inmate to be put on a “keep away” list.  The officer reports it to their supervisor and the two of them determine that there is a basis to move him but a keep away was not established.  Then, the inmate who was threatened is out for movement within the facility and is attacked by the other inmate, causing serious injury. 

Was this a violation of his 8th Amendment rights?   

Answer: A similar situation occurred in the 2020 9th Circuit Court of Appeals Case Wilk v Neven.  In this case,the court said, "The Eighth Amendment requires prison officials to protect inmates from violence. It is not, however, every injury suffered by one prisoner at the hands of another that translates into constitutional liability for prison officials responsible for the victim's safety." Specifically, a prison official violates an inmate's Eighth Amendment right only if that official is "deliberately indifferent" —in other words, if the official is subjectively aware of a substantial risk of serious harm to an inmate and disregards that risk by failing to respond reasonably. A fact-finder may infer subjective awareness from circumstantial evidence."

In addition, the court said of the corrections officers, “Any reasonable prison official in the defendants' position would know that the actions defendants took, and failed to take, violated the Eighth Amendment. None of the defendants can claim ignorance to a prisoner's right to be protected from violence at the hands of other inmates.” 

There were two officials that violated the inmates 8th Amendment Rights.  First was the warden of the facility, who failed to authorize official keep-aways between the two  inmates in question even though his subordinates told him the threats were credible.  Second was the officer that moved the victim.  That officer failed to take into consideration the fact that the section the victim was moved from shared a recereation yard with the section he was moved to, which caused the two inmates to run into each other.

Officers and supervisors working in custody must take appropriate action when an inmate reports a possible threat to his safety.  Although the 9th Circuit remanded this case back to the district court for further proceedings, this case establishes that the failure to protect inmates from each other in a custody setting clearly violates the 8th Amendment to protect against cruel and unusual punishment.  This can include mixing classifications or being lax during movement.   

This blog topic serves as a summary of our video lesson on this crucial topic. If you're interested in accessing the full video lesson and additional resources, click the link to register for your free 30-day trial.