Abstract
The first part of this Note provides a brief look at the history of inmate rights. This section explains the "hands off" doctrine, traces its demise, and examines the courts' approach to early inmate cases decided on the merits. The second part of this Note analyzes the Turner case. It sets forth the Turner test, a four-pronged rational basis test, and examines how the United States Supreme Court applied the test to the challenged regulations in that case. The third part of this Note examines a recent Supreme Court case, Washington v. Harper, which applied the Turner test to determine the validity of a regulation authorizing the forcible administration of antipsychotic drugs to competent but mentally ill inmates. The fourth part of this Note critiques the Turner test using Harper to illustrate the test's shortcomings. This section argues that the Turner test is incorrectly formulated, shows how the Court has misapplied the test in subsequent decisions, and asserts that the test does not adequately protect inmate rights in all circumstances. This Note attempts to illustrate that the Turner test is a step backwards toward the historical "hands off" approach.
How to Cite
35 Ariz. L. Rev. 219 (1993)
8
Views
4
Downloads