Revision History: HB35 Restorative housing and isolated confinement restrictions on use
2026-03-06 04:24:43
Edited by: 74.110.183.75
Edited by: 74.110.183.75
= HB35 Restorative housing and isolated confinement; restrictions on use. = == Status == [https://house.vga.virginia.gov/subcommittees/H15002/agendas/5187 Public Safety | Subcommittee #2 — agenda] <hr> == Overview == === Summary as Introduced === <b>Restorative housing and isolated confinement; restrictions on use.</b> Prohibits the use of isolated confinement, defined in the bill, in state correctional facilities, subject to certain exceptions. The bill requires that before placing an incarcerated person in restorative housing or isolated confinement for his own protection, the facility administrator shall place an incarcerated person in a less-restrictive setting, including by transferring such person to another institution or to a special-purpose housing unit for incarcerated persons who face similar threats. The bill requires that if an incarcerated person is placed in restorative housing or isolated confinement, such placement shall be reviewed every 48 hours and the facility administrator shall ensure that the incarcerated person receives a medical and mental health evaluation from certified medical and mental health professionals within one working day of placement in restorative housing or any form of isolated confinement. The bill also requires the facility administrator to notify the regional administrator in writing that an incarcerated person was placed in restorative housing or isolated confinement within 24 hours of such placement. Finally, the bill requires that formal reviews of an incarcerated person's placement in any form of isolated confinement shall be held in such person's presence, inform him of any reasons administrative officials believe isolated confinement remains necessary, and give the incarcerated person an opportunity to respond to those reasons, and a formal ruling shall be provided to the incarcerated individual within 24 hours. <hr> === Patrons === ==== House Patrons ==== • Joshua G. Cole (chief patron) • Patrick A. Hope (chief-co-patron) • Sam Rasoul (co-patron • Holly Seibold ==== Senate Patrons ==== • Lamont Bagby <hr> == Language == The language of [https://lis.virginia.gov/bill-details/20261/HB35/text/HB35 HB35] can be viewed here. <hr> == Proposed Amendment == === Amendment Offered for Consideration (requested for subcommittee) === ==== Add “Lockdown” throughout relevant provisions ==== Amend the bill to explicitly include “lockdown” alongside “solitary confinement/isolated confinement” and “restorative housing” in all relevant sections, to prevent facilities from using unit-wide lockdown practices as a functional substitute for individual isolated confinement. ==== Strengthen the time-limit clause (close the cumulative-days gap) ==== Replace the current time-limit phrasing with: “No individual shall be held in solitary confinement, lockdown, or restorative housing for more than 15 consecutive days, nor 15 days in any 60-day period.” <b>Purpose of the amendment:</b> The introduced text already uses “15 consecutive days…in any 60-day period,” but stakeholders have raised concerns that “consecutive” language can be worked around by cycling people in and out (or shifting to lockdown practices) without ever hitting a “consecutive” threshold. The amendment makes the limit explicitly <i>both</i> consecutive and cumulative. Again, the intent is to prohibit the outcome of prolonged, solitary isolation, not to jeopardize the safety of anyone, but to ensure the constraint of this practice. <hr> == Opening Statement == === House Subcommittee Statement === <blockquote> ====Notes on delivery: ==== <mark> <b>bold</b>—emphasize, increase volume; </mark> <mark> <i>italicized</i>—stressed, extended pronunciation, sing-songy; </mark> <mark> <i><b>bold italicized</i></b>—stressed and emphatic, increase volume; </mark> <mark> CAPITALIZED—climactic and declarative;</mark> <mark> »chevrons«—deliver jokingly, with humor; </mark> <mark> • bulleted—drum-like repetition, think of MLK's "I Have a Dream," "I have a dream that..." repeated for emphasis; </mark> <mark> — a half pause, slight build-up; </mark> <mark> — — a full pause, major build-up. <mark> <mark><b>VIBE:</b> think <i>"victory lap;"</i> sell the idea that this bill is a done deal and that doubters should get on board while they still have a chance to be on the right side of history. This is a <b><i>pathos</i></b> and <i><b>ethos</i></b> argument, not <i>logos</i>; lean on expert testimonies for questions of <i>logic</i>. - Eric</mark> </blockquote> <br> Mister Chair, members of the subcommittee— <i>This is not our first time here.</i> For <b>two straight years</b>, the General Assembly has passed this reform — — <b>In 2024</b>, I gave you a »sermon« — — and then we passed <i>HB 1244.</i> <b>In 2025</b>, • my sister, • my friend, • and my <i>esteemed colleague</i>, <b>Delegate Karen Keys-Gamarra</b>, took up the torch — — and then we passed <i>HB 2647.</i> Twice, this body has said—<i><b>clearly</b></i>—that we are ready to turn the page on solitary confinement. And after <b>two straight years</b>, nobody can pretend this is new... • You know this bill. • You know this issue. • You know how overdue this change is — — <br> Mister Chair, members of the committee, this is not our first time here—<b>»BUT it will be our last«</b>—because this year <i>we will <b>make history.</b></i> And what is so great about this year is that we all have a <i>chance</i>—a <i><b>chance</b></i> to be part of making history. If you're still on the fence, I want you to look <i>forward</i> into the future with me. <b>Don't let the past hold you back — —</b> • Because when we look back in 25 years, <b>we will know this legislation was the right thing to do.</b> • Because when we look back in 50 years, <b>we will know this legislation was the right thing to do.</b> • Because when we look back in <b><span style="text-transform:uppercase">one-hundred years</span></b>, <i><b><span style="text-transform:uppercase">we will know this legislation was the right thing to do!</span></b></i> Today—I hope everyone in this room joins us in doing the <i><b><span style="text-transform:uppercase">right thing.</span></b></i> <br> We know the counterarguments. We know the questions. And we're happy to answer them. <b>But</b> I encourage us to <i>listen</i>— • To listen to the <i>testimonies</i> of those who have suffered; • To listen to the voices who are ready for change; • To listen so that we may be reminded—again—<i>just how overdue this legislation is.</i> <br> Thank you, Mister Chair and members of the committee. I hope you report this bill favorably to full committee. <hr> === Appropriations Subcommittee Statement === - ==== Amendment ==== + === House Floor Statement === - The amendment changes “48 hours” to “two business days.” This was done to remove the FIS. + Mr. Speaker, they said the third time's a charm. - ==== Introduction ==== + This body has passed a solitary confinement restriction for two years in a row. This year, we have a chance to pass it for a third and final time. - HB35 includes a timing provision that is driving its fiscal impact. After speaking with the Department of Corrections, it is clear that the FIS comes from overtime when the 48-hour deadline falls on weekends or holidays. To address this, we replaced "48 hours" with "two business days." + HB35 would restrict solitary confinement to 15 days total in any 60-day period. The science of isolation is not a mystery to us; prolonged isolation is dangerous to the mind and the body. And times, Mr. Speaker, are a-changin'. Our commonwealth is more ready than ever to bring humane compassion to rehabilitation inside our prisons. - We worked with DOC and stakeholders to reach this version, which keeps the bill’s intent but removes the additional costs. Mr. Elam or DOC staff should be here to confirm that this will eliminate the fiscal impact. + I ask that we engross the bill and pass it on to it's third reading. - <i>(let DOC testify to the elimination of the FIS)</i> + ==== Amendment ==== - I hope it will be the will of the subcommittee to report the bill to full committee. + The amendment changes “48 hours” to “two business days.” This was done to remove the FIS. - <hr> + ==== Introduction ==== - == Support and Opposition == + HB35 includes a timing provision that is driving its fiscal impact. After speaking with the Department of Corrections, it is clear that the FIS comes from overtime when the 48-hour deadline falls on weekends or holidays. To address this, we replaced "48 hours" with "two business days." - === Support === + We worked with DOC and stakeholders to reach this version, which keeps the bill’s intent but removes the additional costs. Mr. Elam or DOC staff should be here to confirm that this will eliminate the fiscal impact. - • ACLU People Power Fairfax + - • Bridging The Gap In Virginia + <i>(let DOC testify to the elimination of the FIS)</i> - • Charlottesville Chapter National Organization for Women + - • Coalition for Justice + I hope it will be the will of the subcommittee to report the bill to full committee. - • EJUSA Evangelical Network + - • Fighting 4 Freedom + <hr> - • Greater Washington (JCRC) + - • Inmate Support Virginia + == Support and Opposition == - • Interfaith Action for Human Rights (IAHR) + - • HALT Solitary + === Support === - • Jewish Community Relations Council of Just Future Project + • ACLU People Power Fairfax - • Justice & Witness Action Network- VA + • Bridging The Gap In Virginia - • United Church of Christ Central Atlantic Conference + • Charlottesville Chapter National Organization for Women - • LatinoJustice PRLDEF + • Coalition for Justice - • NAACP Loudoun + • EJUSA Evangelical Network - • National Association of Social Workers + • Fighting 4 Freedom - • National Association of Social Workers, Virginia Chapter + • Greater Washington (JCRC) - • National Religious Campaign Against Torture + • Inmate Support Virginia - • No Left Turns + • Interfaith Action for Human Rights (IAHR) - • Resource Information Help for the Disadvantaged and Disenfranchised (RIHD) + • HALT Solitary - • RISE for Youth + • Jewish Community Relations Council of Just Future Project - • RVA Health Alliance for Social Justice and Equity + • Justice & Witness Action Network- VA - • Social Action Linking Together (SALT) + • United Church of Christ Central Atlantic Conference - • Social Workers and Allies Against Solitary Confinement + • LatinoJustice PRLDEF - • The Humanization Project + • NAACP Loudoun - • The Sentencing Project + • National Association of Social Workers - • Unitarian Universalist Legislative Ministry of Virginia + • National Association of Social Workers, Virginia Chapter - • Unlock the Box Campaign + • National Religious Campaign Against Torture - • Virginia CURE + • No Left Turns - • Virginia Defenders for Freedom, Justice & Equality + • Resource Information Help for the Disadvantaged and Disenfranchised (RIHD) - • Virginia Justice Democrats + • RISE for Youth - • Virginia Justice for Life + • RVA Health Alliance for Social Justice and Equity - • Virginia Justice Alliance + • Social Action Linking Together (SALT) - • Virginia Prisons Accountability Committee + • Social Workers and Allies Against Solitary Confinement - • Virginia Prisoner Of Conscience + • The Humanization Project - • Virginia Prison Justice Network + • The Sentencing Project - • WJCC Coalition for Community Justice + • Unitarian Universalist Legislative Ministry of Virginia - • 40 Strong + • Unlock the Box Campaign - + • Virginia CURE - === Opposition === + • Virginia Defenders for Freedom, Justice & Equality - • (to be updated) + • Virginia Justice Democrats - + • Virginia Justice for Life - === No Recommendation / Neutral === + • Virginia Justice Alliance - • (to be updated) + • Virginia Prisons Accountability Committee - + • Virginia Prisoner Of Conscience - === No Position Provided === + • Virginia Prison Justice Network - • Department of Corrections + • WJCC Coalition for Community Justice - + • 40 Strong - <hr> + - + === Opposition === - == Fiscal Impact == + • (to be updated) - No fiscal impact statement is posted for HB35. The Department of Corrections may try to bring forward a claim for a fiscal impact; however, LIS and Appropriations Committee have currently not provided any impact statement. + - + === No Recommendation / Neutral === - <hr> + • (to be updated) - == Possible Questions == + === No Position Provided === - + • Department of Corrections - === TL;DR === + - <b>Q1: “Does this end solitary confinement in Virginia?”</b> TL;DR: No—it ends <i>prolonged</i> solitary confinement and sets clear limits, oversight, and due-process rules for any use. <br> + <hr> - <b>Q2: “Does this make prisons less safe for staff?”</b> TL;DR: No—HB35 keeps exceptions for imminent threats and requires documentation; it’s about targeted use, not “never.” + - + == Fiscal Impact == - <br> + No fiscal impact statement is posted for HB35. The Department of Corrections may try to bring forward a claim for a fiscal impact; however, LIS and Appropriations Committee have currently not provided any impact statement. - <b>Q3: “What changes day-to-day?”</b> TL;DR: Frequent reviews, rapid medical/mental health checks, real programming/out-of-cell time, and written accountability when isolation is used. + - + <hr> - <br> + - <b>Q4: “Can DOC just use ‘lockdowns’ instead?”</b> TL;DR: The bill defines lockdown and regulates it, and the requested amendment strengthens this further by applying the same time limits to lockdown explicitly. + == Possible Questions == - <br> + === TL;DR === - + <b>Q1: “Does this end solitary confinement in Virginia?”</b> TL;DR: No—it ends <i>prolonged</i> solitary confinement and sets clear limits, oversight, and due-process rules for any use. <br> - === Q1: “What does the bill aim to accomplish?” === + <b>Q2: “Does this make prisons less safe for staff?”</b> TL;DR: No—HB35 keeps exceptions for imminent threats and requires documentation; it’s about targeted use, not “never.” - <b>Answer you can use:</b> HB35 ends prolonged solitary confinement by setting clear time limits and requiring real oversight—regular reviews, rapid medical and mental health evaluations, documentation, and in-person due process when isolation continues. + - + <br> - <br> + <b>Q3: “What changes day-to-day?”</b> TL;DR: Frequent reviews, rapid medical/mental health checks, real programming/out-of-cell time, and written accountability when isolation is used. - === Q2: “How often is placement reviewed?” === + <br> - <b>Answer you can use:</b> Placement is reviewed frequently, including a required 48-hour review cycle with written documentation explaining why less restrictive settings were not used. + <b>Q4: “Can DOC just use ‘lockdowns’ instead?”</b> TL;DR: The bill defines lockdown and regulates it, and the requested amendment strengthens this further by applying the same time limits to lockdown explicitly. - <br> + <br> - === Q3: “What health protections are required?” === + === Q1: “What does the bill aim to accomplish?” === - <b>Answer you can use:</b> HB35 requires medical and mental health evaluations by certified professionals within one working day of placement in restorative housing or isolated confinement (with limited exceptions). + <b>Answer you can use:</b> HB35 ends prolonged solitary confinement by setting clear time limits and requiring real oversight—regular reviews, rapid medical and mental health evaluations, documentation, and in-person due process when isolation continues. <br> - === Q4: “Does this stop people from getting programming or recreation?” === + === Q2: “How often is placement reviewed?” === - <b>Answer you can use:</b> No—the bill requires at least four hours of out-of-cell programming or congregate activity daily, plus at least one hour of congregate recreation unless exceptional safety circumstances apply. + <b>Answer you can use:</b> Placement is reviewed frequently, including a required 48-hour review cycle with written documentation explaining why less restrictive settings were not used. <br> - === Q5: “What stops indefinite ‘lockdowns’?” === + === Q3: “What health protections are required?” === - <b>Answer you can use:</b> Lockdowns that interrupt programming must have a specific documented security purpose, must end as soon as the purpose is served, are time-limited, require approvals to extend or repeat, and must be documented and published. + <b>Answer you can use:</b> HB35 requires medical and mental health evaluations by certified professionals within one working day of placement in restorative housing or isolated confinement (with limited exceptions). - <hr> + <br> - == Talking Points == + === Q4: “Does this stop people from getting programming or recreation?” === - + <b>Answer you can use:</b> No—the bill requires at least four hours of out-of-cell programming or congregate activity daily, plus at least one hour of congregate recreation unless exceptional safety circumstances apply. - === 1. Solitary Confinement Is Increasing in Virginia === + - <b>Key Facts:</b> + <br> - • In FY25, 7,999 people were placed in some form of isolation in VADOC facilities. + - • This represents an 11% increase from the prior year. + === Q5: “What stops indefinite ‘lockdowns’?” === - • This is 57% higher than FY2021 levels. + <b>Answer you can use:</b> Lockdowns that interrupt programming must have a specific documented security purpose, must end as soon as the purpose is served, are time-limited, require approvals to extend or repeat, and must be documented and published. - • The trend has been steadily upward for several years. + - + <hr> - <b>Policy Implication:</b> Voluntary reforms have not reduced isolation. Without statutory limits, use continues to expand. + - + == Talking Points == - <b>Answer you can use:</b> + - Despite years of discussion, solitary confinement is increasing in Virginia. Nearly 8,000 people were placed in isolation last year—up 57 percent since 2021. That shows policy alone is not working. HB35 creates enforceable limits. + === 1. Solitary Confinement Is Increasing in Virginia === - + <b>Key Facts:</b> - <br> + • In FY25, 7,999 people were placed in some form of isolation in VADOC facilities. - + • This represents an 11% increase from the prior year. - === 2. Solitary Is Becoming More Prolonged === + • This is 57% higher than FY2021 levels. - <b>Key Facts:</b> + • The trend has been steadily upward for several years. - • FY23 average length of stay: 9.9 days + - • FY25 average length of stay: 30.9 days + <b>Policy Implication:</b> Voluntary reforms have not reduced isolation. Without statutory limits, use continues to expand. - • A threefold increase in two years + - • More than double the UN’s 15-day torture threshold + <b>Answer you can use:</b> - + Despite years of discussion, solitary confinement is increasing in Virginia. Nearly 8,000 people were placed in isolation last year—up 57 percent since 2021. That shows policy alone is not working. HB35 creates enforceable limits. - <b>Policy Implication:</b> Temporary isolation is becoming routine long-term confinement. + - + <br> - <b>Answer you can use:</b> + - The average stay in isolation has tripled in two years and now exceeds 30 days. That is more than double what the United Nations considers torture. This bill stops that normalization. + === 2. Solitary Is Becoming More Prolonged === - + <b>Key Facts:</b> - <br> + • FY23 average length of stay: 9.9 days - + • FY25 average length of stay: 30.9 days - === 3. Solitary Is Used Primarily on People in Mental Health Crisis === + • A threefold increase in two years - <b>Key Facts:</b> + • More than double the UN’s 15-day torture threshold - • Over 56 percent have diagnosed mental health conditions + - • True prevalence is likely higher due to underreporting and limited staffing + <b>Policy Implication:</b> Temporary isolation is becoming routine long-term confinement. - • The share of people with mental illness in isolation has increased + - + <b>Answer you can use:</b> - <b>Policy Implication:</b> Isolation is being used as a substitute for treatment. + The average stay in isolation has tripled in two years and now exceeds 30 days. That is more than double what the United Nations considers torture. This bill stops that normalization. - <b>Answer you can use:</b> + <br> - More than half the people placed in solitary already have mental health diagnoses. We are responding to crisis by locking people in a box alone for weeks. That makes no clinical sense. + - + === 3. Solitary Is Used Primarily on People in Mental Health Crisis === - <br> + <b>Key Facts:</b> - + • Over 56 percent have diagnosed mental health conditions - === 4. Solitary Increases Death Risk After Release === + • True prevalence is likely higher due to underreporting and limited staffing - <b>Key Facts:</b> + • The share of people with mental illness in isolation has increased - • Suicide risk: 55% higher + - • Homicide risk: 29% higher + <b>Policy Implication:</b> Isolation is being used as a substitute for treatment. - • Overdose risk: 26% higher + - • All-cause mortality: 17% higher + <b>Answer you can use:</b> - • Risk doubles with repeated isolation + More than half the people placed in solitary already have mental health diagnoses. We are responding