Chapter 14
Injunctive Litigation
Chapter Overview
This chapter addresses injunctions—court orders requiring a lawsuit’s defendants to do something or stop doing something. The chapter explores injunctions entered after litigation or on consent, looking at the prerequisites for entry, modification, and termination, including the impact of the 1996 Prison Litigation Reform Act.
Featured Opinions
- Badgley v. Santacroce, 800 F.2d 33 (2d Cir. 1986)
- Brown v. Plata, 563 U.S. 493 (2011)
- Edwards v. Balisok, 520 U.S. 641 (1997)
- Georgia Advocacy Office v. Jackson, 4 F.4th 1200 (11th Cir. 2021)
- Heck v. Humphrey, 512 U.S. 477 (1994)
- Hutto v. Finney, 437 U.S. 678 (1978)
- Lewis v. Casey, 518 U.S. 343 (1996)
- Miller v. French, 530 U.S. 327 (2000)
- Muhammad v. Close, 540 U.S. 749 (2004)
- Preiser v. Rodriguez, 411 U.S. 475 (1973)
- Rufo v. Inmates of Suffolk County Jail, 502 U.S. 367 (1992)
- Valentine v. Collier, 140 S.Ct. 1598 (2020)
- Wilkinson v. Dotson, 544 U.S. 74 (2005)
- Wilson v. Williams, 961 F.3d 829 (6th Cir. 2020)
Featured, Cited, and Supplemental Litigation Documents
- Plata v. Brown and Coleman v. Brown, No. 2:90–cv–0520 (E.D. Cal.), C01–1351 (N.D. Cal.)
- Plata Litigation summary and documents
- Coleman Litigation summary and documents
- Consolidated three-judge court Litigation summary and documents
- Opinion and Order Requiring Defendants to Implement Amended Plan, 952 F. Supp. 2d 901 (Jun. 20, 2013) (three judge court)
- California’s stay application to Supreme Court (Jul. 10, 2013)
- Amicus brief by four former California governors in support of stay application (Jul. 15, 2013)
- Plaintiffs’ stay opposition (Jul. 19, 2013)
- Denial of Application for a Stay, 570 U.S. 938 (2013)
- Badgley v. Varelas (Nassau County Jail)
- Clark v. California, No. 3:96–cv–01486 (N.D. Cal.)
- Costello v. Wainwright, 72–109 (M.D. Fla.)
- Davis v. Canyon Cnty., No. 1:09–cv–00107 (D. Idaho)
- Duffy v. Riveland, No. C92–cv–1596R (W.D. Wash.)
- Litigation summary and documents
- Settlement Agreement (Jun. 3, 1998)
- Etters v. Young, No. 5:09–ct–3187 (E.D.N.C.)
- Litigation summary and documents
- Order and Agreement, No. 5:09–ct–3187 (May 21, 2012)
- Fussell v. Wilkinson, No. 1:03–cv–00704 (S.D. Ohio)
- Goldsby v. Carnes, No. 20122–1 (W.D. Mo.)
- Litigation summary and documents
- Memorandum Opinion and Order, 365 F. Supp. 395 (1973)
- Hadix v. Johnson, No. 2:80-cv-73581-JF (E.D. Mich.)
- Harris v. Pernsley, No. 82–cv–1847 (E.D. Pa.)
- Hutto v. Finney/Holt v. Sarver, 5:69–cv–00024–GTE (E.D. Ark.)
- Makinson v. Bonneville Cnty., No. 4:97–cv–00190 (D. Idaho)
- Mast v. Donahue. No. 2:05–cv–00037 (S.D. Ind.)
- Prison Legal News v. Berkeley Cnty. Sheriff, No. 2:10–cv–02594 (D.S.C.)
- Litigation summary and documents
- Consent Injunction (Jan. 13, 2012)
- Rouser v. White, 2:93–cv–00767–LKK–GGH (E.D. Cal.)
- Washington v. Reno, No. 93–cv–0217 (E.D. Ky.) (Federal Bureau of Prisons telephone service)
- Litigation summary and documents
- 35 F.3d 1093 (6th Cir. 1994)
- Williams v. City of Philadelphia, No. 2:08–cv–01979 (E.D. Pa.)
