HELENA, Mont. -- Montana Gov. Steve Bullock has issued a directive designed to protect Montanans in prison against COVID-19.

But advocacy groups for incarcerated people say it doesn't go far enough.

Bullock's directive asks the Board of Pardons and Parole to consider early release for people with medical conditions that make them high risk.

Alex Rate, legal director at the American Civil Liberities Union of Montana, says people with disabilities and underlying mental health issues need to be considered as well. He says the state needs to reduce the number of people in these facilities to protect corrections officers and communities.

"The governor's directive urges that there be some of those types of actions undertaken, but there is certainly no force of law behind that directive," Rate stresses.

Bullock's directive also restricts in-person visitation and suspends new transfers to the Department of Corrections, unless they're approved by its director.

Groups including Disability Rights Montana, Montana Human Rights Network and Montana Innocence Project signed onto a letter from the ACLU of Montana to state officials two weeks ago calling on Bullock to release vulnerable people from prison.

Rate says they aren't asking for facilities to throw open their doors and allow everyone to go free.

"What we're seeking is a very deliberate and thorough process by which all rosters are reviewed and populations are accordingly reduced," he explains. "So we believe that the public safety and public health can be balanced in this situation. It just requires somebody to step up and make sure that that happens."

The coronavirus has spread through several correctional facilities across the country, including in California, Illinois and New York. Rate says the time to act is now before the same happens in Montana facilities.


get more stories like this via email

Today, advocates in North Carolina are kicking off a 136-mile "Walk for Commutation" to raise awareness about those on death row who could soon face execution.

Organized by the North Carolina Coalition for Alternatives to the Death Penalty, the walk is part of a larger push that calls on Gov. Roy Cooper to commute the death sentences before he leaves office.

Noel Nickle, executive director of the North Carolina Coalition for Alternatives to the Death Penalty, stresses the urgency as the state prepares for a change in leadership.

"There's really no denying the racism of the death penalty," Nickle explained. "There's also no denying that death sentences have dramatically decreased. Most people on death row were sentenced more than 20 years ago. People are aging. They are no longer, if they ever were, a threat to our communities. We know that the death penalty doesn't keep us safe."

North Carolina has not executed anyone since 2006, but concerns are growing that the state may follow South Carolina's recent decision to restart executions after a 13-year pause.

Nickle called attention to the racial and geographic disparities in death penalty cases. She explained that 60% of the people on death row are Black despite them making up a smaller share of the state population, and added that being put on death row can sometimes depend on where you live.

"For example, we'll be walking through Chapel Hill and Durham as well where there's no one on death row and where the district attorneys have said -- in fact, they were elected on a platform of not seeking the death penalty," she said.

Nickle added the coalition's goal is to spark a statewide conversation about the death penalty's flaws and the urgent need for reform. The walk will begin outside of the Forsyth County Courthouse and conclude on Oct. 10, which is World Day Against the Death Penalty.


get more stories like this via email

A new report examines bail reform and its potential impact in North Carolina and nationwide.

Advocates said bail reform aims to remove the influence of money from decisions about releasing defendants awaiting trial, focusing on factors such as the likelihood of returning to court and potential threats to the community.

Ames Grawert, senior counsel at the Brennan Center for Justice and the report's co-author, said despite critics linking bail reform to rising crime during the pandemic, data show no direct connection between the two. Instead, he noted moving away from cash bail could pave the way for a fairer justice system.

"People who are Latino or Black and accused of crimes, their bail amounts tend to be set higher," Grawert pointed out. "This can be a huge burden to those communities because even if someone is able to secure a bond, like a bail bond, rather than pay the amount of money required by the court outright, those bonds can often come with very high nonrefundable fees."

Grawert noted it can trap people in a cycle of debt or prolonged pretrial detention simply because they cannot afford the costs. The report showed even when given the option to pay bail, only 33% of Latinos are able to afford it.

The study also highlighted how bail reform could help reduce the collateral damage of incarceration, which often limits access to essential services and increases the likelihood of recidivism.

Grawert observed states like New York have already seen success with its bail reform efforts.

"These sorts of pretrial supervision services can be very successful in helping reduce unnecessary pretrial detention while preserving public safety," Grawert contended. "The catch is they have to be adequately funded. They have to have professional staff, and that can't be taken for granted."

The report urged policymakers to invest in alternatives to cash bail and provide support for pretrial services like supervision programs as well as increased access to mental health and substance abuse treatment.


get more stories like this via email

A new report finds using computer tablets in prisons in Connecticut and nationwide isn't filling the void of books.

The Prison Policy Initiative report notes more states provide access to tablets for prisoners. In 2019, only 12 states allowed them - now, 48 do.

But tablet use is increasing at a time when accessing physical books is a challenge due to bans.

Connecticut has close to 2,500 titles on its banned list, though some deemed explicit include medical books.

Wanda Bertram, communications strategist with the Prison Policy Initiative, said these devices make blanket book bans easier to impose.

"Someone who is eager to learn and to read books to escape the world that they're living in, is not going to find a ton on tablets that's going to be that stimulating for them," said Bertram. "The books that are offered on tablets don't seem to be filling the void that's left when prisons choose to restrict access to physical reading."

A PEN America survey finds 84% of prisons have implemented 'content neutral' book bans.

This means instead of being able to directly send an incarcerated person a book, friends and family members have to choose a title from a prison-approved vendor.

Experts say limiting literature can be counterintuitive for prisons. Studies show increased literacy rates, reading, and education programs in prison are key to reducing recidivism and reincarceration.

Pandemic-induced staff shortages are lingering in prisons, which also has led to library services being restricted or cut entirely.

Bertram said she thinks books are critical for people behind bars, noting they can aid with mental health or allow people to plan for life after incarceration.

She said prisons can ensure incarcerated people's access to books.

"Not only are libraries a valuable resource when it comes to just allowing people to read, they're also valuable as a place where people can meet and talk to each other," said Bertram. "Some of the most impactful peer-to-peer or incarcerated people-led programs that have come up in prisons originated in libraries."

While she said she wants to be more optimistic, the growth of computer tablet use is coming at the cost of accessing physical books.

A 2023 Marshall Project review finds state prisons explicitly banned over 50,000 books.

At the same time, 23 states, Washington, D.C., and the Federal Bureau of Prisons say they evaluate books on a case-by-case basis - but use vague rules and have little oversight.