CRAIG WILSON, ERIC BELLAMY, KENDAL NELSON, AND MAXIMINO NIEVES, ON BEHALF OF THEMSELVES AND ALL OTHERS SIMILARLY SITUATED v. MARK WILLIAMS, IN HIS OFFICIAL CAPACITY AS WARDEN OF ELKTON FEDERAL CORRECTIONAL INSTITUTION; MICHAEL CARVAJAL, IN HIS OFFICIAL CAPACITY AS THE FEDERAL BUREAU OF PRISONS DIRECTOR - Articles

All Content


Posted by: Karen Belcher on Jun 9, 2020

Court: 6th Circuit Court (Published Opinions)

Attorneys 1: ARGUED: Sarah Carroll, UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE, for Appellants.

Attorneys 2: ARGUED: David J. Carey, ACLU OF OHIO FOUNDATION, Columbus, Ohio, for Appellees.

Attorneys 3: ON BRIEF: Sarah Carroll, Abby C. Wright, Casen B. Ross, UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE, for Appellants.

Attorneys 4: ON BRIEF: David J. Carey, ACLU OF OHIO FOUNDATION, Columbus, Ohio, Joseph Mead, Freda J. Levenson, ACLU OF OHIO FOUNDATION, Cleveland, Ohio, David A. Singleton, Mark A. Vander Laan, Michael L. Zuckerman, OHIO JUSTICE & POLICY CENTER, Cincinnati, Ohio, Kirti Datla, HOGANS LOVELLS US LLP, Washington, D.C., for Appellees.

Judge(s): COLE, Chief Judge; GIBBONS and COOK, Circuit Judges

Court Appealed: Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of Ohio at Youngstown

JULIA SMITH GIBBONS, Circuit Judge. Petitioners, four inmates housed in the low-security Elkton Federal Correctional Institution and its satellite facility FSL Elkton (collectively “Elkton”), on behalf of themselves and others housed or to be housed there, filed a petition under 28 U.S.C. § 2241 to obtain release from custody to limit their exposure to the COVID-19 virus. They sought to represent all current and future inmates, including a subclass of inmates who—through age and/or certain medical conditions—were particularly vulnerable to complications, including death, if they contracted COVID-19. The district court entered a preliminary injunction on April 22, 2020, directing Respondents Mark Williams, Elkton’s warden, and Michael Carvajal, the Director of the Federal Bureau of Prisons (“BOP”) (together “BOP”), to (1) evaluate each subclass member’s eligibility for transfer out of Elkton by any means, including compassionate release, parole or community supervision, transfer furlough, or non-transfer furlough within two weeks; (2) transfer those deemed ineligible for compassionate release to another BOP facility where testing is available and physical distancing is possible; and (3) not allow those transferred to return to Elkton until certain conditions were met.

We hold that jurisdiction was proper under § 2241, although § 2241 does not permit some of the relief petitioners seek. However, because the district court erred in concluding that petitioners have shown a likelihood of success on the merits of their Eighth Amendment claim, we conclude that the district court abused its discretion in granting the preliminary injunction. We thus vacate the injunction.

 

 

Attachments: