9th Circuit says lack of staff doesn't justify 5-point shackling of inmates in federal court
Shackling defendants in five-point restraints for routine nonjury appearances in federal court simply because of a lack of staff is not appropriate, a federal appeals court says.
Reversing a federal district court decision, the San Francisco-based 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals said in its Tuesday opinion (PDF) that “economic strain of the jailer to provide adequate safeguards” was not sufficient justification for the enhanced court security policy adopted in 2013 in the Southern District of California at the request of the U.S. Marshal.
However, the three-judge panel left the door open for the district court to uphold the restraint policy on remand if it is shown that the policy was adopted with “adequate justification of its necessity.”
The Federal Defenders of San Diego brought the suit on behalf of several defendants. Attorney Ellis Johnston, who represented the group, said it appreciates the high burden imposed by the 9th Circuit to justify courtroom restraints, Courthouse News reports.
“The court’s decision acknowledges how the routine use of shackles in almost every pretrial proceeding can humiliate and distract a defendant in a constitutionally significant way and that across-the-board shackling of people who have not even been convicted of a crime can undercut the need for a dignified and decorous judicial process,” Johnston said.
U.S. Attorney Laura Duffy told the news agency that the government is still considering its options.
“Protecting defendants’ rights and promoting courtroom security are both high priorities,” she said “We are reviewing today’s decision with both priorities in mind.”
The Associated Press and the San Diego Union-Tribune also have stories.