to crisis by locking people in a box alone for weeks. That makes no clinical sense. - <b>Policy Implication:</b> Solitary creates long-term public safety risks. + <br> - <b>Answer you can use:</b> + === 4. Solitary Increases Death Risk After Release === - People who experience solitary are more likely to die by suicide, overdose, or violence after release. This does not stay in prison. It comes back to our communities. + <b>Key Facts:</b> - + • Suicide risk: 55% higher - <br> + • Homicide risk: 29% higher - + • Overdose risk: 26% higher - === 5. Disproportionate Impact on Black Virginians === + • All-cause mortality: 17% higher - <b>Key Facts:</b> + • Risk doubles with repeated isolation - • African Americans: ~19% of state population + - • ~52% of VADOC population + <b>Policy Implication:</b> Solitary creates long-term public safety risks. - • ~65% of long-term isolation placements + - + <b>Answer you can use:</b> - <b>Policy Implication:</b> Solitary compounds existing racial disparities. + People who experience solitary are more likely to die by suicide, overdose, or violence after release. This does not stay in prison. It comes back to our communities. - <b>Answer you can use:</b> + <br> - Black Virginians are already overrepresented in prison. They are even more overrepresented in solitary. HB35 addresses equity as well as safety. + - + === 5. Disproportionate Impact on Black Virginians === - <br> + <b>Key Facts:</b> - + • African Americans: ~19% of state population - === 6. “By Any Name” — Lockdowns Replace Solitary === + • ~52% of VADOC population - <b>Key Facts:</b> + • ~65% of long-term isolation placements - • Increased use of extended lockdowns + - • Program and recreation suspensions + <b>Policy Implication:</b> Solitary compounds existing racial disparities. - • Unit-wide isolation practices + - + <b>Answer you can use:</b> - <b>Policy Implication:</b> Isolation is being relabeled rather than reduced. + Black Virginians are already overrepresented in prison. They are even more overrepresented in solitary. HB35 addresses equity as well as safety. - <b>Answer you can use:</b> + <br> - If we do not regulate lockdowns, solitary simply gets renamed. This bill focuses on conditions, not labels. + - + === 6. “By Any Name” — Lockdowns Replace Solitary === - <br> + <b>Key Facts:</b> - + • Increased use of extended lockdowns - === 7. This Bill Protects Safety While Ending Abuse === + • Program and recreation suspensions - <b>Key Facts:</b> + • Unit-wide isolation practices - • Preserves exceptions for imminent threats + - • Allows medical and security isolation + <b>Policy Implication:</b> Isolation is being relabeled rather than reduced. - • Requires documentation and review + - + <b>Answer you can use:</b> - <b>Policy Implication:</b> Safety tools remain, but abuse is limited. + If we do not regulate lockdowns, solitary simply gets renamed. This bill focuses on conditions, not labels. - <b>Answer you can use:</b> + <br> - HB35 does not eliminate separation. It eliminates indefinite, unreviewed isolation. + - + === 7. This Bill Protects Safety While Ending Abuse === - <hr> + <b>Key Facts:</b> - + • Preserves exceptions for imminent threats - == Additional Information == + • Allows medical and security isolation - <b>1. Definitions are the enforcement backbone</b> + • Requires documentation and review - • The bill defines isolated confinement and lockdown by hours-per-day and loss of programming, so policy can’t be evaded by unit names. + - + <b>Policy Implication:</b> Safety tools remain, but abuse is limited. - <b>Policy implication:</b> Regulates conditions, not labels. + <b>Answer you can use:</b> - + HB35 does not eliminate separation. It eliminates indefinite, unreviewed isolation. - <br> + - + <hr> - <b>2. The “less restrictive first” rule targets protective-custody misuse</b> + - • For “own protection” placements, the facility must use less restrictive options first, including transfers or special-purpose housing for similarly threatened individuals, unless infeasible. + == Additional Information == - + <b>1. Definitions are the enforcement backbone</b> - <b>Policy implication:</b> Safety without defaulting to isolation. + • The bill defines isolated confinement and lockdown by hours-per-day and loss of programming, so policy can’t be evaded by unit names. - <br> + - + <b>Policy implication:</b> Regulates conditions, not labels. - <b>3. Reviews + documentation create accountability</b> + - • Requires regular reviews, documentation in the institutional file, notice up the chain, and formal in-person reviews with appeal rights. + <br> - <b>Policy implication:</b> Isolation becomes a documented exception, not a routine. + <b>2. The “less restrictive first” rule targets protective-custody misuse</b> - + • For “own protection” placements, the facility must use less restrictive options first, including transfers or special-purpose housing for similarly threatened individuals, unless infeasible. - <br> + - + <b>Policy implication:</b> Safety without defaulting to isolation. - <b>4. Lockdown limits matter because lockdown can function like solitary</b> + - • The bill regulates lockdowns that interrupt programming and requires publication of documentation. + <br> - + <b>3. Reviews + documentation create accountability</b> - <b>Policy implication:</b> Prevents “unit-wide solitary” from becoming the workaround. + • Requires regular reviews, documentation in the institutional file, notice up the chain, and formal in-person reviews with appeal rights. - [[Category:2026 Session]] + <b>Policy implication:</b> Isolation becomes a documented exception, not a routine. + + <br> + + <b>4. Lockdown limits matter because lockdown can function like solitary</b> + • The bill regulates lockdowns that interrupt programming and requires publication of documentation. + + + <b>Policy implication:</b> Prevents “unit-wide solitary” from becoming the workaround. + + [[Category:2026 Session]]
2026-02-11 17:12:58
Edited by: 198.246.136.35
Edited by: 198.246.136.35
= HB35 Restorative housing and isolated confinement; restrictions on use. = == Status == [https://house.vga.virginia.gov/subcommittees/H15002/agendas/5187 Public Safety | Subcommittee #2 — agenda] <hr> == Overview == === Summary as Introduced === <b>Restorative housing and isolated confinement; restrictions on use.</b> Prohibits the use of isolated confinement, defined in the bill, in state correctional facilities, subject to certain exceptions. The bill requires that before placing an incarcerated person in restorative housing or isolated confinement for his own protection, the facility administrator shall place an incarcerated person in a less-restrictive setting, including by transferring such person to another institution or to a special-purpose housing unit for incarcerated persons who face similar threats. The bill requires that if an incarcerated person is placed in restorative housing or isolated confinement, such placement shall be reviewed every 48 hours and the facility administrator shall ensure that the incarcerated person receives a medical and mental health evaluation from certified medical and mental health professionals within one working day of placement in restorative housing or any form of isolated confinement. The bill also requires the facility administrator to notify the regional administrator in writing that an incarcerated person was placed in restorative housing or isolated confinement within 24 hours of such placement. Finally, the bill requires that formal reviews of an incarcerated person's placement in any form of isolated confinement shall be held in such person's presence, inform him of any reasons administrative officials believe isolated confinement remains necessary, and give the incarcerated person an opportunity to respond to those reasons, and a formal ruling shall be provided to the incarcerated individual within 24 hours. <hr> === Patrons === ==== House Patrons ==== • Joshua G. Cole (chief patron) • Patrick A. Hope (chief-co-patron) • Sam Rasoul (co-patron • Holly Seibold ==== Senate Patrons ==== • Lamont Bagby <hr> == Language == The language of [https://lis.virginia.gov/bill-details/20261/HB35/text/HB35 HB35] can be viewed here. <hr> == Proposed Amendment == === Amendment Offered for Consideration (requested for subcommittee) === ==== Add “Lockdown” throughout relevant provisions ==== Amend the bill to explicitly include “lockdown” alongside “solitary confinement/isolated confinement” and “restorative housing” in all relevant sections, to prevent facilities from using unit-wide lockdown practices as a functional substitute for individual isolated confinement. ==== Strengthen the time-limit clause (close the cumulative-days gap) ==== Replace the current time-limit phrasing with: “No individual shall be held in solitary confinement, lockdown, or restorative housing for more than 15 consecutive days, nor 15 days in any 60-day period.” <b>Purpose of the amendment:</b> The introduced text already uses “15 consecutive days…in any 60-day period,” but stakeholders have raised concerns that “consecutive” language can be worked around by cycling people in and out (or shifting to lockdown practices) without ever hitting a “consecutive” threshold. The amendment makes the limit explicitly <i>both</i> consecutive and cumulative. Again, the intent is to prohibit the outcome of prolonged, solitary isolation, not to jeopardize the safety of anyone, but to ensure the constraint of this practice. <hr> == Opening Statement == === House Subcommittee Statement === <blockquote> ====Notes on delivery: ==== <mark> <b>bold</b>—emphasize, increase volume; </mark> <mark> <i>italicized</i>—stressed, extended pronunciation, sing-songy; </mark> <mark> <i><b>bold italicized</i></b>—stressed and emphatic, increase volume; </mark> <mark> CAPITALIZED—climactic and declarative;</mark> <mark> »chevrons«—deliver jokingly, with humor; </mark> <mark> • bulleted—drum-like repetition, think of MLK's "I Have a Dream," "I have a dream that..." repeated for emphasis; </mark> <mark> — a half pause, slight build-up; </mark> <mark> — — a full pause, major build-up. <mark> <mark><b>VIBE:</b> think <i>"victory lap;"</i> sell the idea that this bill is a done deal and that doubters should get on board while they still have a chance to be on the right side of history. This is a <b><i>pathos</i></b> and <i><b>ethos</i></b> argument, not <i>logos</i>; lean on expert testimonies for questions of <i>logic</i>. - Eric</mark> </blockquote> <br> Mister Chair, members of the subcommittee— <i>This is not our first time here.</i> For <b>two straight years</b>, the General Assembly has passed this reform — — <b>In 2024</b>, I gave you a »sermon« — — and then we passed <i>HB 1244.</i> <b>In 2025</b>, • my sister, • my friend, • and my <i>esteemed colleague</i>, <b>Delegate Karen Keys-Gamarra</b>, took up the torch — — and then we passed <i>HB 2647.</i> Twice, this body has said—<i><b>clearly</b></i>—that we are ready to turn the page on solitary confinement. And after <b>two straight years</b>, nobody can pretend this is new... • You know this bill. • You know this issue. • You know how overdue this change is — — <br> Mister Chair, members of the committee, this is not our first time here—<b>»BUT it will be our last«</b>—because this year <i>we will <b>make history.</b></i> And what is so great about this year is that we all have a <i>chance</i>—a <i><b>chance</b></i> to be part of making history. If you're still on the fence, I want you to look <i>forward</i> into the future with me. <b>Don't let the past hold you back — —</b> • Because when we look back in 25 years, <b>we will know this legislation was the right thing to do.</b> • Because when we look back in 50 years, <b>we will know this legislation was the right thing to do.</b> • Because when we look back in <b><span style="text-transform:uppercase">one-hundred years</span></b>, <i><b><span style="text-transform:uppercase">we will know this legislation was the right thing to do!</span></b></i> Today—I hope everyone in this room joins us in doing the <i><b><span style="text-transform:uppercase">right thing.</span></b></i> <br> We know the counterarguments. We know the questions. And we're happy to answer them. <b>But</b> I encourage us to <i>listen</i>— • To listen to the <i>testimonies</i> of those who have suffered; • To listen to the voices who are ready for change; • To listen so that we may be reminded—again—<i>just how overdue this legislation is.</i> <br> Thank you, Mister Chair and members of the committee. I hope you report this bill favorably to full committee. <hr> === Appropriations Subcommittee Statement === ==== Amendment ==== The amendment changes “48 hours” to “two business days.” This was done to remove the FIS. ==== Introduction ==== - HB35 includes a timing provision that is driving its fiscal impact. After speaking with the Department of Corrections, it is clear that the FIS comes from overtime when the 48-hour deadline falls on weekends or holidays. + HB35 includes a timing provision that is driving its fiscal impact. After speaking with the Department of Corrections, it is clear that the FIS comes from overtime when the 48-hour deadline falls on weekends or holidays. To address this, we replaced "48 hours" with "two business days." - The amendment changes “48 hours” to “two business days.” We worked with DOC and stakeholders to reach this version, which keeps the bill’s intent but removes the additional costs. Mr. Elam or DOC staff should be here to confirm that this will eliminate the fiscal impact. + We worked with DOC and stakeholders to reach this version, which keeps the bill’s intent but removes the additional costs. Mr. Elam or DOC staff should be here to confirm that this will eliminate the fiscal impact. <i>(let DOC testify to the elimination of the FIS)</i> I hope it will be the will of the subcommittee to report the bill to full committee. <hr> == Support and Opposition == === Support === • ACLU People Power Fairfax • Bridging The Gap In Virginia • Charlottesville Chapter National Organization for Women • Coalition for Justice • EJUSA Evangelical Network • Fighting 4 Freedom • Greater Washington (JCRC) • Inmate Support Virginia • Interfaith Action for Human Rights (IAHR) • HALT Solitary • Jewish Community Relations Council of Just Future Project • Justice & Witness Action Network- VA • United Church of Christ Central Atlantic Conference • LatinoJustice PRLDEF • NAACP Loudoun • National Association of Social Workers • National Association of Social Workers, Virginia Chapter • National Religious Campaign Against Torture • No Left Turns • Resource Information Help for the Disadvantaged and Disenfranchised (RIHD) • RISE for Youth • RVA Health Alliance for Social Justice and Equity • Social Action Linking Together (SALT) • Social Workers and Allies Against Solitary Confinement • The Humanization Project • The Sentencing Project • Unitarian Universalist Legislative Ministry of Virginia • Unlock the Box Campaign • Virginia CURE • Virginia Defenders for Freedom, Justice & Equality • Virginia Justice Democrats • Virginia Justice for Life • Virginia Justice Alliance • Virginia Prisons Accountability Committee • Virginia Prisoner Of Conscience • Virginia Prison Justice Network • WJCC Coalition for Community Justice • 40 Strong === Opposition === • (to be updated) === No Recommendation / Neutral === • (to be updated) === No Position Provided === • Department of Corrections <hr> == Fiscal Impact == No fiscal impact statement is posted for HB35. The Department of Corrections may try to bring forward a claim for a fiscal impact; however, LIS and Appropriations Committee have currently not provided any impact statement. <hr> == Possible Questions == === TL;DR === <b>Q1: “Does this end solitary confinement in Virginia?”</b> TL;DR: No—it ends <i>prolonged</i> solitary confinement and sets clear limits, oversight, and due-process rules for any use. <br> <b>Q2: “Does this make prisons less safe for staff?”</b> TL;DR: No—HB35 keeps exceptions for imminent threats and requires documentation; it’s about targeted use, not “never.” <br> <b>Q3: “What changes day-to-day?”</b> TL;DR: Frequent reviews, rapid medical/mental health checks, real programming/out-of-cell time, and written accountability when isolation is used. <br> <b>Q4: “Can DOC just use ‘lockdowns’ instead?”</b> TL;DR: The bill defines lockdown and regulates it, and the requested amendment strengthens this further by applying the same time limits to lockdown explicitly. <br> === Q1: “What does the bill aim to accomplish?” === <b>Answer you can use:</b> HB35 ends prolonged solitary confinement by setting clear time limits and requiring real oversight—regular reviews, rapid medical and mental health evaluations, documentation, and in-person due process when isolation continues. <br> === Q2: “How often is placement reviewed?” === <b>Answer you can use:</b> Placement is reviewed frequently, including a required 48-hour review cycle with written documentation explaining why less restrictive settings were not used. <br> === Q3: “What health protections are required?” === <b>Answer you can use:</b> HB35 requires medical and mental health evaluations by certified professionals within one working day of placement in restorative housing or isolated confinement (with limited exceptions). <br> === Q4: “Does this stop people from getting programming or recreation?” === <b>Answer you can use:</b> No—the bill requires at least four hours of out-of-cell programming or congregate activity daily, plus at least one hour of congregate recreation unless exceptional safety circumstances apply. <br> === Q5: “What stops indefinite ‘lockdowns’?” === <b>Answer you can use:</b> Lockdowns that interrupt programming must have a specific documented security purpose, must end as soon as the purpose is served, are time-limited, require approvals to extend or repeat, and must be documented and published. <hr> == Talking Points == === 1. Solitary Confinement Is Increasing in Virginia === <b>Key Facts:</b> • In FY25, 7,999 people were placed in some form of isolation in VADOC facilities. • This represents an 11% increase from the prior year. • This is 57% higher than FY2021 levels. • The trend has been steadily upward for several years. <b>Policy Implication:</b> Voluntary reforms have not reduced isolation. Without statutory limits, use continues to expand. <b>Answer you can use:</b> Despite years of discussion, solitary confinement is increasing in Virginia. Nearly 8,000 people were placed in isolation last year—up 57 percent since 2021. That shows policy alone is not working. HB35 creates enforceable limits. <br> === 2. Solitary Is Becoming More Prolonged === <b>Key Facts:</b> • FY23 average length of stay: 9.9 days • FY25 average length of stay: 30.9 days • A threefold increase in two years • More than double the UN’s 15-day torture threshold <b>Policy Implication:</b> Temporary isolation is becoming routine long-term confinement. <b>Answer you can use:</b> The average stay in isolation has tripled in two years and now exceeds 30 days. That is more than double what the United Nations considers torture. This bill stops that normalization. <br> === 3. Solitary Is Used Primarily on People in Mental Health Crisis === <b>Key Facts:</b> • Over 56 percent have diagnosed mental health conditions • True prevalence is likely higher due to underreporting and limited staffing • The share of people with mental illness in isolation has increased <b>Policy Implication:</b> Isolation is being used as a substitute for treatment. <b>Answer you can use:</b> More than half the people placed in solitary already have mental health diagnoses. We are responding to crisis by locking people in a box alone for weeks. That makes no clinical sense. <br> === 4. Solitary Increases Death Risk After Release === <b>Key Facts:</b> • Suicide risk: 55% higher • Homicide risk: 29% higher • Overdose risk: 26% higher • All-cause mortality: 17% higher • Risk doubles with repeated isolation <b>Policy Implication:</b> Solitary creates long-term public safety risks. <b>Answer you can use:</b> People who experience solitary are more likely to die by suicide, overdose, or violence after release. This does not stay in prison. It comes back to our communities. <br> === 5. Disproportionate Impact on Black Virginians === <b>Key Facts:</b> • African Americans: ~19% of state population • ~52% of VADOC population • ~65% of long-term isolation placements <b>Policy Implication:</b> Solitary compounds existing racial disparities. <b>Answer you can use:</b> Black Virginians are already overrepresented in prison. They are even more overrepresented in solitary. HB35 addresses equity as well as safety. <br> === 6. “By Any Name” — Lockdowns Replace Solitary === <b>Key Facts:</b> • Increased use of extended lockdowns • Program and recreation suspensions • Unit-wide isolation practices <b>Policy Implication:</b> Isolation is being relabeled rather than reduced. <b>Answer you can use:</b> If we do not regulate lockdowns, solitary simply gets renamed. This bill focuses on conditions, not labels. <br> === 7. This Bill Protects Safety While Ending Abuse === <b>Key Facts:</b> • Preserves exceptions for imminent threats • Allows medical and security isolation • Requires documentation and review <b>Policy Implication:</b> Safety tools remain, but abuse is limited. <b>Answer you can use:</b> HB35 does not eliminate separation. It eliminates indefinite, unreviewed isolation. <hr> == Additional Information == <b>1. Definitions are the enforcement backbone</b> • The bill defines isolated confinement and lockdown by hours-per-day and loss of programming, so policy can’t be evaded by unit names. <b>Policy implication:</b> Regulates conditions, not labels. <br> <b>2. The “less restrictive first” rule targets protective-custody misuse</b> • For “own protection” placements, the facility must use less restrictive options first, including transfers or special-purpose housing for similarly threatened individuals, unless infeasible. <b>Policy implication:</b> Safety without defaulting to isolation. <br> <b>3. Reviews + documentation create accountability</b> • Requires regular reviews, documentation in the institutional file, notice up the chain, and formal in-person reviews with appeal rights. <b>Policy implication:</b> Isolation becomes a documented exception, not a routine. <br> <b>4. Lockdown limits matter because lockdown can function like solitary</b> • The bill regulates lockdowns that interrupt programming and requires publication of documentation. <b>Policy implication:</b> Prevents “unit-wide solitary” from becoming the workaround. [[Category:2026 Session]]
2026-02-04 03:57:25
Edited by: 74.110.183.75
Edited by: 74.110.183.75
= HB35 Restorative housing and isolated confinement; restrictions on use. = == Status == [https://house.vga.virginia.gov/subcommittees/H15002/agendas/5187 Public Safety | Subcommittee #2 — agenda] <hr> == Overview == === Summary as Introduced === <b>Restorative housing and isolated confinement; restrictions on use.</b> Prohibits the use of isolated confinement, defined in the bill, in state correctional facilities, subject to certain exceptions. The bill requires that before placing an incarcerated person in restorative housing or isolated confinement for his own protection, the facility administrator shall place an incarcerated person in a less-restrictive setting, including by transferring such person to another institution or to a special-purpose housing unit for incarcerated persons who face similar threats. The bill requires that if an incarcerated person is placed in restorative housing or isolated confinement, such placement shall be reviewed every 48 hours and the facility administrator shall ensure that the incarcerated person receives a medical and mental health evaluation from certified medical and mental health professionals within one working day of placement in restorative housing or any form of isolated confinement. The bill also requires the facility administrator to notify the regional administrator in writing that an incarcerated person was placed in restorative housing or isolated confinement within 24 hours of such placement. Finally, the bill requires that formal reviews of an incarcerated person's placement in any form of isolated confinement shall be held in such person's presence, inform him of any reasons administrative officials believe isolated confinement remains necessary, and give the incarcerated person an opportunity to respond to those reasons, and a formal ruling shall be provided to the incarcerated individual within 24 hours. <hr> === Patrons === ==== House Patrons ==== • Joshua G. Cole (chief patron) • Patrick A. Hope (chief-co-patron) • Sam Rasoul (co-patron • Holly Seibold ==== Senate Patrons ==== • Lamont Bagby <hr> == Language == The language of [https://lis.virginia.gov/bill-details/20261/HB35/text/HB35 HB35] can be viewed here. <hr> == Proposed Amendment == === Amendment Offered for Consideration (requested for subcommittee) === ==== Add “Lockdown” throughout relevant provisions ==== Amend the bill to explicitly include “lockdown” alongside “solitary confinement/isolated confinement” and “restorative housing” in all relevant sections, to prevent facilities from using unit-wide lockdown practices as a functional substitute for individual isolated confinement. ==== Strengthen the time-limit clause (close the cumulative-days gap) ==== Replace the current time-limit phrasing with: “No individual shall be held in solitary confinement, lockdown, or restorative housing for more than 15 consecutive days, nor 15 days in any 60-day period.” <b>Purpose of the amendment:</b> The introduced text already uses “15 consecutive days…in any 60-day period,” but stakeholders have raised concerns that “consecutive” language can be worked around by cycling people in and out (or shifting to lockdown practices) without ever hitting a “consecutive” threshold. The amendment makes the limit explicitly <i>both</i> consecutive and cumulative. Again, the intent is to prohibit the outcome of prolonged, solitary isolation, not to jeopardize the safety of anyone, but to ensure the constraint of this practice. <hr> == Opening Statement == === House Subcommittee Statement === <blockquote> ====Notes on delivery: ==== <mark> <b>bold</b>—emphasize, increase volume; </mark> <mark> <i>italicized</i>—stressed, extended pronunciation, sing-songy; </mark> <mark> <i><b>bold italicized</i></b>—stressed and emphatic, increase volume; </mark> <mark> CAPITALIZED—climactic and declarative;</mark> <mark> »chevrons«—deliver jokingly, with humor; </mark> <mark> • bulleted—drum-like repetition, think of MLK's "I Have a Dream," "I have a dream that..." repeated for emphasis; </mark> <mark> — a half pause, slight build-up; </mark> <mark> — — a full pause, major build-up. <mark> <mark><b>VIBE:</b> think <i>"victory lap;"</i> sell the idea that this bill is a done deal and that doubters should get on board while they still have a chance to be on the right side of history. This is a <b><i>pathos</i></b> and <i><b>ethos</i></b> argument, not <i>logos</i>; lean on expert testimonies for questions of <i>logic</i>. - Eric</mark> </blockquote> <br> Mister Chair, members of the subcommittee— <i>This is not our first time here.</i> For <b>two straight years</b>, the General Assembly has passed this reform — — <b>In 2024</b>, I gave you a »sermon« — — and then we passed <i>HB 1244.</i> <b>In 2025</b>, • my sister, • my friend, • and my <i>esteemed colleague</i>, <b>Delegate Karen Keys-Gamarra</b>, took up the torch — — and then we passed <i>HB 2647.</i> Twice, this body has said—<i><b>clearly</b></i>—that we are ready to turn the page on solitary confinement. And after <b>two straight years</b>, nobody can pretend this is new... • You know this bill. • You know this issue. • You know how overdue this change is — — <br> Mister Chair, members of the committee, this is not our first time here—<b>»BUT it will be our last«</b>—because this year <i>we will <b>make history.</b></i> And what is so great about this year is that we all have a <i>chance</i>—a <i><b>chance</b></i> to be part of making history. If you're still on the fence, I want you to look <i>forward</i> into the future with me. <b>Don't let the past hold you back — —</b> • Because when we look back in 25 years, <b>we will know this legislation was the right thing to do.</b> • Because when we look back in 50 years, <b>we will know this legislation was the right thing to do.</b> • Because when we look back in <b><span style="text-transform:uppercase">one-hundred years</span></b>, <i><b><span style="text-transform:uppercase">we will know this legislation was the right thing to do!</span></b></i> Today—I hope everyone in this room joins us in doing the <i><b><span style="text-transform:uppercase">right thing.</span></b></i> <br> We know the counterarguments. We know the questions. And we're happy to answer them. <b>But</b> I encourage us to <i>listen</i>— • To listen to the <i>testimonies</i> of those who have suffered; • To listen to the voices who are ready for change; • To listen so that we may be reminded—again—<i>just how overdue this legislation is.</i> <br> Thank you, Mister Chair and members of the committee. I hope you report this bill favorably to full committee. <hr> === Appropriations Subcommittee Statement === ==== Amendment ==== The amendment changes “48 hours” to “two business days.” This was done to remove the FIS. ==== Introduction ==== HB35 includes a timing provision that is driving its fiscal impact. After speaking with the Department of Corrections, it is clear that the FIS comes from overtime when the 48-hour deadline falls on weekends or holidays. The amendment changes “48 hours” to “two business days.” We worked with DOC and stakeholders to reach this version, which keeps the bill’s intent but removes the additional costs. Mr. Elam or DOC staff should be here to confirm that this will eliminate the fiscal impact. <i>(let DOC testify to the elimination of the FIS)</i> I hope it will be the will of the subcommittee to report the bill to full committee. - == Support and Opposition == + <hr> - === Support === + == Support and Opposition == - • ACLU People Power Fairfax + - • Bridging The Gap In Virginia + === Support === - • Charlottesville Chapter National Organization for Women + • ACLU People Power Fairfax - • Coalition for Justice + • Bridging The Gap In Virginia - • EJUSA Evangelical Network + • Charlottesville Chapter National Organization for Women - • Fighting 4 Freedom + • Coalition for Justice - • Greater Washington (JCRC) + • EJUSA Evangelical Network - • Inmate Support Virginia + • Fighting 4 Freedom - • Interfaith Action for Human Rights (IAHR) + • Greater Washington (JCRC) - • HALT Solitary + • Inmate Support Virginia - • Jewish Community Relations Council of Just Future Project + • Interfaith Action for Human Rights (IAHR) - • Justice & Witness Action Network- VA + • HALT Solitary - • United Church of Christ Central Atlantic Conference + • Jewish Community Relations Council of Just Future Project - • LatinoJustice PRLDEF + • Justice & Witness Action Network- VA - • NAACP Loudoun + • United Church of Christ Central Atlantic Conference - • National Association of Social Workers + • LatinoJustice PRLDEF - • National Association of Social Workers, Virginia Chapter + • NAACP Loudoun - • National Religious Campaign Against Torture + • National Association of Social Workers - • No Left Turns + • National Association of Social Workers, Virginia Chapter - • Resource Information Help for the Disadvantaged and Disenfranchised (RIHD) + • National Religious Campaign Against Torture - • RISE for Youth + • No Left Turns - • RVA Health Alliance for Social Justice and Equity + • Resource Information Help for the Disadvantaged and Disenfranchised (RIHD) - • Social Action Linking Together (SALT) + • RISE for Youth - • Social Workers and Allies Against Solitary Confinement + • RVA Health Alliance for Social Justice and Equity - • The Humanization Project + • Social Action Linking Together (SALT) - • The Sentencing Project + • Social Workers and Allies Against Solitary Confinement - • Unitarian Universalist Legislative Ministry of Virginia + • The Humanization Project - • Unlock the Box Campaign + • The Sentencing Project - • Virginia CURE + • Unitarian Universalist Legislative Ministry of Virginia - • Virginia Defenders for Freedom, Justice & Equality + • Unlock the Box Campaign - • Virginia Justice Democrats + • Virginia CURE - • Virginia Justice for Life + • Virginia Defenders for Freedom, Justice & Equality - • Virginia Justice Alliance + • Virginia Justice Democrats - • Virginia Prisons Accountability Committee + • Virginia Justice for Life - • Virginia Prisoner Of Conscience + • Virginia Justice Alliance - • Virginia Prison Justice Network + • Virginia Prisons Accountability Committee - • WJCC Coalition for Community Justice + • Virginia Prisoner Of Conscience - • 40 Strong + • Virginia Prison Justice Network - + • WJCC Coalition for Community Justice - === Opposition === + • 40 Strong - • (to be updated) + - + === Opposition === - === No Recommendation / Neutral === + • (to be updated) - • (to be updated) + - + === No Recommendation / Neutral === - === No Position Provided === + • (to be updated) - • Department of Corrections + - + === No Position Provided === - <hr> + • Department of Corrections - == Fiscal Impact == + <hr> - No fiscal impact statement is posted for HB35. The Department of Corrections may try to bring forward a claim for a fiscal impact; however, LIS and Appropriations Committee have currently not provided any impact statement. + - + == Fiscal Impact == - <hr> + No fiscal impact statement is posted for HB35. The Department of Corrections may try to bring forward a claim for a fiscal impact; however, LIS and Appropriations Committee have currently not provided any impact statement. - == Possible Questions == + <hr> - === TL;DR === + == Possible Questions == - <b>Q1: “Does this end solitary confinement in Virginia?”</b> TL;DR: No—it ends <i>prolonged</i> solitary confinement and sets clear limits, oversight, and due-process rules for any use. <br> + - <b>Q2: “Does this make prisons less safe for staff?”</b> TL;DR: No—HB35 keeps exceptions for imminent threats and requires documentation; it’s about targeted use, not “never.” + === TL;DR === - + <b>Q1: “Does this end solitary confinement in Virginia?”</b> TL;DR: No—it ends <i>prolonged</i> solitary confinement and sets clear limits, oversight, and due-process rules for any use. <br> - <br> + <b>Q2: “Does this make prisons less safe for staff?”</b> TL;DR: No—HB35 keeps exceptions for imminent threats and requires documentation; it’s about targeted use, not “never.” - <b>Q3: “What changes day-to-day?”</b> TL;DR: Frequent reviews, rapid medical/mental health checks, real programming/out-of-cell time, and written accountability when isolation is used. + - + <br> - <br> + <b>Q3: “What changes day-to-day?”</b> TL;DR: Frequent reviews, rapid medical/mental health checks, real programming/out-of-cell time, and written accountability when isolation is used. - <b>Q4: “Can DOC just use ‘lockdowns’ instead?”</b> TL;DR: The bill defines lockdown and regulates it, and the requested amendment strengthens this further by applying the same time limits to lockdown explicitly. + - + <br> - <br> + <b>Q4: “Can DOC just use ‘lockdowns’ instead?”</b> TL;DR: The bill defines lockdown and regulates it, and the requested amendment strengthens this further by applying the same time limits to lockdown explicitly. - === Q1: “What does the bill aim to accomplish?” === + <br> - <b>Answer you can use:</b> HB35 ends prolonged solitary confinement by setting clear time limits and requiring real oversight—regular reviews, rapid medical and mental health evaluations, documentation, and in-person due process when isolation continues. + - + === Q1: “What does the bill aim to accomplish?” === - <br> + <b>Answer you can use:</b> HB35 ends prolonged solitary confinement by setting clear time limits and requiring real oversight—regular reviews, rapid medical and mental health evaluations, documentation, and in-person due process when isolation continues. - === Q2: “How often is placement reviewed?” === + <br> - <b>Answer you can use:</b> Placement is reviewed frequently, including a required 48-hour review cycle with written documentation explaining why less restrictive settings were not used. + - + === Q2: “How often is placement reviewed?” === - <br> + <b>Answer you can use:</b> Placement is reviewed frequently, including a required 48-hour review cycle with written documentation explaining why less restrictive settings were not used. - === Q3: “What health protections are required?” === + <br> - <b>Answer you can use:</b> HB35 requires medical and mental health evaluations by certified professionals within one working day of placement in restorative housing or isolated confinement (with limited exceptions). + - + === Q3: “What health protections are required?” === - <br> + <b>Answer you can use:</b> HB35 requires medical and mental health evaluations by certified professionals within one working day of placement in restorative housing or isolated confinement (with limited exceptions). - === Q4: “Does this stop people from getting programming or recreation?” === + <br> - <b>Answer you can use:</b> No—the bill requires at least four hours of out-of-cell programming or congregate activity daily, plus at least one hour of congregate recreation unless exceptional safety circumstances apply. + - + === Q4: “Does this stop people from getting programming or recreation?” === - <br> + <b>Answer you can use:</b> No—the bill requires at least four hours of out-of-cell programming or congregate activity daily, plus at least one hour of congregate recreation unless exceptional safety circumstances apply. - === Q5: “What stops indefinite ‘lockdowns’?” === + <br> - <b>Answer you can use:</b> Lockdowns that interrupt programming must have a specific documented security purpose, must end as soon as the purpose is served, are time-limited, require approvals to extend or repeat, and must be documented and published. + - + === Q5: “What stops indefinite ‘lockdowns’?” === - <hr> + <b>Answer you can use:</b> Lockdowns that interrupt programming must have a specific documented security purpose, must end as soon as the purpose is served, are time-limited, require approvals to extend or repeat, and must be documented and published. - == Talking Points == + <hr> - === 1. Solitary Confinement Is Increasing in Virginia === + == Talking Points == - <b>Key Facts:</b> + - • In FY25, 7,999 people were placed in some form of isolation in VADOC facilities. + === 1. Solitary Confinement Is Increasing in Virginia === - • This represents an 11% increase from the prior year. + <b>Key Facts:</b> - • This is 57% higher than FY2021 levels. + • In FY25, 7,999 people were placed in some form of isolation in VADOC facilities. - • The trend has been steadily upward for several years. + • This represents an 11% increase from the prior year. - + • This is 57% higher than FY2021 levels. - <b>Policy Implication:</b> Voluntary reforms have not reduced isolation. Without statutory limits, use continues to expand. + • The trend has been steadily upward for several years. - <b>Answer you can use:</b> + <b>Policy Implication:</b> Voluntary reforms have not reduced isolation. Without statutory limits, use continues to expand. - Despite years of discussion, solitary confinement is increasing in Virginia. Nearly 8,000 people were placed in isolation last year—up 57 percent since 2021. That shows policy alone is not working. HB35 creates enforceable limits. + - + <b>Answer you can use:</b> - <br> + Despite years of discussion, solitary confinement is increasing in Virginia. Nearly 8,000 people were placed in isolation last year—up 57 percent since 2021. That shows policy alone is not working. HB35 creates enforceable limits. - === 2. Solitary Is Becoming More Prolonged === + <br> - <b>Key Facts:</b> + - • FY23 average length of stay: 9.9 days + === 2. Solitary Is Becoming More Prolonged === - • FY25 average length of stay: 30.9 days + <b>Key Facts:</b> - • A threefold increase in two years + • FY23 average length of stay: 9.9 days - • More than double the UN’s 15-day torture threshold + • FY25 average length of stay: 30.9 days - + • A threefold increase in two years - <b>Policy Implication:</b> Temporary isolation is becoming routine long-term confinement. + • More than double the UN’s 15-day torture threshold - <b>Answer you can use:</b> + <b>Policy Implication:</b> Temporary isolation is becoming routine long-term confinement. - The average stay in isolation has tripled in two years and now exceeds 30 days. That is more than double what the United Nations considers torture. This bill stops that normalization. + - + <b>Answer you can use:</b> - <br> + The average stay in isolation has tripled in two years and now exceeds 30 days. That is more than double what the United Nations considers torture. This bill stops that normalization. - === 3. Solitary Is Used Primarily on People in Mental Health Crisis === + <br> - <b>Key Facts:</b> + - • Over 56 percent have diagnosed mental health conditions + === 3. Solitary Is Used Primarily on People in Mental Health Crisis === - • True prevalence is likely higher due to underreporting and limited staffing + <b>Key Facts:</b> - • The share of people with mental illness in isolation has increased + • Over 56 percent have diagnosed mental health conditions - + • True prevalence is likely higher due to underreporting and limited staffing - <b>Policy Implication:</b> Isolation is being used as a substitute for treatment. + • The share of people with mental illness in isolation has increased - <b>Answer you can use:</b> + <b>Policy Implication:</b> Isolation is being used as a substitute for treatment. - More than half the people placed in solitary already have mental health diagnoses. We are responding to crisis by locking people in a box alone for weeks. That makes no clinical sense. + - + <b>Answer you can use:</b> - <br> + More than half the people placed in solitary already have mental health diagnoses. We are responding to crisis by locking people in a box alone for weeks. That makes no clinical sense. - === 4. Solitary Increases Death Risk After Release === + <br> - <b>Key Facts:</b> + - • Suicide risk: 55% higher + === 4. Solitary Increases Death Risk After Release === - • Homicide risk: 29% higher + <b>Key Facts:</b> - • Overdose risk: 26% higher + • Suicide risk: 55% higher - • All-cause mortality: 17% higher + • Homicide risk: 29% higher - • Risk doubles with repeated isolation + • Overdose risk: 26% higher - + • All-cause mortality: 17% higher - <b>Policy Implication:</b> Solitary creates long-term public safety risks. + • Risk doubles with repeated isolation - <b>Answer you can use:</b> + <b>Policy Implication:</b> Solitary creates long-term public safety risks. - People who experience solitary are more likely to die by suicide, overdose, or violence after release. This does not stay in prison. It comes back to our communities. + - + <b>Answer you can use:</b> - <br> + People who experience solitary are more likely to die by suicide, overdose, or violence after release. This does not stay in prison. It comes back to our communities. - === 5. Disproportionate Impact on Black Virginians === + <br> - <b>Key Facts:</b> + - • African Americans: ~19% of state population + === 5. Disproportionate Impact on Black Virginians === - • ~52% of VADOC population + <b>Key Facts:</b> - • ~65% of long-term isolation placements + • African Americans: ~19% of state population - + • ~52% of VADOC population - <b>Policy Implication:</b> Solitary compounds existing racial disparities. + • ~65% of long-term isolation placements - <b>Answer you can use:</b> + <b>Policy Implication:</b> Solitary compounds existing racial disparities. - Black Virginians are already overrepresented in prison. They are even more overrepresented in solitary. HB35 addresses equity as well as safety. + - + <b>Answer you can use:</b> - <br> + Black Virginians are already overrepresented in prison. They are even more overrepresented in solitary. HB35 addresses equity as well as safety. - === 6. “By Any Name” — Lockdowns Replace Solitary === + <br> - <b>Key Facts:</b> + - • Increased use of extended lockdowns + === 6. “By Any Name” — Lockdowns Replace Solitary === - • Program and recreation suspensions + <b>Key Facts:</b> - • Unit-wide isolation practices + • Increased use of extended lockdowns - + • Program and recreation suspensions - <b>Policy Implication:</b> Isolation is being relabeled rather than reduced. + • Unit-wide isolation practices - <b>Answer you can use:</b> + <b>Policy Implication:</b> Isolation is being relabeled rather than reduced. - If we do not regulate lockdowns, solitary simply gets renamed. This bill focuses on conditions, not labels. + - + <b>Answer you can use:</b> - <br> + If we do not regulate lockdowns, solitary simply gets renamed. This bill focuses on conditions, not labels. - === 7. This Bill Protects Safety While Ending Abuse === + <br> - <b>Key Facts:</b> + - • Preserves exceptions for imminent threats + === 7. This Bill Protects Safety While Ending Abuse === - • Allows medical and security isolation + <b>Key Facts:</b> - • Requires documentation and review + • Preserves exceptions for imminent threats - + • Allows medical and security isolation - <b>Policy Implication:</b> Safety tools remain, but abuse is limited. + • Requires documentation and review - <b>Answer you can use:</b> + <b>Policy Implication:</b> Safety tools remain, but abuse is limited. - HB35 does not eliminate separation. It eliminates indefinite, unreviewed isolation. + - + <b>Answer you can use:</b> - <hr> + HB35 does not eliminate separation. It eliminates indefinite, unreviewed isolation. - == Additional Information == + <hr> - <b>1. Definitions are the enforcement backbone</b> + - • The bill defines isolated confinement and lockdown by hours-per-day and loss of programming, so policy can’t be evaded by unit names. + == Additional Information == - + <b>1. Definitions are the enforcement backbone</b> - + • The bill defines isolated confinement and lockdown by hours-per-day and loss of programming, so policy can’t be evaded by unit names. - <b>Policy implication:</b> Regulates conditions, not labels. + - <br> + <b>Policy implication:</b> Regulates conditions, not labels. - <b>2. The “less restrictive first” rule targets protective-custody misuse</b> + <br> - • For “own protection” placements, the facility must use less restrictive options first, including transfers or special-purpose housing for similarly threatened individuals, unless infeasible. + - + <b>2. The “less restrictive first” rule targets protective-custody misuse</b> - <b>Policy implication:</b> Safety without defaulting to isolation. + • For “own protection” placements, the facility must use less restrictive options first, including transfers or special-purpose housing for similarly threatened individuals, unless infeasible. - <br> + <b>Policy implication:</b> Safety without defaulting to isolation. - <b>3. Reviews + documentation create accountability</b> + <br> - • Requires regular reviews, documentation in the institutional file, notice up the chain, and formal in-person reviews with appeal rights. + - + <b>3. Reviews + documentation create accountability</b> - <b>Policy implication:</b> Isolation becomes a documented exception, not a routine. + • Requires regular reviews, documentation in the institutional file, notice up the chain, and formal in-person reviews with appeal rights. - <br> + <b>Policy implication:</b> Isolation becomes a documented exception, not a routine. - <b>4. Lockdown limits matter because lockdown can function like solitary</b> + <br> - • The bill regulates lockdowns that interrupt programming and requires publication of documentation. + - + <b>4. Lockdown limits matter because lockdown can function like solitary</b> - + • The bill regulates lockdowns that interrupt programming and requires publication of documentation. - <b>Policy implication:</b> Prevents “unit-wide solitary” from becoming the workaround. + - [[Category:2026 Session]] + <b>Policy implication:</b> Prevents “unit-wide solitary” from becoming the workaround. + + [[Category:2026 Session]]
2026-02-04 03:31:21
Edited by: 74.110.183.75
Edited by: 74.110.183.75
= HB35 Restorative housing and isolated confinement; restrictions on use. = == Status == [https://house.vga.virginia.gov/subcommittees/H15002/agendas/5187 Public Safety | Subcommittee #2 — agenda] <hr> == Overview == === Summary as Introduced === <b>Restorative housing and isolated confinement; restrictions on use.</b> Prohibits the use of isolated confinement, defined in the bill, in state correctional facilities, subject to certain exceptions. The bill requires that before placing an incarcerated person in restorative housing or isolated confinement for his own protection, the facility administrator shall place an incarcerated person in a less-restrictive setting, including by transferring such person to another institution or to a special-purpose housing unit for incarcerated persons who face similar threats. The bill requires that if an incarcerated person is placed in restorative housing or isolated confinement, such placement shall be reviewed every 48 hours and the facility administrator shall ensure that the incarcerated person receives a medical and mental health evaluation from certified medical and mental health professionals within one working day of placement in restorative housing or any form of isolated confinement. The bill also requires the facility administrator to notify the regional administrator in writing that an incarcerated person was placed in restorative housing or isolated confinement within 24 hours of such placement. Finally, the bill requires that formal reviews of an incarcerated person's placement in any form of isolated confinement shall be held in such person's presence, inform him of any reasons administrative officials believe isolated confinement remains necessary, and give the incarcerated person an opportunity to respond to those reasons, and a formal ruling shall be provided to the incarcerated individual within 24 hours. <hr> === Patrons === ==== House Patrons ==== • Joshua G. Cole (chief patron) • Patrick A. Hope (chief-co-patron) • Sam Rasoul (co-patron • Holly Seibold ==== Senate Patrons ==== • Lamont Bagby <hr> == Language == The language of [https://lis.virginia.gov/bill-details/20261/HB35/text/HB35 HB35] can be viewed here. <hr> == Proposed Amendment == === Amendment Offered for Consideration (requested for subcommittee) === ==== Add “Lockdown” throughout relevant provisions ==== Amend the bill to explicitly include “lockdown” alongside “solitary confinement/isolated confinement” and “restorative housing” in all relevant sections, to prevent facilities from using unit-wide lockdown practices as a functional substitute for individual isolated confinement. ==== Strengthen the time-limit clause (close the cumulative-days gap) ==== Replace the current time-limit phrasing with: “No individual shall be held in solitary confinement, lockdown, or restorative housing for more than 15 consecutive days, nor 15 days in any 60-day period.” <b>Purpose of the amendment:</b> The introduced text already uses “15 consecutive days…in any 60-day period,” but stakeholders have raised concerns that “consecutive” language can be worked around by cycling people in and out (or shifting to lockdown practices) without ever hitting a “consecutive” threshold. The amendment makes the limit explicitly <i>both</i> consecutive and cumulative. Again, the intent is to prohibit the outcome of prolonged, solitary isolation, not to jeopardize the safety of anyone, but to ensure the constraint of this practice. <hr> == Opening Statement == === House Subcommittee Statement === <blockquote> ====Notes on delivery: ==== <mark> <b>bold</b>—emphasize, increase volume; </mark> <mark> <i>italicized</i>—stressed, extended pronunciation, sing-songy; </mark> <mark> <i><b>bold italicized</i></b>—stressed and emphatic, increase volume; </mark> <mark> CAPITALIZED—climactic and declarative;</mark> <mark> »chevrons«—deliver jokingly, with humor; </mark> <mark> • bulleted—drum-like repetition, think of MLK's "I Have a Dream," "I have a dream that..." repeated for emphasis; </mark> <mark> — a half pause, slight build-up; </mark> <mark> — — a full pause, major build-up. <mark> <mark><b>VIBE:</b> think <i>"victory lap;"</i> sell the idea that this bill is a done deal and that doubters should get on board while they still have a chance to be on the right side of history. This is a <b><i>pathos</i></b> and <i><b>ethos</i></b> argument, not <i>logos</i>; lean on expert testimonies for questions of <i>logic</i>. - Eric</mark> </blockquote> <br> Mister Chair, members of the subcommittee— <i>This is not our first time here.</i> For <b>two straight years</b>, the General Assembly has passed this reform — — <b>In 2024</b>, I gave you a »sermon« — — and then we passed <i>HB 1244.</i> <b>In 2025</b>, • my sister, • my friend, • and my <i>esteemed colleague</i>, <b>Delegate Karen Keys-Gamarra</b>, took up the torch — — and then we passed <i>HB 2647.</i> Twice, this body has said—<i><b>clearly</b></i>—that we are ready to turn the page on solitary confinement. And after <b>two straight years</b>, nobody can pretend this is new... • You know this bill. • You know this issue. • You know how overdue this change is — — <br> Mister Chair, members of the committee, this is not our first time here—<b>»BUT it will be our last«</b>—because this year <i>we will <b>make history.</b></i> And what is so great about this year is that we all have a <i>chance</i>—a <i><b>chance</b></i> to be part of making history. If you're still on the fence, I want you to look <i>forward</i> into the future with me. <b>Don't let the past hold you back — —</b> • Because when we look back in 25 years, <b>we will know this legislation was the right thing to do.</b> • Because when we look back in 50 years, <b>we will know this legislation was the right thing to do.</b> • Because when we look back in <b><span style="text-transform:uppercase">one-hundred years</span></b>, <i><b><span style="text-transform:uppercase">we will know this legislation was the right thing to do!</span></b></i> Today—I hope everyone in this room joins us in doing the <i><b><span style="text-transform:uppercase">right thing.</span></b></i> <br> We know the counterarguments. We know the questions. And we're happy to answer them. <b>But</b> I encourage us to <i>listen</i>— • To listen to the <i>testimonies</i> of those who have suffered; • To listen to the voices who are ready for change; • To listen so that we may be reminded—again—<i>just how overdue this legislation is.</i> <br> Thank you, Mister Chair and members of the committee. I hope you report this bill favorably to full committee. <hr> - == Support and Opposition == + === Appropriations Subcommittee Statement === - === Support === + ==== Amendment ==== - • ACLU People Power Fairfax + - • Bridging The Gap In Virginia + The amendment changes “48 hours” to “two business days.” This was done to remove the FIS. - • Charlottesville Chapter National Organization for Women + - • Coalition for Justice + ==== Introduction ==== - • EJUSA Evangelical Network + - • Fighting 4 Freedom + HB35 includes a timing provision that is driving its fiscal impact. After speaking with the Department of Corrections, it is clear that the FIS comes from overtime when the 48-hour deadline falls on weekends or holidays. - • Greater Washington (JCRC) + - • Inmate Support Virginia + The amendment changes “48 hours” to “two business days.” We worked with DOC and stakeholders to reach this version, which keeps the bill’s intent but removes the additional costs. Mr. Elam or DOC staff should be here to confirm that this will eliminate the fiscal impact. - • Interfaith Action for Human Rights (IAHR) + - • HALT Solitary + <i>(let DOC testify to the elimination of the FIS)</i> - • Jewish Community Relations Council of Just Future Project + - • Justice & Witness Action Network- VA + I hope it will be the will of the subcommittee to report the bill to full committee. - • United Church of Christ Central Atlantic Conference + - • LatinoJustice PRLDEF + == Support and Opposition == - • NAACP Loudoun + - • National Association of Social Workers + === Support === - • National Association of Social Workers, Virginia Chapter + • ACLU People Power Fairfax - • National Religious Campaign Against Torture + • Bridging The Gap In Virginia - • No Left Turns + • Charlottesville Chapter National Organization for Women - • Resource Information Help for the Disadvantaged and Disenfranchised (RIHD) + • Coalition for Justice - • RISE for Youth + • EJUSA Evangelical Network - • RVA Health Alliance for Social Justice and Equity + • Fighting 4 Freedom - • Social Action Linking Together (SALT) + • Greater Washington (JCRC) - • Social Workers and Allies Against Solitary Confinement + • Inmate Support Virginia - • The Humanization Project + • Interfaith Action for Human Rights (IAHR) - • The Sentencing Project + • HALT Solitary - • Unitarian Universalist Legislative Ministry of Virginia + • Jewish Community Relations Council of Just Future Project - • Unlock the Box Campaign + • Justice & Witness Action Network- VA - • Virginia CURE + • United Church of Christ Central Atlantic Conference - • Virginia Defenders for Freedom, Justice & Equality + • LatinoJustice PRLDEF - • Virginia Justice Democrats + • NAACP Loudoun - • Virginia Justice for Life + • National Association of Social Workers - • Virginia Justice Alliance + • National Association of Social Workers, Virginia Chapter - • Virginia Prisons Accountability Committee + • National Religious Campaign Against Torture - • Virginia Prisoner Of Conscience + • No Left Turns - • Virginia Prison Justice Network + • Resource Information Help for the Disadvantaged and Disenfranchised (RIHD) - • WJCC Coalition for Community Justice + • RISE for Youth - • 40 Strong + • RVA Health Alliance for Social Justice and Equity - + • Social Action Linking Together (SALT) - === Opposition === + • Social Workers and Allies Against Solitary Confinement - • (to be updated) + • The Humanization Project - + • The Sentencing Project - === No Recommendation / Neutral === + • Unitarian Universalist Legislative Ministry of Virginia - • (to be updated) + • Unlock the Box Campaign - + • Virginia CURE - === No Position Provided === + • Virginia Defenders for Freedom, Justice & Equality - • Department of Corrections + • Virginia Justice Democrats - + • Virginia Justice for Life - <hr> + • Virginia Justice Alliance - + • Virginia Prisons Accountability Committee - == Fiscal Impact == + • Virginia Prisoner Of Conscience - No fiscal impact statement is posted for HB35. The Department of Corrections may try to bring forward a claim for a fiscal impact; however, LIS and Appropriations Committee have currently not provided any impact statement. + • Virginia Prison Justice Network - + • WJCC Coalition for Community Justice - <hr> + • 40 Strong - == Possible Questions == + === Opposition === - + • (to be updated) - === TL;DR === + - <b>Q1: “Does this end solitary confinement in Virginia?”</b> TL;DR: No—it ends <i>prolonged</i> solitary confinement and sets clear limits, oversight, and due-process rules for any use. <br> + === No Recommendation / Neutral === - <b>Q2: “Does this make prisons less safe for staff?”</b> TL;DR: No—HB35 keeps exceptions for imminent threats and requires documentation; it’s about targeted use, not “never.” + • (to be updated) - <br> + === No Position Provided === - <b>Q3: “What changes day-to-day?”</b> TL;DR: Frequent reviews, rapid medical/mental health checks, real programming/out-of-cell time, and written accountability when isolation is used. + • Department of Corrections - <br> + <hr> - <b>Q4: “Can DOC just use ‘lockdowns’ instead?”</b> TL;DR: The bill defines lockdown and regulates it, and the requested amendment strengthens this further by applying the same time limits to lockdown explicitly. + - + == Fiscal Impact == - <br> + No fiscal impact statement is posted for HB35. The Department of Corrections may try to bring forward a claim for a fiscal impact; however, LIS and Appropriations Committee have currently not provided any impact statement. - === Q1: “What does the bill aim to accomplish?” === + <hr> - <b>Answer you can use:</b> HB35 ends prolonged solitary confinement by setting clear time limits and requiring real oversight—regular reviews, rapid medical and mental health evaluations, documentation, and in-person due process when isolation continues. + - + == Possible Questions == - <br> + - + === TL;DR === - === Q2: “How often is placement reviewed?” === + <b>Q1: “Does this end solitary confinement in Virginia?”</b> TL;DR: No—it ends <i>prolonged</i> solitary confinement and sets clear limits, oversight, and due-process rules for any use. <br> - <b>Answer you can use:</b> Placement is reviewed frequently, including a required 48-hour review cycle with written documentation explaining why less restrictive settings were not used. + <b>Q2: “Does this make prisons less safe for staff?”</b> TL;DR: No—HB35 keeps exceptions for imminent threats and requires documentation; it’s about targeted use, not “never.” - <br> + <br> - + <b>Q3: “What changes day-to-day?”</b> TL;DR: Frequent reviews, rapid medical/mental health checks, real programming/out-of-cell time, and written accountability when isolation is used. - === Q3: “What health protections are required?” === + - <b>Answer you can use:</b> HB35 requires medical and mental health evaluations by certified professionals within one working day of placement in restorative housing or isolated confinement (with limited exceptions). + <br> - + <b>Q4: “Can DOC just use ‘lockdowns’ instead?”