As a response to an increasing prison population and as a counteractive measure to problematic inmates, many states within the United States have established supermaximum (supermax) prisons or supermax units within existing prison facilities. Many criminal justice researchers have questioned the efficacy of these specialized units. Although the National Institute for Corrections has established model criteria to dictate what types of inmates should be placed in supermax custody, existing research has not yet examined if the states have chosen to follow the criteria or substitute their own criteria for admission to supermax custody. The current study examines 42 individual state policies in an attempt to ascertain how states determine which inmates are considered the “worst of the worst” and deserve segregation in supermax facilities and/or units. Implications of these policies and directions for future research are discussed.
ArrigoB. A.BullockJ. L. (2008). The psychological effects of solitary confinement on prisoners in supermax units: Reviewing what we know and recommending what should change. International Journal of Offender Therapy and Comparative Criminology, 52, 622-640.
2.
BenchL. L.AllenT. D. (2003). Investigating the stigma of prison classification: An experimental design. The Prison Journal, 83, 367-382.
3.
BriggsC. S.SundtJ. L.CastellanoT. C. (2003). The effect of super maximum security prisons on aggregate levels of institutional violence. Criminology, 41, 1,341-1,376.
4.
ButlerH. D.GriffinO. H.III.KnightG. F. (2012). Supermax prisons: Another chapter in the constitutionality of the incarceration conundrum. Rutgers Journal of Law & Public Policy, 9(1), 1-36.
5.
FeeleyM. M.SimonJ. (1992). The new penology: Notes on the emerging strategy of corrections and its implications. Criminology, 30, 449-475.
6.
HaneyC. (2003). Mental health issues in long-term solitary and “supermax” confinement. Crime and Delinquency, 49, 124-156.
KingK.SteinerB.BreachS. R. (2008). Violence in the supermax: A self-fulfilling prophecy. The Prison Journal, 88, 144-168.
9.
KingR. D. (1999). The rise of supermax: An American solution in search of a problem?Punishment and Society, 1, 163-186.
10.
KupersT. A.DronetT.WinterM.AustinJ.KellyL.CartierW.McBrideJ. (2009). Beyond supermax administrative segregation: Mississippi’s experience rethinking prison classification and creating alternative mental health programs. Criminal Justice and Behavior, 36, 1,037-1,050.
11.
KurkiL.MorrisN. (2001). The purpose, practice, and problem of supermax prisons. In MorrisN.TonryM. (Eds.), Crime and justice: An annual review of research (Vol. 28, pp. 385-424). Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
12.
MatthewsW. (2010). ACLU strikes deal to shutter notorious unit 32 at Mississippi state penitentiary. Retrieved from http://www.aclu-ms.org/news/unit32.htm
13.
MearsD. P. (2006). Evaluating the effectiveness of supermax prisons. Washington, DC: Urban Institute Justice Policy Center.
14.
MearsD. P. (2008). An assessment of supermax prisons using an evaluation research framework. The Prison Journal, 88(1), 43-68.
15.
MearsD. P.BalesW. D. (2009). Supermax incarceration and recidivism. Criminology, 47, 1131-1166.
16.
MearsD. P.BalesW. D. (2010). Supermax housing: Placement, duration, and time to reentry. Journal of Criminal Justice, 38, 545-554.
17.
MearsD. P.CastroJ. L. (2006). Wardens’ views on the wisdom of supermax prisons. Crime and Delinquency, 52, 398-431.
18.
MearsD. P.ReisigM. D. (2006). The theory and practice of supermax prisons. Punishment and Society, 8(1), 33-57.
19.
MearsD. P.WatsonJ. (2006). Towards a fair and balanced assessment of supermax prisons. Justice Quarterly, 23, 232-270.
20.
NadayA.FreilichJ. D.MellowJ. (2008). The elusive data on supermax confinement. The Prison Journal, 88(1), 69-93.
21.
National Institute of Corrections. (1997). Supermax housing: A survey of current practice, special issues in corrections. Longmont, CO: U.S. Department of Justice, National Institute of Corrections.
22.
O’KeefeM. L. (2008). Administrative segregation from within: A corrections perspective. The Prison Journal, 88(1), 123-143.
23.
PizarroJ. M.SteniusV. M. K. (2004). Supermax prisons: Their rise, current practices, and effect on inmates. The Prison Journal, 84, 248-264.
24.
PizarroJ. M.SteniusV. M. K.PrattT. C. (2006). Supermax prisons: Myths, realities, and the politics of punishment in American society. Criminal Justice Policy Review, 17(1), 6-21.
25.
Presley v. Epps, No. 4:05CV148-JAD, 2007.
26.
RichardsS. C. (2008). USP Marion: The first federal supermax. The Prison Journal, 88(1), 6-22.
27.
RivelandC. (1999). Supermax prisons: Overview and general considerations. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Justice, National Institute of Corrections.
28.
RossJ. I. (2007). Supermax prisons. Society, 44(3), 60-64.
29.
Ruiz v. Estelle, 503 F. Supp. 1265 (1980).
30.
WardD. A.WerlichT. G. (2003). Alcatraz and Marion: Evaluating super-maximum custody. Punishment and Society, 5(1), 53-75.
31.
WellsT. L.JohnsonW. W.HenningsenR. J. (2002). Attitudes of prison wardens toward administrative segregation and supermax prisons. In AlaridL. F.CromwellP. F. (Eds.), Correctional perspectives: Views from academics, practitioners, and prisoners (pp.171-180). Los Angeles, CA: Roxbury.
32.
ZimringF. E. (2001). Imprisonment rates and the new politics of criminal punishment. Punishment and Society, 3, 161-166.
