Voice of the Experienced v. LeBlanc

The district court issued a ruling and order finding that the defendants’ remedies in response to its order had been inadequate and directing them to take additional steps, including providing additional tents to provide shade and making changes to the break schedule.

–

The federal district court for the Middle District of Louisiana granted in part an application by incarcerated persons who labor on the “Farm Line” at the Angola penitentiary in Louisiana for a preliminary injunction or temporary restraining order enjoining agricultural labor on the Farm Line when heat index values exceed 88°F. The court found that the evidence at this stage showed that Angola’s heat-related policies were inadequate to mitigate risks of heat-related disorders, resulting in a substantial risk of serious harm. The court said the “worsening climate situation” in Louisiana and Angola compounded the inadequacies of the policies. The court further found that plaintiffs had shown a substantial likelihood of establishing that the defendants had been deliberately indifferent to these risks in violation of the Eighth Amendment. The court also found that the plaintiffs showed an immediate risk of irreparable injury and that the balance of interests favored an injunction. Citing the Prison Litigation Reform Act (PLRA) provision limiting relief in prison conditions lawsuits to remedies that reduce risk to “a socially acceptable level,” the court did not entirely enjoin operation of the Farm Line when the 88°F threshold was reached but instead ordered the defendants to “take immediate measures to correct the glaring deficiencies in their heat-related policies.” The court listed five sets of actions that the defendants were required take and required them to submit a memorandum regarding proposed remedies.

–

The Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals stayed three of the five required sets of actions, but not portions of the ruling that pertained to addressing deficiencies in the defendants’ policies regarding shade, rest, and provision of adequate protective gear. The Fifth Circuit found that the three stayed portions of the district court’s ruling reached beyond persons working on the Farm Line and that the relief was therefore overbroad under the Prison Litigation Reform Act. The Fifth Circuit also found that evidence did not demonstrate the defendants’ deliberate indifference with respect to the stayed portions of the district court’s order.