</b> TL;DR: The bill defines lockdown and regulates it, and the requested amendment strengthens this further by applying the same time limits to lockdown explicitly. - <br> + - + <br> - === Q4: “Does this stop people from getting programming or recreation?” === + - <b>Answer you can use:</b> No—the bill requires at least four hours of out-of-cell programming or congregate activity daily, plus at least one hour of congregate recreation unless exceptional safety circumstances apply. + === Q1: “What does the bill aim to accomplish?” === - + <b>Answer you can use:</b> HB35 ends prolonged solitary confinement by setting clear time limits and requiring real oversight—regular reviews, rapid medical and mental health evaluations, documentation, and in-person due process when isolation continues. - <br> + - + <br> - === Q5: “What stops indefinite ‘lockdowns’?” === + - <b>Answer you can use:</b> Lockdowns that interrupt programming must have a specific documented security purpose, must end as soon as the purpose is served, are time-limited, require approvals to extend or repeat, and must be documented and published. + === Q2: “How often is placement reviewed?” === - + <b>Answer you can use:</b> Placement is reviewed frequently, including a required 48-hour review cycle with written documentation explaining why less restrictive settings were not used. - <hr> + - + <br> - == Talking Points == + - + === Q3: “What health protections are required?” === - === 1. Solitary Confinement Is Increasing in Virginia === + <b>Answer you can use:</b> HB35 requires medical and mental health evaluations by certified professionals within one working day of placement in restorative housing or isolated confinement (with limited exceptions). - <b>Key Facts:</b> + - • In FY25, 7,999 people were placed in some form of isolation in VADOC facilities. + <br> - • This represents an 11% increase from the prior year. + - • This is 57% higher than FY2021 levels. + === Q4: “Does this stop people from getting programming or recreation?” === - • The trend has been steadily upward for several years. + <b>Answer you can use:</b> No—the bill requires at least four hours of out-of-cell programming or congregate activity daily, plus at least one hour of congregate recreation unless exceptional safety circumstances apply. - <b>Policy Implication:</b> Voluntary reforms have not reduced isolation. Without statutory limits, use continues to expand. + <br> - <b>Answer you can use:</b> + === Q5: “What stops indefinite ‘lockdowns’?” === - Despite years of discussion, solitary confinement is increasing in Virginia. Nearly 8,000 people were placed in isolation last year—up 57 percent since 2021. That shows policy alone is not working. HB35 creates enforceable limits. + <b>Answer you can use:</b> Lockdowns that interrupt programming must have a specific documented security purpose, must end as soon as the purpose is served, are time-limited, require approvals to extend or repeat, and must be documented and published. - <br> + <hr> - === 2. Solitary Is Becoming More Prolonged === + == Talking Points == - <b>Key Facts:</b> + - • FY23 average length of stay: 9.9 days + === 1. Solitary Confinement Is Increasing in Virginia === - • FY25 average length of stay: 30.9 days + <b>Key Facts:</b> - • A threefold increase in two years + • In FY25, 7,999 people were placed in some form of isolation in VADOC facilities. - • More than double the UN’s 15-day torture threshold + • This represents an 11% increase from the prior year. - + • This is 57% higher than FY2021 levels. - <b>Policy Implication:</b> Temporary isolation is becoming routine long-term confinement. + • The trend has been steadily upward for several years. - <b>Answer you can use:</b> + <b>Policy Implication:</b> Voluntary reforms have not reduced isolation. Without statutory limits, use continues to expand. - The average stay in isolation has tripled in two years and now exceeds 30 days. That is more than double what the United Nations considers torture. This bill stops that normalization. + - + <b>Answer you can use:</b> - <br> + Despite years of discussion, solitary confinement is increasing in Virginia. Nearly 8,000 people were placed in isolation last year—up 57 percent since 2021. That shows policy alone is not working. HB35 creates enforceable limits. - === 3. Solitary Is Used Primarily on People in Mental Health Crisis === + <br> - <b>Key Facts:</b> + - • Over 56 percent have diagnosed mental health conditions + === 2. Solitary Is Becoming More Prolonged === - • True prevalence is likely higher due to underreporting and limited staffing + <b>Key Facts:</b> - • The share of people with mental illness in isolation has increased + • FY23 average length of stay: 9.9 days - + • FY25 average length of stay: 30.9 days - <b>Policy Implication:</b> Isolation is being used as a substitute for treatment. + • A threefold increase in two years - + • More than double the UN’s 15-day torture threshold - <b>Answer you can use:</b> + - More than half the people placed in solitary already have mental health diagnoses. We are responding to crisis by locking people in a box alone for weeks. That makes no clinical sense. + <b>Policy Implication:</b> Temporary isolation is becoming routine long-term confinement. - <br> + <b>Answer you can use:</b> - + The average stay in isolation has tripled in two years and now exceeds 30 days. That is more than double what the United Nations considers torture. This bill stops that normalization. - === 4. Solitary Increases Death Risk After Release === + - <b>Key Facts:</b> + <br> - • Suicide risk: 55% higher + - • Homicide risk: 29% higher + === 3. Solitary Is Used Primarily on People in Mental Health Crisis === - • Overdose risk: 26% higher + <b>Key Facts:</b> - • All-cause mortality: 17% higher + • Over 56 percent have diagnosed mental health conditions - • Risk doubles with repeated isolation + • True prevalence is likely higher due to underreporting and limited staffing - + • The share of people with mental illness in isolation has increased - <b>Policy Implication:</b> Solitary creates long-term public safety risks. + - + <b>Policy Implication:</b> Isolation is being used as a substitute for treatment. - <b>Answer you can use:</b> + - People who experience solitary are more likely to die by suicide, overdose, or violence after release. This does not stay in prison. It comes back to our communities. + <b>Answer you can use:</b> - + More than half the people placed in solitary already have mental health diagnoses. We are responding to crisis by locking people in a box alone for weeks. That makes no clinical sense. - <br> + - + <br> - === 5. Disproportionate Impact on Black Virginians === + - <b>Key Facts:</b> + === 4. Solitary Increases Death Risk After Release === - • African Americans: ~19% of state population + <b>Key Facts:</b> - • ~52% of VADOC population + • Suicide risk: 55% higher - • ~65% of long-term isolation placements + • Homicide risk: 29% higher - + • Overdose risk: 26% higher - <b>Policy Implication:</b> Solitary compounds existing racial disparities. + • All-cause mortality: 17% higher - + • Risk doubles with repeated isolation - <b>Answer you can use:</b> + - Black Virginians are already overrepresented in prison. They are even more overrepresented in solitary. HB35 addresses equity as well as safety. + <b>Policy Implication:</b> Solitary creates long-term public safety risks. - <br> + <b>Answer you can use:</b> - + People who experience solitary are more likely to die by suicide, overdose, or violence after release. This does not stay in prison. It comes back to our communities. - === 6. “By Any Name” — Lockdowns Replace Solitary === + - <b>Key Facts:</b> + <br> - • Increased use of extended lockdowns + - • Program and recreation suspensions + === 5. Disproportionate Impact on Black Virginians === - • Unit-wide isolation practices + <b>Key Facts:</b> - + • African Americans: ~19% of state population - <b>Policy Implication:</b> Isolation is being relabeled rather than reduced. + • ~52% of VADOC population - + • ~65% of long-term isolation placements - <b>Answer you can use:</b> + - If we do not regulate lockdowns, solitary simply gets renamed. This bill focuses on conditions, not labels. + <b>Policy Implication:</b> Solitary compounds existing racial disparities. - <br> + <b>Answer you can use:</b> - + Black Virginians are already overrepresented in prison. They are even more overrepresented in solitary. HB35 addresses equity as well as safety. - === 7. This Bill Protects Safety While Ending Abuse === + - <b>Key Facts:</b> + <br> - • Preserves exceptions for imminent threats + - • Allows medical and security isolation + === 6. “By Any Name” — Lockdowns Replace Solitary === - • Requires documentation and review + <b>Key Facts:</b> - + • Increased use of extended lockdowns - <b>Policy Implication:</b> Safety tools remain, but abuse is limited. + • Program and recreation suspensions - + • Unit-wide isolation practices - <b>Answer you can use:</b> + - HB35 does not eliminate separation. It eliminates indefinite, unreviewed isolation. + <b>Policy Implication:</b> Isolation is being relabeled rather than reduced. - <hr> + <b>Answer you can use:</b> - + If we do not regulate lockdowns, solitary simply gets renamed. This bill focuses on conditions, not labels. - == Additional Information == + - <b>1. Definitions are the enforcement backbone</b> + <br> - • The bill defines isolated confinement and lockdown by hours-per-day and loss of programming, so policy can’t be evaded by unit names. + - + === 7. This Bill Protects Safety While Ending Abuse === - + <b>Key Facts:</b> - <b>Policy implication:</b> Regulates conditions, not labels. + • Preserves exceptions for imminent threats - + • Allows medical and security isolation - <br> + • Requires documentation and review - <b>2. The “less restrictive first” rule targets protective-custody misuse</b> + <b>Policy Implication:</b> Safety tools remain, but abuse is limited. - • For “own protection” placements, the facility must use less restrictive options first, including transfers or special-purpose housing for similarly threatened individuals, unless infeasible. + - + <b>Answer you can use:</b> - <b>Policy implication:</b> Safety without defaulting to isolation. + HB35 does not eliminate separation. It eliminates indefinite, unreviewed isolation. - <br> + <hr> - <b>3. Reviews + documentation create accountability</b> + == Additional Information == - • Requires regular reviews, documentation in the institutional file, notice up the chain, and formal in-person reviews with appeal rights. + <b>1. Definitions are the enforcement backbone</b> - + • The bill defines isolated confinement and lockdown by hours-per-day and loss of programming, so policy can’t be evaded by unit names. - <b>Policy implication:</b> Isolation becomes a documented exception, not a routine. + - <br> + <b>Policy implication:</b> Regulates conditions, not labels. - <b>4. Lockdown limits matter because lockdown can function like solitary</b> + <br> - • The bill regulates lockdowns that interrupt programming and requires publication of documentation. + - + <b>2. The “less restrictive first” rule targets protective-custody misuse</b> - + • For “own protection” placements, the facility must use less restrictive options first, including transfers or special-purpose housing for similarly threatened individuals, unless infeasible. - <b>Policy implication:</b> Prevents “unit-wide solitary” from becoming the workaround. + - + <b>Policy implication:</b> Safety without defaulting to isolation. - [[Category:2026 Session]] + + <br> + + <b>3. Reviews + documentation create accountability</b> + • Requires regular reviews, documentation in the institutional file, notice up the chain, and formal in-person reviews with appeal rights. + + <b>Policy implication:</b> Isolation becomes a documented exception, not a routine. + + <br> + + <b>4. Lockdown limits matter because lockdown can function like solitary</b> + • The bill regulates lockdowns that interrupt programming and requires publication of documentation. + + + <b>Policy implication:</b> Prevents “unit-wide solitary” from becoming the workaround. + + [[Category:2026 Session]]
2026-02-04 03:30:52
Edited by: 74.110.183.75
Edited by: 74.110.183.75
= HB35 Restorative housing and isolated confinement; restrictions on use. = == Status == [https://house.vga.virginia.gov/subcommittees/H15002/agendas/5187 Public Safety | Subcommittee #2 — agenda] <hr> == Overview == === Summary as Introduced === <b>Restorative housing and isolated confinement; restrictions on use.</b> Prohibits the use of isolated confinement, defined in the bill, in state correctional facilities, subject to certain exceptions. The bill requires that before placing an incarcerated person in restorative housing or isolated confinement for his own protection, the facility administrator shall place an incarcerated person in a less-restrictive setting, including by transferring such person to another institution or to a special-purpose housing unit for incarcerated persons who face similar threats. The bill requires that if an incarcerated person is placed in restorative housing or isolated confinement, such placement shall be reviewed every 48 hours and the facility administrator shall ensure that the incarcerated person receives a medical and mental health evaluation from certified medical and mental health professionals within one working day of placement in restorative housing or any form of isolated confinement. The bill also requires the facility administrator to notify the regional administrator in writing that an incarcerated person was placed in restorative housing or isolated confinement within 24 hours of such placement. Finally, the bill requires that formal reviews of an incarcerated person's placement in any form of isolated confinement shall be held in such person's presence, inform him of any reasons administrative officials believe isolated confinement remains necessary, and give the incarcerated person an opportunity to respond to those reasons, and a formal ruling shall be provided to the incarcerated individual within 24 hours. <hr> === Patrons === ==== House Patrons ==== • Joshua G. Cole (chief patron) • Patrick A. Hope (chief-co-patron) • Sam Rasoul (co-patron • Holly Seibold ==== Senate Patrons ==== • Lamont Bagby <hr> == Language == The language of [https://lis.virginia.gov/bill-details/20261/HB35/text/HB35 HB35] can be viewed here. <hr> == Proposed Amendment == === Amendment Offered for Consideration (requested for subcommittee) === ==== Add “Lockdown” throughout relevant provisions ==== Amend the bill to explicitly include “lockdown” alongside “solitary confinement/isolated confinement” and “restorative housing” in all relevant sections, to prevent facilities from using unit-wide lockdown practices as a functional substitute for individual isolated confinement. ==== Strengthen the time-limit clause (close the cumulative-days gap) ==== Replace the current time-limit phrasing with: “No individual shall be held in solitary confinement, lockdown, or restorative housing for more than 15 consecutive days, nor 15 days in any 60-day period.” <b>Purpose of the amendment:</b> The introduced text already uses “15 consecutive days…in any 60-day period,” but stakeholders have raised concerns that “consecutive” language can be worked around by cycling people in and out (or shifting to lockdown practices) without ever hitting a “consecutive” threshold. The amendment makes the limit explicitly <i>both</i> consecutive and cumulative. Again, the intent is to prohibit the outcome of prolonged, solitary isolation, not to jeopardize the safety of anyone, but to ensure the constraint of this practice. <hr> == Opening Statement == === House Subcommittee Statement === <blockquote> ====Notes on delivery: ==== <mark> <b>bold</b>—emphasize, increase volume; </mark> <mark> <i>italicized</i>—stressed, extended pronunciation, sing-songy; </mark> <mark> <i><b>bold italicized</i></b>—stressed and emphatic, increase volume; </mark> <mark> CAPITALIZED—climactic and declarative;</mark> <mark> »chevrons«—deliver jokingly, with humor; </mark> <mark> • bulleted—drum-like repetition, think of MLK's "I Have a Dream," "I have a dream that..." repeated for emphasis; </mark> <mark> — a half pause, slight build-up; </mark> <mark> — — a full pause, major build-up. <mark> <mark><b>VIBE:</b> think <i>"victory lap;"</i> sell the idea that this bill is a done deal and that doubters should get on board while they still have a chance to be on the right side of history. This is a <b><i>pathos</i></b> and <i><b>ethos</i></b> argument, not <i>logos</i>; lean on expert testimonies for questions of <i>logic</i>. - Eric</mark> </blockquote> <br> Mister Chair, members of the subcommittee— <i>This is not our first time here.</i> For <b>two straight years</b>, the General Assembly has passed this reform — — <b>In 2024</b>, I gave you a »sermon« — — and then we passed <i>HB 1244.</i> <b>In 2025</b>, • my sister, • my friend, • and my <i>esteemed colleague</i>, <b>Delegate Karen Keys-Gamarra</b>, took up the torch — — and then we passed <i>HB 2647.</i> Twice, this body has said—<i><b>clearly</b></i>—that we are ready to turn the page on solitary confinement. And after <b>two straight years</b>, nobody can pretend this is new... • You know this bill. • You know this issue. • You know how overdue this change is — — <br> Mister Chair, members of the committee, this is not our first time here—<b>»BUT it will be our last«</b>—because this year <i>we will <b>make history.</b></i> And what is so great about this year is that we all have a <i>chance</i>—a <i><b>chance</b></i> to be part of making history. If you're still on the fence, I want you to look <i>forward</i> into the future with me. <b>Don't let the past hold you back — —</b> • Because when we look back in 25 years, <b>we will know this legislation was the right thing to do.</b> • Because when we look back in 50 years, <b>we will know this legislation was the right thing to do.</b> • Because when we look back in <b><span style="text-transform:uppercase">one-hundred years</span></b>, <i><b><span style="text-transform:uppercase">we will know this legislation was the right thing to do!</span></b></i> Today—I hope everyone in this room joins us in doing the <i><b><span style="text-transform:uppercase">right thing.</span></b></i> <br> We know the counterarguments. We know the questions. And we're happy to answer them. <b>But</b> I encourage us to <i>listen</i>— • To listen to the <i>testimonies</i> of those who have suffered; • To listen to the voices who are ready for change; • To listen so that we may be reminded—again—<i>just how overdue this legislation is.</i> <br> Thank you, Mister Chair and members of the committee. I hope you report this bill favorably to full committee. <hr> == Support and Opposition == === Support === • ACLU People Power Fairfax • Bridging The Gap In Virginia • Charlottesville Chapter National Organization for Women • Coalition for Justice • EJUSA Evangelical Network • Fighting 4 Freedom • Greater Washington (JCRC) • Inmate Support Virginia • Interfaith Action for Human Rights (IAHR) • HALT Solitary • Jewish Community Relations Council of Just Future Project • Justice & Witness Action Network- VA • United Church of Christ Central Atlantic Conference • LatinoJustice PRLDEF • NAACP Loudoun • National Association of Social Workers • National Association of Social Workers, Virginia Chapter • National Religious Campaign Against Torture • No Left Turns • Resource Information Help for the Disadvantaged and Disenfranchised (RIHD) • RISE for Youth • RVA Health Alliance for Social Justice and Equity • Social Action Linking Together (SALT) • Social Workers and Allies Against Solitary Confinement • The Humanization Project • The Sentencing Project • Unitarian Universalist Legislative Ministry of Virginia • Unlock the Box Campaign • Virginia CURE • Virginia Defenders for Freedom, Justice & Equality • Virginia Justice Democrats • Virginia Justice for Life • Virginia Justice Alliance • Virginia Prisons Accountability Committee • Virginia Prisoner Of Conscience • Virginia Prison Justice Network • WJCC Coalition for Community Justice • 40 Strong === Opposition === • (to be updated) === No Recommendation / Neutral === • (to be updated) === No Position Provided === • Department of Corrections <hr> == Fiscal Impact == No fiscal impact statement is posted for HB35. The Department of Corrections may try to bring forward a claim for a fiscal impact; however, LIS and Appropriations Committee have currently not provided any impact statement. <hr> == Possible Questions == === TL;DR === <b>Q1: “Does this end solitary confinement in Virginia?”</b> TL;DR: No—it ends <i>prolonged</i> solitary confinement and sets clear limits, oversight, and due-process rules for any use. <br> <b>Q2: “Does this make prisons less safe for staff?”</b> TL;DR: No—HB35 keeps exceptions for imminent threats and requires documentation; it’s about targeted use, not “never.” <br> <b>Q3: “What changes day-to-day?”</b> TL;DR: Frequent reviews, rapid medical/mental health checks, real programming/out-of-cell time, and written accountability when isolation is used. <br> <b>Q4: “Can DOC just use ‘lockdowns’ instead?”