Statutes, Treaties, and Regulations
- Civil Rights of Institutionalized Persons Act (CRIPA), 42 U.S.C. §§ 1997 et seq. (Posted version includes both 1980 and current version on exhaustion)
- Prison Litigation Reform Act, Pub. L. No. 104-134 (see in particular 18 U.S.C. § 3626)
- Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 60
Excerpted Sources & Supplemental Documents
- Sen. Spencer Abraham, Introductory statement for the Prison Conditions Litigation Reform Act, 141 Cong. Rec. S14312–03, 1995 WL 566447 (Sept. 26, 1995)
- John Boston, Modification of Judgments/Consent Judgments, 7 Nat’l Prison Project J. #2 (Spring 1992)
- Ross Sandler & David Schoenbrod, Democracy by Decree: What Happens When Courts Run Government (2003)
- Heather Schoenfeld, Building the Prison State: Race and the Politics of Mass Incarceration (Chapters 3 & 4: The Unintended Consequences of Prison Litigation, 1980–1991) (2019)
- Margo Schlanger, Civil Rights Injunctions Over Time: A Case Study of Jail and Prison Court Orders, 81 N.Y.U. L. Rev. 550 (2006)
Lived Experiences
Data & Figures
Additional Reading
History and Effects of Injunctive Litigation
- ACLU National Prison Project, Status Report: The Courts and Prisons (March 1, 1987), reprinted in 1 Prisoners and the Law App. B-3 (Ira Robbins, ed.) (1989 version available here)
- Dan Berger, Mariame Kaba & David Stein, What Abolitionists Do, Jacobin (Aug. 2017)
- Richard T. Boylan & Naci H. Mocan, Intended and Unintended Consequences of Prison Reform, 30 J. L. Econ. & Org. 558 (2014)
- Owen M. Fiss & Doug Rendleman, Injunctions (2d ed. 1984)
- Joshua Guetzkow & Eric Schoon, If You Build It, They Will Fill It: The Unintended Consequences of Prison Overcrowding Litigation, 49 Law & Soc’y Rev. 401 (2015)
- Linda Harriman & Jeffrey D. Straussman, Do Judges Determine Budget Decisions? Federal Court Decisions in Prison Reform and State Spending for Corrections, 43 Pub. Admin. Rev. 343 (Jul. 1983)
- Judith Resnik, Impermissible Punishments: How Prison Became a Problem for Democracy (2025)
- Dorothy E. Roberts, The Supreme Court 2018 Term, Foreword: Abolition Constitutionalism, 133 Harv. L. Rev. 1 (2019)
- Margo Schlanger, Inmate Litigation, 116 Harv. L. Rev. 1555 (2003)
- Margo Schlanger, Beyond the Hero Judge: Institutional Reform Litigation as Litigation, 97 Mich. L. Rev. 1994 (1999)
- William A. Taggart, Redefining the Power of the Federal Judiciary: The Impact of Court-Ordered Prison Reform on State Expenditures for Corrections, 23 Law & Soc’y Rev. 241 (1989)
- Michael L. Zuckerman, When the Conditions Are the Confinement: Eighth Amendment Habeas Claims During COVID-19, 90 U. Cin. L. Rev. 1 (2021)
Civil Rights of Institutionalized Persons Act
- Robert Dinerstein, The Absence of Justice, 63 Neb. L. Rev. 680 (1984)
- Robert Dinerstein, Rights of Institutionalized Disabled Persons, in W.L. Taylor & R.C. Govan, eds., One Nation Indivisible: The Civil Rights Challenge for the 1990s (1989)
- Karen E. Holt, When Officials Clash: Implementation of the Civil Rights of Institutionalized Persons Act (1998)
Prison Litigation Reform Act and Injunctions
- Elizabeth Alexander, Getting to Yes in a PLRA World, 30 Pace L. Rev. 1672 (2010)
- Alison Brill, Note, Rights Without Remedy: The Myth of State Court Accessibility After the Prison Litigation Reform Act, 30 Cardozo L. Rev. 645 (2008)
- John Boston, The Prison Litigation Reform Act: The New Face of Court Stripping, 67 Brook. L. Rev. 429 (2001)
- Contract with America: The Bold Plan by Rep. Newt Gingrich, Rep. Dick Armey, and the House Republicans to Change the Nation 53 (Ed Gillespie & Bob Schellhas eds., 1994)
- Kiira J. Johal, Note, Judges Behind Bars: The Intrusiveness Requirement’s Restriction on the Implementation of Relief Under the Prison Litigation Reform Act, 114 Colum. L. Rev. 715 (2014)
- Margo Schlanger, Trends in Prisoner Litigation, as the PLRA Enters Adulthood, 5 U.C. Irvine L. Rev. 153 (2015)
- Margo Schlanger, Prisoners’ Rights Lawyers’ Strategies for Preserving the Role of the Courts, 69 U. Miami L. Rev. 519 (2015)
- Margo Schlanger, Plata v. Brown and Realignment: Jails, Prisons, Courts, and Politics, 48 Harv. C.R.-C.L. L. Rev. 165 (2013)