What Happened When Connecticut Sent Its Prisoners to a Virginia Supermax
I recently learned about an important case in law school for jurisdiction issues that has an interesting criminal justice lens and highlights a dramatic controversy around prison conditions in recent history. This case caught my attention and pulled my heartstrings in so many ways because of its sad implications for many prisoners. The case is Young v. New Haven Advocate. On the surface, it’s a case about defamation and internet jurisdiction. But the cause of action revolves around an issue that touches on mass incarceration, prison conditions, and state management of prison populations.
Back in the late 1990s and early 2000s, Connecticut made a controversial decision to save money on prison expenditures when it started sending some of its prisoners out of state to Virginia to a high-security supermax prison called Wallens Ridge. The conditions in Connecticut prisons were known to be decent, but these were not transfers to similar facilities. Wallens Ridge was known for its harsh conditions, extreme isolation, and use of force, and their families were hundreds of miles away, making it nearly impossible to visit. There were allegations of abuse, racism, and even reports of deaths behind bars; these issues are still happening today. This was extremely hard to swallow when reading, and everyone in my class was shocked to say the least.
Naturally, this didn’t go unnoticed. Journalists in Connecticut began reporting on what was happening to their state’s inmates. Their articles highlighted the conditions at Wallens Ridge, criticized state officials for the transfers, and raised questions about whether Connecticut was turning a blind eye to what was happening in Virginia. That’s where the Young case comes in.
Stanley Young, the warden of Wallens Ridge at the time, didn’t take kindly to how he was portrayed in these articles. He ended up suing two Connecticut newspapers, The New Haven Advocate and The Hartford Courant. He sued for defamation because they named him in their articles and suggested that he had confederate flags in his office, making him a confederate sympathizer. He filed the lawsuit in Virginia, arguing that even though the papers were based in Connecticut, the stories were accessible online in Virginia, and that’s where the damage to his reputation was done.
The court found that although the articles reached Virginia and were causing issues there, they could not hold jurisdiction over Connecticut newspapers that were only publishing to a small Connecticut audience, with no intent to reach a Virginia audience. This was an important case for specific jurisdiction issues with claims surrounding internet reach. However, what is more interesting is the story, which implicates a broader discussion of prisoner treatment and state oversight.
States continue to ship prisoners across state lines, sometimes for cost-saving reasons, sometimes because of overcrowding. It is a massive injustice to transport prisoners to a state where they are not residents for the selfish motive of cost-saving. Families can no longer see the prisoners, and rehabilitation, the main goal of the prison system, becomes so much harder. Abuse becomes easier to hide when the conditions of the prison are completely out of the state’s hands. Who is to say that the standards for prisoners are the same in Virginia as in Connecticut?
This case and controversy took place in 2001, and in 2004, all of the remaining prisoners were returned to Virginia. In the process of “cost saving,” Connecticut ended up spending far more money because of this transfer, through many legal battles. Though it is a victory that the prisoners were returned to Connecticut and removed from the terrible conditions of Wallens Ridge, this case serves as a reminder of an ongoing battle for prison reform. Even today, there are reports of deaths and bad conditions in Wallen Ridge, and these are issues that must be addressed. Shipping mass amounts of prisoners out of state cannot be an ongoing practice either.
Young v. New Haven Advocate was fascinating to me for many reasons, but I wanted to share its implications in prison reform and reflections on our system today. For those of us who care about criminal justice reform and transparency, it’s a case worth remembering, though a difficult one to face once you dive in.