</b> TL;DR: The bill defines lockdown and regulates it, and the requested amendment strengthens this further by applying the same time limits to lockdown explicitly. <br> === Q1: “What does the bill aim to accomplish?” === <b>Answer you can use:</b> HB35 ends prolonged solitary confinement by setting clear time limits and requiring real oversight—regular reviews, rapid medical and mental health evaluations, documentation, and in-person due process when isolation continues. <br> === Q2: “How often is placement reviewed?” === <b>Answer you can use:</b> Placement is reviewed frequently, including a required 48-hour review cycle with written documentation explaining why less restrictive settings were not used. <br> === Q3: “What health protections are required?” === <b>Answer you can use:</b> HB35 requires medical and mental health evaluations by certified professionals within one working day of placement in restorative housing or isolated confinement (with limited exceptions). <br> === Q4: “Does this stop people from getting programming or recreation?” === <b>Answer you can use:</b> No—the bill requires at least four hours of out-of-cell programming or congregate activity daily, plus at least one hour of congregate recreation unless exceptional safety circumstances apply. <br> === Q5: “What stops indefinite ‘lockdowns’?” === <b>Answer you can use:</b> Lockdowns that interrupt programming must have a specific documented security purpose, must end as soon as the purpose is served, are time-limited, require approvals to extend or repeat, and must be documented and published. <hr> == Talking Points == - 1. This Body Knows This Issue — And Has Acted Before + - + === 1. Solitary Confinement Is Increasing in Virginia === - HB35 is not new or untested. + <b>Key Facts:</b> - + • In FY25, 7,999 people were placed in some form of isolation in VADOC facilities. - Nearly identical legislation has passed the General Assembly in back-to-back years. + • This represents an 11% increase from the prior year. - + • This is 57% higher than FY2021 levels. - Members have reviewed the data, heard testimony, and debated this issue extensively. + • The trend has been steadily upward for several years. - The continued return of this bill reflects unfinished business, not unresolved questions. + <b>Policy Implication:</b> Voluntary reforms have not reduced isolation. Without statutory limits, use continues to expand. - This is about following through on prior bipartisan legislative judgment. + <b>Answer you can use:</b> - + Despite years of discussion, solitary confinement is increasing in Virginia. Nearly 8,000 people were placed in isolation last year—up 57 percent since 2021. That shows policy alone is not working. HB35 creates enforceable limits. - <b>Use if asked “Why again?”:</b> + - “We’re here again because the legislature already decided this policy is sound. Two sessions in a row, both chambers passed it. This is about completing work we’ve already agreed is necessary.” + <br> - 2. The Bill Ends Prolonged Isolation — Not Safety Measures + === 2. Solitary Is Becoming More Prolonged === - + <b>Key Facts:</b> - HB35 does <i>not</i> prohibit short-term separation for safety. + • FY23 average length of stay: 9.9 days - + • FY25 average length of stay: 30.9 days - It preserves exceptions for imminent threats and operational emergencies. + • A threefold increase in two years - + • More than double the UN’s 15-day torture threshold - It requires documentation and review when separation is used. + - + <b>Policy Implication:</b> Temporary isolation is becoming routine long-term confinement. - The focus is duration, oversight, and accountability. + - + <b>Answer you can use:</b> - <b>Use if asked “Does this tie DOC’s hands?”:</b> + The average stay in isolation has tripled in two years and now exceeds 30 days. That is more than double what the United Nations considers torture. This bill stops that normalization. - “No. It preserves safety tools. It simply prevents those tools from becoming permanent, unreviewed punishment.” + - + <br> - 3. Isolation Undermines Judgment, Rehabilitation, and Stability + - + === 3. Solitary Is Used Primarily on People in Mental Health Crisis === - Long-term isolation degrades mental health, impulse control, and decision-making. + <b>Key Facts:</b> - + • Over 56 percent have diagnosed mental health conditions - This undermines rehabilitation and increases long-term management risks. + • True prevalence is likely higher due to underreporting and limited staffing - + • The share of people with mental illness in isolation has increased - Scripture, psychology, and corrections research all point in the same direction: + - prolonged isolation weakens people rather than stabilizing them. + <b>Policy Implication:</b> Isolation is being used as a substitute for treatment. - <b>Use if asked “Why bring moral language into this?”:</b> + <b>Answer you can use:</b> - “This is a public safety issue, a health issue, and a moral issue. All three align here.” + More than half the people placed in solitary already have mental health diagnoses. We are responding to crisis by locking people in a box alone for weeks. That makes no clinical sense. - 4. The Bill Is About Human Dignity and Public Safety Together + <br> - HB35 reflects the principle that safety and humanity are not opposites. + === 4. Solitary Increases Death Risk After Release === - + <b>Key Facts:</b> - Facilities that rely less on prolonged isolation see: + • Suicide risk: 55% higher - + • Homicide risk: 29% higher - Fewer mental health crises + • Overdose risk: 26% higher - + • All-cause mortality: 17% higher - Fewer self-harm incidents + • Risk doubles with repeated isolation - Better long-term behavior management + <b>Policy Implication:</b> Solitary creates long-term public safety risks. - Oversight improves institutional stability. + <b>Answer you can use:</b> - + People who experience solitary are more likely to die by suicide, overdose, or violence after release. This does not stay in prison. It comes back to our communities. - <b>Use if asked “Is this just about being ‘soft’?”:</b> + - “No. It’s about being smart. This improves safety for staff and incarcerated people.” + <br> - 5. Oversight Is the Core Reform + === 5. Disproportionate Impact on Black Virginians === - + <b>Key Facts:</b> - Regular reviews + • African Americans: ~19% of state population - + • ~52% of VADOC population - Health evaluations + • ~65% of long-term isolation placements - Written justification + <b>Policy Implication:</b> Solitary compounds existing racial disparities. - In-person hearings + <b>Answer you can use:</b> - + Black Virginians are already overrepresented in prison. They are even more overrepresented in solitary. HB35 addresses equity as well as safety. - Multidisciplinary input + - + <br> - These are not symbolic. They are structural safeguards. + - + === 6. “By Any Name” — Lockdowns Replace Solitary === - <b>Use if asked “What actually changes?”:</b> + <b>Key Facts:</b> - “Isolation becomes accountable. It can’t disappear into paperwork and silence.” + • Increased use of extended lockdowns - + • Program and recreation suspensions - 6. Why This Is Overdue + • Unit-wide isolation practices - Virginia has debated this issue for years. + <b>Policy Implication:</b> Isolation is being relabeled rather than reduced. - Other states have already adopted similar limits. + <b>Answer you can use:</b> - + If we do not regulate lockdowns, solitary simply gets renamed. This bill focuses on conditions, not labels. - National corrections standards discourage prolonged isolation. + - + <br> - Virginia’s own legislature has endorsed reform twice. + - + === 7. This Bill Protects Safety While Ending Abuse === - <b>Use if asked “Why now?”:</b> + <b>Key Facts:</b> - “Because we’ve delayed long enough. The policy case is settled.” + • Preserves exceptions for imminent threats - + • Allows medical and security isolation - 7. The Faith-Based Framing: Isolation vs. Restoration + • Requires documentation and review - Proverbs teaches that isolation breaks judgment. + <b>Policy Implication:</b> Safety tools remain, but abuse is limited. - Forced isolation denies people the ability to regain judgment. + <b>Answer you can use:</b> - + HB35 does not eliminate separation. It eliminates indefinite, unreviewed isolation. - Rehabilitation requires relationship, structure, and accountability—not abandonment. + - + <hr> - Restorative housing must be restorative in practice, not just in name. + - + == Additional Information == - <b>Use if challenged on religious framing:</b> + <b>1. Definitions are the enforcement backbone</b> - “This is about shared moral language, not theology. Every tradition teaches that people do better in community.” + • The bill defines isolated confinement and lockdown by hours-per-day and loss of programming, so policy can’t be evaded by unit names. - 8. Responding to Past Opposition Claims + - + <b>Policy implication:</b> Regulates conditions, not labels. - (Common from prior years) + - + <br> - “We need more data.” + - → Two years of legislative review. National data exists. The status quo is well-documented. + <b>2. The “less restrictive first” rule targets protective-custody misuse</b> - + • For “own protection” placements, the facility must use less restrictive options first, including transfers or special-purpose housing for similarly threatened individuals, unless infeasible. - “This will increase costs.” + - → Prolonged isolation increases medical, mental health, and staffing costs. + <b>Policy implication:</b> Safety without defaulting to isolation. - “We’re already in compliance.” + <br> - → If so, then codifying best practices should not be controversial. + - + <b>3. Reviews + documentation create accountability</b> - “This hurts staff.” + • Requires regular reviews, documentation in the institutional file, notice up the chain, and formal in-person reviews with appeal rights. - → It reduces volatile conditions and improves predictability. + - + <b>Policy implication:</b> Isolation becomes a documented exception, not a routine. - <hr> + - + <br> - == Additional Information == + - <b>1. Definitions are the enforcement backbone</b> + <b>4. Lockdown limits matter because lockdown can function like solitary</b> - • The bill defines isolated confinement and lockdown by hours-per-day and loss of programming, so policy can’t be evaded by unit names. + • The bill regulates lockdowns that interrupt programming and requires publication of documentation. - <b>Policy implication:</b> Regulates conditions, not labels. + <b>Policy implication:</b> Prevents “unit-wide solitary” from becoming the workaround. - <br> + [[Category:2026 Session]] - - <b>2. The “less restrictive first” rule targets protective-custody misuse</b> - • For “own protection” placements, the facility must use less restrictive options first, including transfers or special-purpose housing for similarly threatened individuals, unless infeasible. - - <b>Policy implication:</b> Safety without defaulting to isolation. - - <br> - - <b>3. Reviews + documentation create accountability</b> - • Requires regular reviews, documentation in the institutional file, notice up the chain, and formal in-person reviews with appeal rights. - - <b>Policy implication:</b> Isolation becomes a documented exception, not a routine. - - <br> - - <b>4. Lockdown limits matter because lockdown can function like solitary</b> - • The bill regulates lockdowns that interrupt programming and requires publication of documentation. - - - <b>Policy implication:</b> Prevents “unit-wide solitary” from becoming the workaround. - - [[Category:2026 Session]]
2026-01-22 12:47:29
Edited by: 198.246.136.35
Edited by: 198.246.136.35
= HB35 Restorative housing and isolated confinement; restrictions on use. = == Status == [https://house.vga.virginia.gov/subcommittees/H15002/agendas/5187 Public Safety | Subcommittee #2 — agenda] <hr> == Overview == === Summary as Introduced === <b>Restorative housing and isolated confinement; restrictions on use.</b> Prohibits the use of isolated confinement, defined in the bill, in state correctional facilities, subject to certain exceptions. The bill requires that before placing an incarcerated person in restorative housing or isolated confinement for his own protection, the facility administrator shall place an incarcerated person in a less-restrictive setting, including by transferring such person to another institution or to a special-purpose housing unit for incarcerated persons who face similar threats. The bill requires that if an incarcerated person is placed in restorative housing or isolated confinement, such placement shall be reviewed every 48 hours and the facility administrator shall ensure that the incarcerated person receives a medical and mental health evaluation from certified medical and mental health professionals within one working day of placement in restorative housing or any form of isolated confinement. The bill also requires the facility administrator to notify the regional administrator in writing that an incarcerated person was placed in restorative housing or isolated confinement within 24 hours of such placement. Finally, the bill requires that formal reviews of an incarcerated person's placement in any form of isolated confinement shall be held in such person's presence, inform him of any reasons administrative officials believe isolated confinement remains necessary, and give the incarcerated person an opportunity to respond to those reasons, and a formal ruling shall be provided to the incarcerated individual within 24 hours. <hr> === Patrons === ==== House Patrons ==== • Joshua G. Cole (chief patron) • Patrick A. Hope (chief-co-patron) • Sam Rasoul (co-patron • Holly Seibold ==== Senate Patrons ==== • Lamont Bagby <hr> == Language == The language of [https://lis.virginia.gov/bill-details/20261/HB35/text/HB35 HB35] can be viewed here. <hr> == Proposed Amendment == === Amendment Offered for Consideration (requested for subcommittee) === ==== Add “Lockdown” throughout relevant provisions ==== Amend the bill to explicitly include “lockdown” alongside “solitary confinement/isolated confinement” and “restorative housing” in all relevant sections, to prevent facilities from using unit-wide lockdown practices as a functional substitute for individual isolated confinement. ==== Strengthen the time-limit clause (close the cumulative-days gap) ==== Replace the current time-limit phrasing with: “No individual shall be held in solitary confinement, lockdown, or restorative housing for more than 15 consecutive days, nor 15 days in any 60-day period.” <b>Purpose of the amendment:</b> The introduced text already uses “15 consecutive days…in any 60-day period,” but stakeholders have raised concerns that “consecutive” language can be worked around by cycling people in and out (or shifting to lockdown practices) without ever hitting a “consecutive” threshold. The amendment makes the limit explicitly <i>both</i> consecutive and cumulative. Again, the intent is to prohibit the outcome of prolonged, solitary isolation, not to jeopardize the safety of anyone, but to ensure the constraint of this practice. <hr> == Opening Statement == === House Subcommittee Statement === <blockquote> ====Notes on delivery: ==== <mark> <b>bold</b>—emphasize, increase volume; </mark> <mark> <i>italicized</i>—stressed, extended pronunciation, sing-songy; </mark> <mark> <i><b>bold italicized</i></b>—stressed and emphatic, increase volume; </mark> <mark> CAPITALIZED—climactic and declarative;</mark> <mark> »chevrons«—deliver jokingly, with humor; </mark> <mark> • bulleted—drum-like repetition, think of MLK's "I Have a Dream," "I have a dream that..." repeated for emphasis; </mark> <mark> — a half pause, slight build-up; </mark> <mark> — — a full pause, major build-up. <mark> <mark><b>VIBE:</b> think <i>"victory lap;"</i> sell the idea that this bill is a done deal and that doubters should get on board while they still have a chance to be on the right side of history. This is a <b><i>pathos</i></b> and <i><b>ethos</i></b> argument, not <i>logos</i>; lean on expert testimonies for questions of <i>logic</i>. - Eric</mark> </blockquote> <br> Mister Chair, members of the subcommittee— <i>This is not our first time here.</i> For <b>two straight years</b>, the General Assembly has passed this reform — — <b>In 2024</b>, I gave you a »sermon« — — and then we passed <i>HB 1244.</i> <b>In 2025</b>, • my sister, • my friend, • and my <i>esteemed colleague</i>, <b>Delegate Karen Keys-Gamarra</b>, took up the torch — — and then we passed <i>HB 2647.</i> Twice, this body has said—<i><b>clearly</b></i>—that we are ready to turn the page on solitary confinement. And after <b>two straight years</b>, nobody can pretend this is new... • You know this bill. • You know this issue. • You know how overdue this change is — — <br> Mister Chair, members of the committee, this is not our first time here—<b>»BUT it will be our last«</b>—because this year <i>we will <b>make history.</b></i> And what is so great about this year is that we all have a <i>chance</i>—a <i><b>chance</b></i> to be part of making history. If you're still on the fence, I want you to look <i>forward</i> into the future with me. <b>Don't let the past hold you back — —</b> • Because when we look back in 25 years, <b>we will know this legislation was the right thing to do.</b> • Because when we look back in 50 years, <b>we will know this legislation was the right thing to do.</b> • Because when we look back in <b><span style="text-transform:uppercase">one-hundred years</span></b>, <i><b><span style="text-transform:uppercase">we will know this legislation was the right thing to do!</span></b></i> Today—I hope everyone in this room joins us in doing the <i><b><span style="text-transform:uppercase">right thing.</span></b></i> <br> We know the counterarguments. We know the questions. And we're happy to answer them. <b>But</b> I encourage us to <i>listen</i>— • To listen to the <i>testimonies</i> of those who have suffered; • To listen to the voices who are ready for change; • To listen so that we may be reminded—again—<i>just how overdue this legislation is.</i> <br> Thank you, Mister Chair and members of the committee. I hope you report this bill favorably to full committee. <hr> == Support and Opposition == === Support === • ACLU People Power Fairfax • Bridging The Gap In Virginia • Charlottesville Chapter National Organization for Women • Coalition for Justice • EJUSA Evangelical Network • Fighting 4 Freedom • Greater Washington (JCRC) • Inmate Support Virginia • Interfaith Action for Human Rights (IAHR) • HALT Solitary • Jewish Community Relations Council of Just Future Project • Justice & Witness Action Network- VA • United Church of Christ Central Atlantic Conference • LatinoJustice PRLDEF • NAACP Loudoun • National Association of Social Workers • National Association of Social Workers, Virginia Chapter • National Religious Campaign Against Torture • No Left Turns • Resource Information Help for the Disadvantaged and Disenfranchised (RIHD) • RISE for Youth • RVA Health Alliance for Social Justice and Equity • Social Action Linking Together (SALT) • Social Workers and Allies Against Solitary Confinement • The Humanization Project • The Sentencing Project • Unitarian Universalist Legislative Ministry of Virginia • Unlock the Box Campaign • Virginia CURE • Virginia Defenders for Freedom, Justice & Equality • Virginia Justice Democrats • Virginia Justice for Life • Virginia Justice Alliance • Virginia Prisons Accountability Committee • Virginia Prisoner Of Conscience • Virginia Prison Justice Network • WJCC Coalition for Community Justice • 40 Strong === Opposition === • (to be updated) === No Recommendation / Neutral === • (to be updated) === No Position Provided === • Department of Corrections <hr> == Fiscal Impact == No fiscal impact statement is posted for HB35. The Department of Corrections may try to bring forward a claim for a fiscal impact; however, LIS and Appropriations Committee have currently not provided any impact statement. <hr> == Possible Questions == === TL;DR === <b>Q1: “Does this end solitary confinement in Virginia?”</b> TL;DR: No—it ends <i>prolonged</i> solitary confinement and sets clear limits, oversight, and due-process rules for any use. <br> <b>Q2: “Does this make prisons less safe for staff?”</b> TL;DR: No—HB35 keeps exceptions for imminent threats and requires documentation; it’s about targeted use, not “never.” <br> <b>Q3: “What changes day-to-day?”</b> TL;DR: Frequent reviews, rapid medical/mental health checks, real programming/out-of-cell time, and written accountability when isolation is used. <br> <b>Q4: “Can DOC just use ‘lockdowns’ instead?”