Judge Tamika Montgomery-Reeves, who was nominated by President Biden to the Third Circuit court of appeals, cast the deciding vote to authorize a mentally ill black man to proceed with a claim that he was subjected to cruel and unusual punishment as a result of solitary confinement for 26 years without penological justification. Judge Montgomery-Reeves joined an opinion written by Clinton nominee Judge Theodore McKee, to which Trump nominee Judge Peter Phipps dissented. The September 2024 decision was inWilliams v Secretary.
What is this case about?
Roy Lee Williams, a black man, has had a “history of mental illness” since he was 14, when he was “involuntarily committed” to a psychiatric center for “making suicidal threats and exhibiting violent behavior.” Williams was later convicted and sentenced to death in connection with a killing in 1988. Pursuant to a standard Department of Corrections (DOC) policy concerning people sentenced to death, Williams was put in solitary confinement in 1993.
The state kept Williams in solitary confinement for 26 years, until after a different lawsuit challenging the DOC policy was resolved in 2019. This was despite the fact that there was no specific penological justification for keeping Williams in solitary and that he was “only subject to an active death warrant for thirty-seven days of those twenty-six years.”
As often occurs with individuals with mental health problems kept in solitary, Williams experienced significant problems during that period. One psychiatrist concluded in 1996 that Williams was “severely psychologically, cognitively and emotionally impaired.” Williams attempted to commit suicide, leading to further restrictions such as removal of his tv and radio.
The record showed that people kept in solitary like Williams “lived in cells no larger than seven feet by twelve feet.” They were forced to spend the “overwhelming majority” of their time in isolation in their cells, including eating alone, and could leave their cells for hygiene and other purposes for no more than “ten hours per week.” They exercised in “cages” that were “no more than twice the size” of their cells. They were “precluded” from participating in adult education courses or attending group religious services. These and other deplorable conditions were documented by a Department of Justice 2014 investigation and report. The DOJ report also found that DOC’s prolonged solitary confinement of people with serious mental illness was often “unjustifiably harsh and resulted in serious harm,” and appeared to violate the Eighth Amendment’s prohibition on cruel and unusual punishment.
Acting initially on his own and without a lawyer, Williams filed a federal lawsuit seeking damages against the Secretary of DOC for the cruel and unusual punishment he endured for 26 years in solitary. He also raised claims under the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA), The district court, however, ruled that the Secretary was entitled to qualified immunity, that Williams could not show deliberate indifference under the ADA, and granted summary judgment against Williams. He appealed to the Third Circuit.
How did Judge Montgomery-Reeves and the Third Circuit Rule and Why is it Important?
Judge Montgomery-Reeves cast the deciding vote in a 2-1 ruling that reversed the lower court and sent the case back so that Williams could proceed to try to prove his Eighth Amendment and ADA claims. Judge McKee’s opinion concluded, after careful review of the record and relevant case law, that the Secretary had “fair and clear warning” that his “conduct was unconstitutional” and that “keeping Williams in solitary confinement” for so long would “constitute cruel and unusual punishment.” There was “no room for doubt,” McKee continued, that it was “clearly established that someone with a known preexisting serious mental illness has a constitutional right” not to be held in “prolonged solitary confinement” without penological justification. As to the ADA claim, McKee wrote, a trier of fact could well find that DOC was “deliberately indifferent to the risk of harm” to Williams by placing him in solitary despite his “preexisting serious mental illness.”
The decision made possible by Judge Montgomery-Reeves’ deciding vote will obviously help Roy Lee Williams get some measure of justice for the serious constitutional violation and harm he has suffered. It will also be important in other cases concerning solitary confinement of people with mental illness, particularly in the Third Circuit, which includes Pennsylvania, Delaware and New Jersey. This includes lawsuits now pending by others who were kept in solitary confinement in Pennsylvania pursuant to the state’s former policy. In addition, the ruling serves as a reminder of the importance of promptly confirming fair-minded judges to our federal courts.