</b> TL;DR: The bill defines lockdown and regulates it, and the requested amendment strengthens this further by applying the same time limits to lockdown explicitly. <br> === Q1: “What does the bill aim to accomplish?” === <b>Answer you can use:</b> HB35 ends prolonged solitary confinement by setting clear time limits and requiring real oversight—regular reviews, rapid medical and mental health evaluations, documentation, and in-person due process when isolation continues. <br> === Q2: “How often is placement reviewed?” === <b>Answer you can use:</b> Placement is reviewed frequently, including a required 48-hour review cycle with written documentation explaining why less restrictive settings were not used. <br> === Q3: “What health protections are required?” === <b>Answer you can use:</b> HB35 requires medical and mental health evaluations by certified professionals within one working day of placement in restorative housing or isolated confinement (with limited exceptions). <br> === Q4: “Does this stop people from getting programming or recreation?” === <b>Answer you can use:</b> No—the bill requires at least four hours of out-of-cell programming or congregate activity daily, plus at least one hour of congregate recreation unless exceptional safety circumstances apply. <br> === Q5: “What stops indefinite ‘lockdowns’?” === <b>Answer you can use:</b> Lockdowns that interrupt programming must have a specific documented security purpose, must end as soon as the purpose is served, are time-limited, require approvals to extend or repeat, and must be documented and published. <hr> - == Additional Information == + == Talking Points == - <b>1. Definitions are the enforcement backbone</b> + 1. This Body Knows This Issue — And Has Acted Before - • The bill defines isolated confinement and lockdown by hours-per-day and loss of programming, so policy can’t be evaded by unit names. + - + HB35 is not new or untested. - <b>Policy implication:</b> Regulates conditions, not labels. + Nearly identical legislation has passed the General Assembly in back-to-back years. - <br> + Members have reviewed the data, heard testimony, and debated this issue extensively. - <b>2. The “less restrictive first” rule targets protective-custody misuse</b> + The continued return of this bill reflects unfinished business, not unresolved questions. - • For “own protection” placements, the facility must use less restrictive options first, including transfers or special-purpose housing for similarly threatened individuals, unless infeasible. + - + This is about following through on prior bipartisan legislative judgment. - <b>Policy implication:</b> Safety without defaulting to isolation. + - + <b>Use if asked “Why again?”:</b> - <br> + “We’re here again because the legislature already decided this policy is sound. Two sessions in a row, both chambers passed it. This is about completing work we’ve already agreed is necessary.” - <b>3. Reviews + documentation create accountability</b> + 2. The Bill Ends Prolonged Isolation — Not Safety Measures - • Requires regular reviews, documentation in the institutional file, notice up the chain, and formal in-person reviews with appeal rights. + - + HB35 does <i>not</i> prohibit short-term separation for safety. - <b>Policy implication:</b> Isolation becomes a documented exception, not a routine. + - + It preserves exceptions for imminent threats and operational emergencies. - <br> + - + It requires documentation and review when separation is used. - <b>4. Lockdown limits matter because lockdown can function like solitary</b> + - • The bill regulates lockdowns that interrupt programming and requires publication of documentation. + The focus is duration, oversight, and accountability. - + <b>Use if asked “Does this tie DOC’s hands?”:</b> - <b>Policy implication:</b> Prevents “unit-wide solitary” from becoming the workaround. + “No. It preserves safety tools. It simply prevents those tools from becoming permanent, unreviewed punishment.” - [[Category:2026 Session]] + 3. Isolation Undermines Judgment, Rehabilitation, and Stability + + Long-term isolation degrades mental health, impulse control, and decision-making. + + This undermines rehabilitation and increases long-term management risks. + + Scripture, psychology, and corrections research all point in the same direction: + prolonged isolation weakens people rather than stabilizing them. + + <b>Use if asked “Why bring moral language into this?”:</b> + “This is a public safety issue, a health issue, and a moral issue. All three align here.” + + 4. The Bill Is About Human Dignity and Public Safety Together + + HB35 reflects the principle that safety and humanity are not opposites. + + Facilities that rely less on prolonged isolation see: + + Fewer mental health crises + + Fewer self-harm incidents + + Better long-term behavior management + + Oversight improves institutional stability. + + <b>Use if asked “Is this just about being ‘soft’?”:</b> + “No. It’s about being smart. This improves safety for staff and incarcerated people.” + + 5. Oversight Is the Core Reform + + Regular reviews + + Health evaluations + + Written justification + + In-person hearings + + Multidisciplinary input + + These are not symbolic. They are structural safeguards. + + <b>Use if asked “What actually changes?”:</b> + “Isolation becomes accountable. It can’t disappear into paperwork and silence.” + + 6. Why This Is Overdue + + Virginia has debated this issue for years. + + Other states have already adopted similar limits. + + National corrections standards discourage prolonged isolation. + + Virginia’s own legislature has endorsed reform twice. + + <b>Use if asked “Why now?”:</b> + “Because we’ve delayed long enough. The policy case is settled.” + + 7. The Faith-Based Framing: Isolation vs. Restoration + + Proverbs teaches that isolation breaks judgment. + + Forced isolation denies people the ability to regain judgment. + + Rehabilitation requires relationship, structure, and accountability—not abandonment. + + Restorative housing must be restorative in practice, not just in name. + + <b>Use if challenged on religious framing:</b> + “This is about shared moral language, not theology. Every tradition teaches that people do better in community.” + + 8. Responding to Past Opposition Claims + + (Common from prior years) + + “We need more data.” + → Two years of legislative review. National data exists. The status quo is well-documented. + + “This will increase costs.” + → Prolonged isolation increases medical, mental health, and staffing costs. + + “We’re already in compliance.” + → If so, then codifying best practices should not be controversial. + + “This hurts staff.” + → It reduces volatile conditions and improves predictability. + + <hr> + + == Additional Information == + <b>1. Definitions are the enforcement backbone</b> + • The bill defines isolated confinement and lockdown by hours-per-day and loss of programming, so policy can’t be evaded by unit names. + + + <b>Policy implication:</b> Regulates conditions, not labels. + + <br> + + <b>2. The “less restrictive first” rule targets protective-custody misuse</b> + • For “own protection” placements, the facility must use less restrictive options first, including transfers or special-purpose housing for similarly threatened individuals, unless infeasible. + + <b>Policy implication:</b> Safety without defaulting to isolation. + + <br> + + <b>3. Reviews + documentation create accountability</b> + • Requires regular reviews, documentation in the institutional file, notice up the chain, and formal in-person reviews with appeal rights. + + <b>Policy implication:</b> Isolation becomes a documented exception, not a routine. + + <br> + + <b>4. Lockdown limits matter because lockdown can function like solitary</b> + • The bill regulates lockdowns that interrupt programming and requires publication of documentation. + + + <b>Policy implication:</b> Prevents “unit-wide solitary” from becoming the workaround. + + [[Category:2026 Session]]
2026-01-22 12:43:51
Edited by: 198.246.136.35
Edited by: 198.246.136.35
= HB35 Restorative housing and isolated confinement; restrictions on use. = == Status == [https://house.vga.virginia.gov/subcommittees/H15002/agendas/5187 Public Safety | Subcommittee #2 — agenda] <hr> == Overview == === Summary as Introduced === <b>Restorative housing and isolated confinement; restrictions on use.</b> Prohibits the use of isolated confinement, defined in the bill, in state correctional facilities, subject to certain exceptions. The bill requires that before placing an incarcerated person in restorative housing or isolated confinement for his own protection, the facility administrator shall place an incarcerated person in a less-restrictive setting, including by transferring such person to another institution or to a special-purpose housing unit for incarcerated persons who face similar threats. The bill requires that if an incarcerated person is placed in restorative housing or isolated confinement, such placement shall be reviewed every 48 hours and the facility administrator shall ensure that the incarcerated person receives a medical and mental health evaluation from certified medical and mental health professionals within one working day of placement in restorative housing or any form of isolated confinement. The bill also requires the facility administrator to notify the regional administrator in writing that an incarcerated person was placed in restorative housing or isolated confinement within 24 hours of such placement. Finally, the bill requires that formal reviews of an incarcerated person's placement in any form of isolated confinement shall be held in such person's presence, inform him of any reasons administrative officials believe isolated confinement remains necessary, and give the incarcerated person an opportunity to respond to those reasons, and a formal ruling shall be provided to the incarcerated individual within 24 hours. <hr> === Patrons === ==== House Patrons ==== • Joshua G. Cole (chief patron) • Patrick A. Hope (chief-co-patron) • Sam Rasoul (co-patron • Holly Seibold ==== Senate Patrons ==== • Lamont Bagby <hr> == Language == The language of [https://lis.virginia.gov/bill-details/20261/HB35/text/HB35 HB35] can be viewed here. <hr> == Proposed Amendment == === Amendment Offered for Consideration (requested for subcommittee) === ==== Add “Lockdown” throughout relevant provisions ==== Amend the bill to explicitly include “lockdown” alongside “solitary confinement/isolated confinement” and “restorative housing” in all relevant sections, to prevent facilities from using unit-wide lockdown practices as a functional substitute for individual isolated confinement. ==== Strengthen the time-limit clause (close the cumulative-days gap) ==== Replace the current time-limit phrasing with: “No individual shall be held in solitary confinement, lockdown, or restorative housing for more than 15 consecutive days, nor 15 days in any 60-day period.” <b>Purpose of the amendment:</b> The introduced text already uses “15 consecutive days…in any 60-day period,” but stakeholders have raised concerns that “consecutive” language can be worked around by cycling people in and out (or shifting to lockdown practices) without ever hitting a “consecutive” threshold. The amendment makes the limit explicitly <i>both</i> consecutive and cumulative. Again, the intent is to prohibit the outcome of prolonged, solitary isolation, not to jeopardize the safety of anyone, but to ensure the constraint of this practice. <hr> == Opening Statement == === House Subcommittee Statement === <blockquote> ====Notes on delivery: ==== <mark> <b>bold</b>—emphasize, increase volume; </mark> <mark> <i>italicized</i>—stressed, extended pronunciation, sing-songy; </mark> <mark> <i><b>bold italicized</i></b>—stressed and emphatic, increase volume; </mark> <mark> CAPITALIZED—climactic and declarative;</mark> <mark> »chevrons«—deliver jokingly, with humor; </mark> <mark> • bulleted—drum-like repetition, think of MLK's "I Have a Dream," "I have a dream that..." repeated for emphasis; </mark> <mark> — a half pause, slight build-up; </mark> <mark> — — a full pause, major build-up. <mark> <mark><b>VIBE:</b> think <i>"victory lap;"</i> sell the idea that this bill is a done deal and that doubters should get on board while they still have a chance to be on the right side of history. This is a <b><i>pathos</i></b> and <i><b>ethos</i></b> argument, not <i>logos</i>; lean on expert testimonies for questions of <i>logic</i>. - Eric</mark> </blockquote> <br> Mister Chair, members of the subcommittee— <i>This is not our first time here.</i> For <b>two straight years</b>, the General Assembly has passed this reform — — <b>In 2024</b>, I gave you a »sermon« — — and then we passed <i>HB 1244.</i> <b>In 2025</b>, • my sister, • my friend, • and my <i>esteemed colleague</i>, <b>Delegate Karen Keys-Gamarra</b>, took up the torch — — and then we passed <i>HB 2647.</i> Twice, this body has said—<i><b>clearly</b></i>—that we are ready to turn the page on solitary confinement. And after <b>two straight years</b>, nobody can pretend this is new... • You know this bill. • You know this issue. • You know how overdue this change is — — <br> Mister Chair, members of the committee, this is not our first time here—<b>»BUT it will be our last«</b>—because this year <i>we will <b>make history.</b></i> And what is so great about this year is that we all have a <i>chance</i>—a <i><b>chance</b></i> to be part of making history. If you're still on the fence, I want you to look <i>forward</i> into the future with me. <b>Don't let the past hold you back — —</b> • Because when we look back in 25 years, <b>we will know this legislation was the right thing to do.</b> • Because when we look back in 50 years, <b>we will know this legislation was the right thing to do.</b> - • Because when we look back in <b>one-hundred years</b>, <i><b><span style="text-transform:uppercase">we will know this legislation was the right thing to do!</span></b></i> + • Because when we look back in <b><span style="text-transform:uppercase">one-hundred years</span></b>, <i><b><span style="text-transform:uppercase">we will know this legislation was the right thing to do!</span></b></i> Today—I hope everyone in this room joins us in doing the <i><b><span style="text-transform:uppercase">right thing.</span></b></i> <br> We know the counterarguments. We know the questions. And we're happy to answer them. <b>But</b> I encourage us to <i>listen</i>— • To listen to the <i>testimonies</i> of those who have suffered; • To listen to the voices who are ready for change; • To listen so that we may be reminded—again—<i>just how overdue this legislation is.</i> <br> Thank you, Mister Chair and members of the committee. I hope you report this bill favorably to full committee. <hr> == Support and Opposition == === Support === • ACLU People Power Fairfax • Bridging The Gap In Virginia • Charlottesville Chapter National Organization for Women • Coalition for Justice • EJUSA Evangelical Network • Fighting 4 Freedom • Greater Washington (JCRC) • Inmate Support Virginia • Interfaith Action for Human Rights (IAHR) • HALT Solitary • Jewish Community Relations Council of Just Future Project • Justice & Witness Action Network- VA • United Church of Christ Central Atlantic Conference • LatinoJustice PRLDEF • NAACP Loudoun • National Association of Social Workers • National Association of Social Workers, Virginia Chapter • National Religious Campaign Against Torture • No Left Turns • Resource Information Help for the Disadvantaged and Disenfranchised (RIHD) • RISE for Youth • RVA Health Alliance for Social Justice and Equity • Social Action Linking Together (SALT) • Social Workers and Allies Against Solitary Confinement • The Humanization Project • The Sentencing Project • Unitarian Universalist Legislative Ministry of Virginia • Unlock the Box Campaign • Virginia CURE • Virginia Defenders for Freedom, Justice & Equality • Virginia Justice Democrats • Virginia Justice for Life • Virginia Justice Alliance • Virginia Prisons Accountability Committee • Virginia Prisoner Of Conscience • Virginia Prison Justice Network • WJCC Coalition for Community Justice • 40 Strong === Opposition === • (to be updated) === No Recommendation / Neutral === • (to be updated) === No Position Provided === • Department of Corrections <hr> == Fiscal Impact == No fiscal impact statement is posted for HB35. The Department of Corrections may try to bring forward a claim for a fiscal impact; however, LIS and Appropriations Committee have currently not provided any impact statement. <hr> == Possible Questions == === TL;DR === <b>Q1: “Does this end solitary confinement in Virginia?”</b> TL;DR: No—it ends <i>prolonged</i> solitary confinement and sets clear limits, oversight, and due-process rules for any use. <br> <b>Q2: “Does this make prisons less safe for staff?”</b> TL;DR: No—HB35 keeps exceptions for imminent threats and requires documentation; it’s about targeted use, not “never.” <br> <b>Q3: “What changes day-to-day?”</b> TL;DR: Frequent reviews, rapid medical/mental health checks, real programming/out-of-cell time, and written accountability when isolation is used. <br> <b>Q4: “Can DOC just use ‘lockdowns’ instead?”</b> TL;DR: The bill defines lockdown and regulates it, and the requested amendment strengthens this further by applying the same time limits to lockdown explicitly. <br> === Q1: “What does the bill aim to accomplish?” === <b>Answer you can use:</b> HB35 ends prolonged solitary confinement by setting clear time limits and requiring real oversight—regular reviews, rapid medical and mental health evaluations, documentation, and in-person due process when isolation continues. <br> === Q2: “How often is placement reviewed?” === <b>Answer you can use:</b> Placement is reviewed frequently, including a required 48-hour review cycle with written documentation explaining why less restrictive settings were not used. <br> === Q3: “What health protections are required?” === <b>Answer you can use:</b> HB35 requires medical and mental health evaluations by certified professionals within one working day of placement in restorative housing or isolated confinement (with limited exceptions). <br> === Q4: “Does this stop people from getting programming or recreation?” === <b>Answer you can use:</b> No—the bill requires at least four hours of out-of-cell programming or congregate activity daily, plus at least one hour of congregate recreation unless exceptional safety circumstances apply. <br> === Q5: “What stops indefinite ‘lockdowns’?” === <b>Answer you can use:</b> Lockdowns that interrupt programming must have a specific documented security purpose, must end as soon as the purpose is served, are time-limited, require approvals to extend or repeat, and must be documented and published. <hr> == Additional Information == <b>1. Definitions are the enforcement backbone</b> • The bill defines isolated confinement and lockdown by hours-per-day and loss of programming, so policy can’t be evaded by unit names. <b>Policy implication:</b> Regulates conditions, not labels. <br> <b>2. The “less restrictive first” rule targets protective-custody misuse</b> • For “own protection” placements, the facility must use less restrictive options first, including transfers or special-purpose housing for similarly threatened individuals, unless infeasible. <b>Policy implication:</b> Safety without defaulting to isolation. <br> <b>3. Reviews + documentation create accountability</b> • Requires regular reviews, documentation in the institutional file, notice up the chain, and formal in-person reviews with appeal rights. <b>Policy implication:</b> Isolation becomes a documented exception, not a routine. <br> <b>4. Lockdown limits matter because lockdown can function like solitary</b> • The bill regulates lockdowns that interrupt programming and requires publication of documentation. <b>Policy implication:</b> Prevents “unit-wide solitary” from becoming the workaround. [[Category:2026 Session]]
2026-01-22 07:33:45
Edited by: 74.110.183.75
Edited by: 74.110.183.75
= HB35 Restorative housing and isolated confinement; restrictions on use. = == Status == [https://house.vga.virginia.gov/subcommittees/H15002/agendas/5187 Public Safety | Subcommittee #2 — agenda] <hr> == Overview == === Summary as Introduced === <b>Restorative housing and isolated confinement; restrictions on use.</b> Prohibits the use of isolated confinement, defined in the bill, in state correctional facilities, subject to certain exceptions. The bill requires that before placing an incarcerated person in restorative housing or isolated confinement for his own protection, the facility administrator shall place an incarcerated person in a less-restrictive setting, including by transferring such person to another institution or to a special-purpose housing unit for incarcerated persons who face similar threats. The bill requires that if an incarcerated person is placed in restorative housing or isolated confinement, such placement shall be reviewed every 48 hours and the facility administrator shall ensure that the incarcerated person receives a medical and mental health evaluation from certified medical and mental health professionals within one working day of placement in restorative housing or any form of isolated confinement. The bill also requires the facility administrator to notify the regional administrator in writing that an incarcerated person was placed in restorative housing or isolated confinement within 24 hours of such placement. Finally, the bill requires that formal reviews of an incarcerated person's placement in any form of isolated confinement shall be held in such person's presence, inform him of any reasons administrative officials believe isolated confinement remains necessary, and give the incarcerated person an opportunity to respond to those reasons, and a formal ruling shall be provided to the incarcerated individual within 24 hours. <hr> === Patrons === ==== House Patrons ==== • Joshua G. Cole (chief patron) • Patrick A. Hope (chief-co-patron) • Sam Rasoul (co-patron • Holly Seibold ==== Senate Patrons ==== • Lamont Bagby <hr> == Language == The language of [https://lis.virginia.gov/bill-details/20261/HB35/text/HB35 HB35] can be viewed here. <hr> == Proposed Amendment == === Amendment Offered for Consideration (requested for subcommittee) === ==== Add “Lockdown” throughout relevant provisions ==== Amend the bill to explicitly include “lockdown” alongside “solitary confinement/isolated confinement” and “restorative housing” in all relevant sections, to prevent facilities from using unit-wide lockdown practices as a functional substitute for individual isolated confinement. ==== Strengthen the time-limit clause (close the cumulative-days gap) ==== Replace the current time-limit phrasing with: “No individual shall be held in solitary confinement, lockdown, or restorative housing for more than 15 consecutive days, nor 15 days in any 60-day period.” <b>Purpose of the amendment:</b> The introduced text already uses “15 consecutive days…in any 60-day period,” but stakeholders have raised concerns that “consecutive” language can be worked around by cycling people in and out (or shifting to lockdown practices) without ever hitting a “consecutive” threshold. The amendment makes the limit explicitly <i>both</i> consecutive and cumulative. Again, the intent is to prohibit the outcome of prolonged, solitary isolation, not to jeopardize the safety of anyone, but to ensure the constraint of this practice. <hr> == Opening Statement == === House Subcommittee Statement === <blockquote> ====Notes on delivery: ==== <mark> <b>bold</b>—emphasize, increase volume; </mark> <mark> <i>italicized</i>—stressed, extended pronunciation, sing-songy; </mark> <mark> <i><b>bold italicized</i></b>—stressed and emphatic, increase volume; </mark> <mark> CAPITALIZED—climactic and declarative;</mark> <mark> »chevrons«—deliver jokingly, with humor; </mark> <mark> • bulleted—drum-like repetition, think of MLK's "I Have a Dream," "I have a dream that..." repeated for emphasis; </mark> <mark> — a half pause, slight build-up; </mark> <mark> — — a full pause, major build-up. <mark> <mark><b>VIBE:</b> think <i>"victory lap;"</i> sell the idea that this bill is a done deal and that doubters should get on board while they still have a chance to be on the right side of history. This is a <b><i>pathos</i></b> and <i><b>ethos</i></b> argument, not <i>logos</i>; lean on expert testimonies for questions of <i>logic</i>. - Eric</mark> </blockquote> <br> Mister Chair, members of the subcommittee— <i>This is not our first time here.</i> For <b>two straight years</b>, the General Assembly has passed this reform — — <b>In 2024</b>, I gave you a »sermon« — — and then we passed <i>HB 1244.</i> <b>In 2025</b>, • my sister, • my friend, • and my <i>esteemed colleague</i>, <b>Delegate Karen Keys-Gamarra</b>, took up the torch — — and then we passed <i>HB 2647.</i> Twice, this body has said—<i><b>clearly</b></i>—that we are ready to turn the page on solitary confinement. And after <b>two straight years</b>, nobody can pretend this is new... • You know this bill. • You know this issue. • You know how overdue this change is — — <br> Mister Chair, members of the committee, this is not our first time here—<b>»BUT it will be our last«</b>—because this year <i>we will <b>make history.</b></i> And what is so great about this year is that we all have a <i>chance</i>—a <i><b>chance</b></i> to be part of making history. If you're still on the fence, I want you to look <i>forward</i> into the future with me. <b>Don't let the past hold you back — —</b> • Because when we look back in 25 years, <b>we will know this legislation was the right thing to do.</b> • Because when we look back in 50 years, <b>we will know this legislation was the right thing to do.</b> - • Because when we look back in <b>one-hundred years</b>, <i><b>we will know this legislation was the right thing to do!</b></i> + • Because when we look back in <b>one-hundred years</b>, <i><b><span style="text-transform:uppercase">we will know this legislation was the right thing to do!</span></b></i> - Today—I hope everyone in this room joins us in doing the <i><b>right thing.</b></i> + Today—I hope everyone in this room joins us in doing the <i><b><span style="text-transform:uppercase">right thing.</span></b></i> <br> We know the counterarguments. We know the questions. And we're happy to answer them. <b>But</b> I encourage us to <i>listen</i>— • To listen to the <i>testimonies</i> of those who have suffered; • To listen to the voices who are ready for change; • To listen so that we may be reminded—again—<i>just how overdue this legislation is.</i> <br> Thank you, Mister Chair and members of the committee. I hope you report this bill favorably to full committee. <hr> == Support and Opposition == === Support === • ACLU People Power Fairfax • Bridging The Gap In Virginia • Charlottesville Chapter National Organization for Women • Coalition for Justice • EJUSA Evangelical Network • Fighting 4 Freedom • Greater Washington (JCRC) • Inmate Support Virginia • Interfaith Action for Human Rights (IAHR) • HALT Solitary • Jewish Community Relations Council of Just Future Project • Justice & Witness Action Network- VA • United Church of Christ Central Atlantic Conference • LatinoJustice PRLDEF • NAACP Loudoun • National Association of Social Workers • National Association of Social Workers, Virginia Chapter • National Religious Campaign Against Torture • No Left Turns • Resource Information Help for the Disadvantaged and Disenfranchised (RIHD) • RISE for Youth • RVA Health Alliance for Social Justice and Equity • Social Action Linking Together (SALT) • Social Workers and Allies Against Solitary Confinement • The Humanization Project • The Sentencing Project • Unitarian Universalist Legislative Ministry of Virginia • Unlock the Box Campaign • Virginia CURE • Virginia Defenders for Freedom, Justice & Equality • Virginia Justice Democrats • Virginia Justice for Life • Virginia Justice Alliance • Virginia Prisons Accountability Committee • Virginia Prisoner Of Conscience • Virginia Prison Justice Network • WJCC Coalition for Community Justice • 40 Strong === Opposition === • (to be updated) === No Recommendation / Neutral === • (to be updated) === No Position Provided === • Department of Corrections <hr> == Fiscal Impact == No fiscal impact statement is posted for HB35. The Department of Corrections may try to bring forward a claim for a fiscal impact; however, LIS and Appropriations Committee have currently not provided any impact statement. <hr> == Possible Questions == === TL;DR === <b>Q1: “Does this end solitary confinement in Virginia?”</b> TL;DR: No—it ends <i>prolonged</i> solitary confinement and sets clear limits, oversight, and due-process rules for any use. <br> <b>Q2: “Does this make prisons less safe for staff?”</b> TL;DR: No—HB35 keeps exceptions for imminent threats and requires documentation; it’s about targeted use, not “never.” <br> <b>Q3: “What changes day-to-day?”</b> TL;DR: Frequent reviews, rapid medical/mental health checks, real programming/out-of-cell time, and written accountability when isolation is used. <br> <b>Q4: “Can DOC just use ‘lockdowns’ instead?”</b> TL;DR: The bill defines lockdown and regulates it, and the requested amendment strengthens this further by applying the same time limits to lockdown explicitly. <br> === Q1: “What does the bill aim to accomplish?” === <b>Answer you can use:</b> HB35 ends prolonged solitary confinement by setting clear time limits and requiring real oversight—regular reviews, rapid medical and mental health evaluations, documentation, and in-person due process when isolation continues. <br> === Q2: “How often is placement reviewed?” === <b>Answer you can use:</b> Placement is reviewed frequently, including a required 48-hour review cycle with written documentation explaining why less restrictive settings were not used. <br> === Q3: “What health protections are required?” === <b>Answer you can use:</b> HB35 requires medical and mental health evaluations by certified professionals within one working day of placement in restorative housing or isolated confinement (with limited exceptions). <br> === Q4: “Does this stop people from getting programming or recreation?” === <b>Answer you can use:</b> No—the bill requires at least four hours of out-of-cell programming or congregate activity daily, plus at least one hour of congregate recreation unless exceptional safety circumstances apply. <br> === Q5: “What stops indefinite ‘lockdowns’?” === <b>Answer you can use:</b> Lockdowns that interrupt programming must have a specific documented security purpose, must end as soon as the purpose is served, are time-limited, require approvals to extend or repeat, and must be documented and published. <hr> == Additional Information == <b>1. Definitions are the enforcement backbone</b> • The bill defines isolated confinement and lockdown by hours-per-day and loss of programming, so policy can’t be evaded by unit names. <b>Policy implication:</b> Regulates conditions, not labels. <br> <b>2. The “less restrictive first” rule targets protective-custody misuse</b> • For “own protection” placements, the facility must use less restrictive options first, including transfers or special-purpose housing for similarly threatened individuals, unless infeasible. <b>Policy implication:</b> Safety without defaulting to isolation. <br> <b>3. Reviews + documentation create accountability</b> • Requires regular reviews, documentation in the institutional file, notice up the chain, and formal in-person reviews with appeal rights. <b>Policy implication:</b> Isolation becomes a documented exception, not a routine. <br> <b>4. Lockdown limits matter because lockdown can function like solitary</b> • The bill regulates lockdowns that interrupt programming and requires publication of documentation. <b>Policy implication:</b> Prevents “unit-wide solitary” from becoming the workaround. [[Category:2026 Session]]
2026-01-22 07:32:45
Edited by: 74.110.183.75
Edited by: 74.110.183.75
= HB35 Restorative housing and isolated confinement; restrictions on use. = == Status == [https://house.vga.virginia.gov/subcommittees/H15002/agendas/5187 Public Safety | Subcommittee #2 — agenda] <hr> == Overview == === Summary as Introduced === <b>Restorative housing and isolated confinement; restrictions on use.</b> Prohibits the use of isolated confinement, defined in the bill, in state correctional facilities, subject to certain exceptions. The bill requires that before placing an incarcerated person in restorative housing or isolated confinement for his own protection, the facility administrator shall place an incarcerated person in a less-restrictive setting, including by transferring such person to another institution or to a special-purpose housing unit for incarcerated persons who face similar threats. The bill requires that if an incarcerated person is placed in restorative housing or isolated confinement, such placement shall be reviewed every 48 hours and the facility administrator shall ensure that the incarcerated person receives a medical and mental health evaluation from certified medical and mental health professionals within one working day of placement in restorative housing or any form of isolated confinement. The bill also requires the facility administrator to notify the regional administrator in writing that an incarcerated person was placed in restorative housing or isolated confinement within 24 hours of such placement. Finally, the bill requires that formal reviews of an incarcerated person's placement in any form of isolated confinement shall be held in such person's presence, inform him of any reasons administrative officials believe isolated confinement remains necessary, and give the incarcerated person an opportunity to respond to those reasons, and a formal ruling shall be provided to the incarcerated individual within 24 hours. <hr> === Patrons === ==== House Patrons ==== • Joshua G. Cole (chief patron) • Patrick A. Hope (chief-co-patron) • Sam Rasoul (co-patron • Holly Seibold ==== Senate Patrons ==== • Lamont Bagby <hr> == Language == The language of [https://lis.virginia.gov/bill-details/20261/HB35/text/HB35 HB35] can be viewed here. <hr> == Proposed Amendment == === Amendment Offered for Consideration (requested for subcommittee) === ==== Add “Lockdown” throughout relevant provisions ==== Amend the bill to explicitly include “lockdown” alongside “solitary confinement/isolated confinement” and “restorative housing” in all relevant sections, to prevent facilities from using unit-wide lockdown practices as a functional substitute for individual isolated confinement. ==== Strengthen the time-limit clause (close the cumulative-days gap) ==== Replace the current time-limit phrasing with: “No individual shall be held in solitary confinement, lockdown, or restorative housing for more than 15 consecutive days, nor 15 days in any 60-day period.” <b>Purpose of the amendment:</b> The introduced text already uses “15 consecutive days…in any 60-day period,” but stakeholders have raised concerns that “consecutive” language can be worked around by cycling people in and out (or shifting to lockdown practices) without ever hitting a “consecutive” threshold. The amendment makes the limit explicitly <i>both</i> consecutive and cumulative. Again, the intent is to prohibit the outcome of prolonged, solitary isolation, not to jeopardize the safety of anyone, but to ensure the constraint of this practice. <hr> == Opening Statement == === House Subcommittee Statement === <blockquote> ====Notes on delivery: ==== <mark> <b>bold</b>—emphasize, increase volume; </mark> <mark> <i>italicized</i>—stressed, extended pronunciation, sing-songy; </mark> - <mark> <i><b>bold italicized</i></b>—climactic, stressed and emphatic; </mark> + <mark> <i><b>bold italicized</i></b>—stressed and emphatic, increase volume; </mark> - <mark> »chevrons«—deliver jokingly, with humor; </mark> + <mark> CAPITALIZED—climactic and declarative;</mark> - <mark> • bulleted—drum-like repetition, think of MLK's "I Have a Dream," "I have a dream that..." repeated for emphasis; </mark> + <mark> »chevrons«—deliver jokingly, with humor; </mark> - <mark> — a half pause, slight build-up; </mark> + <mark> • bulleted—drum-like repetition, think of MLK's "I Have a Dream," "I have a dream that..." repeated for emphasis; </mark> - <mark> — — a full pause, major build-up. <mark> + <mark> — a half pause, slight build-up; </mark> - + <mark> — — a full pause, major build-up. <mark> - <mark><b>VIBE:</b> think <i>"victory lap;"</i> sell the idea that this bill is a done deal and that doubters should get on board while they still have a chance to be on the right side of history. This is a <b><i>pathos</i></b> and <i><b>ethos</i></b> argument, not <i>logos</i>; lean on expert testimonies for questions of <i>logic</i>. - Eric</mark> + - </blockquote> + <mark><b>VIBE:</b> think <i>"victory lap;"</i> sell the idea that this bill is a done deal and that doubters should get on board while they still have a chance to be on the right side of history. This is a <b><i>pathos</i></b> and <i><b>ethos</i></b> argument, not <i>logos</i>; lean on expert testimonies for questions of <i>logic</i>. - Eric</mark> - + </blockquote> - <br> + - + <br> - Mister Chair, members of the subcommittee— + - + Mister Chair, members of the subcommittee— - <i>This is not our first time here.</i> + - + <i>This is not our first time here.</i> - For <b>two straight years</b>, the General Assembly has passed this reform — — + - + For <b>two straight years</b>, the General Assembly has passed this reform — — - <b>In 2024</b>, I gave you a »sermon« — — and then we passed <i>HB 1244.</i> + - + <b>In 2024</b>, I gave you a »sermon« — — and then we passed <i>HB 1244.</i> - <b>In 2025</b>, • my sister, • my friend, • and my <i>esteemed colleague</i>, <b>Delegate Karen Keys-Gamarra</b>, took up the torch — — and then we passed <i>HB 2647.</i> + - + <b>In 2025</b>, • my sister, • my friend, • and my <i>esteemed colleague</i>, <b>Delegate Karen Keys-Gamarra</b>, took up the torch — — and then we passed <i>HB 2647.</i> - Twice, this body has said—<i><b>clearly</b></i>—that we are ready to turn the page on solitary confinement. + - + Twice, this body has said—<i><b>clearly</b></i>—that we are ready to turn the page on solitary confinement. - And after <b>two straight years</b>, nobody can pretend this is new... + - + And after <b>two straight years</b>, nobody can pretend this is new... - • You know this bill. + - • You know this issue. + • You know this bill. - • You know how overdue this change is — — + • You know this issue. - + • You know how overdue this change is — — - <br> + - + <br> - Mister Chair, members of the committee, this is not our first time here—<b>»BUT it will be our last«</b>—because this year <i>we will <b>make history.</b></i> + - + Mister Chair, members of the committee, this is not our first time here—<b>»BUT it will be our last«</b>—because this year <i>we will <b>make history.</b></i> - And what is so great about this year is that we all have a <i>chance</i>—a <i><b>chance</b></i> to be part of making history. + - + And what is so great about this year is that we all have a <i>chance</i>—a <i><b>chance</b></i> to be part of making history. - If you're still on the fence, I want you to look <i>forward</i> into the future with me. <b>Don't let the past hold you back — —</b> + - + If you're still on the fence, I want you to look <i>forward</i> into the future with me. <b>Don't let the past hold you back — —</b> - • Because when we look back in 25 years, <b>we will know this legislation was the right thing to do.</b> + - + • Because when we look back in 25 years, <b>we will know this legislation was the right thing to do.</b> - • Because when we look back in 50 years, <b>we will know this legislation was the right thing to do.</b> + - + • Because when we look back in 50 years, <b>we will know this legislation was the right thing to do.</b> - • Because when we look back in <b>one-hundred years</b>, <i><b>we will know this legislation was the right thing to do!</b></i> + - + • Because when we look back in <b>one-hundred years</b>, <i><b>we will know this legislation was the right thing to do!</b></i> - Today—I hope everyone in this room joins us in doing the <i><b>right thing.</b></i> + - + Today—I hope everyone in this room joins us in doing the <i><b>right thing.</b></i> - <br> + - + <br> - We know the counterarguments. We know the questions. And we're happy to answer them. <b>But</b> I encourage us to <i>listen</i>— + - + We know the counterarguments. We know the questions. And we're happy to answer them. <b>But</b> I encourage us to <i>listen</i>— - • To listen to the <i>testimonies</i> of those who have suffered; + - + • To listen to the <i>testimonies</i> of those who have suffered; - • To listen to the voices who are ready for change; + - + • To listen to the voices who are ready for change; - • To listen so that we may be reminded—again—<i>just how overdue this legislation is.</i> + - + • To listen so that we may be reminded—again—<i>just how overdue this legislation is.</i> - <br> + - + <br> - Thank you, Mister Chair and members of the committee. I hope you report this bill favorably to full committee. + - + Thank you, Mister Chair and members of the committee. I hope you report this bill favorably to full committee. - <hr> + - + <hr> - == Support and Opposition == + - + == Support and Opposition == - === Support === + - • ACLU People Power Fairfax + === Support === - • Bridging The Gap In Virginia + • ACLU People Power Fairfax - • Charlottesville Chapter National Organization for Women + • Bridging The Gap In Virginia - • Coalition for Justice + • Charlottesville Chapter National Organization for Women - • EJUSA Evangelical Network + • Coalition for Justice - • Fighting 4 Freedom + • EJUSA Evangelical Network - • Greater Washington (JCRC) + • Fighting 4 Freedom - • Inmate Support Virginia + • Greater Washington (JCRC) - • Interfaith Action for Human Rights (IAHR) + • Inmate Support Virginia - • HALT Solitary + • Interfaith Action for Human Rights (IAHR) - • Jewish Community Relations Council of Just Future Project + • HALT Solitary - • Justice & Witness Action Network- VA + • Jewish Community Relations Council of Just Future Project - • United Church of Christ Central Atlantic Conference + • Justice & Witness Action Network- VA - • LatinoJustice PRLDEF + • United Church of Christ Central Atlantic Conference - • NAACP Loudoun + • LatinoJustice PRLDEF - • National Association of Social Workers + • NAACP Loudoun - • National Association of Social Workers, Virginia Chapter + • National Association of Social Workers - • National Religious Campaign Against Torture + • National Association of Social Workers, Virginia Chapter - • No Left Turns + • National Religious Campaign Against Torture - • Resource Information Help for the Disadvantaged and Disenfranchised (RIHD) + • No Left Turns - • RISE for Youth + • Resource Information Help for the Disadvantaged and Disenfranchised (RIHD) - • RVA Health Alliance for Social Justice and Equity + • RISE for Youth - • Social Action Linking Together (SALT) + • RVA Health Alliance for Social Justice and Equity - • Social Workers and Allies Against Solitary Confinement + • Social Action Linking Together (SALT) - • The Humanization Project + • Social Workers and Allies Against Solitary Confinement - • The Sentencing Project + • The Humanization Project - • Unitarian Universalist Legislative Ministry of Virginia + • The Sentencing Project - • Unlock the Box Campaign + • Unitarian Universalist Legislative Ministry of Virginia - • Virginia CURE + • Unlock the Box Campaign - • Virginia Defenders for Freedom, Justice & Equality + • Virginia CURE - • Virginia Justice Democrats + • Virginia Defenders for Freedom, Justice & Equality - • Virginia Justice for Life + • Virginia Justice Democrats - • Virginia Justice Alliance + • Virginia Justice for Life - • Virginia Prisons Accountability Committee + • Virginia Justice Alliance - • Virginia Prisoner Of Conscience + • Virginia Prisons Accountability Committee - • Virginia Prison Justice Network + • Virginia Prisoner Of Conscience - • WJCC Coalition for Community Justice + • Virginia Prison Justice Network - • 40 Strong + • WJCC Coalition for Community Justice - + • 40 Strong - === Opposition === + - • (to be updated) + === Opposition === - + • (to be updated) - === No Recommendation / Neutral === + - • (to be updated) + === No Recommendation / Neutral === - + • (to be updated) - === No Position Provided === + - • Department of Corrections + === No Position Provided === - + • Department of Corrections - <hr> + - + <hr> - == Fiscal Impact == + - No fiscal impact statement is posted for HB35. The Department of Corrections may try to bring forward a claim for a fiscal impact; however, LIS and Appropriations Committee have currently not provided any impact statement. + == Fiscal Impact == - + No fiscal impact statement is posted for HB35. The Department of Corrections may try to bring forward a claim for a fiscal impact; however, LIS and Appropriations Committee have currently not provided any impact statement. - <hr> + - + <hr> - == Possible Questions == + - + == Possible Questions == - === TL;DR === + - <b>Q1: “Does this end solitary confinement in Virginia?”</b> TL;DR: No—it ends <i>prolonged</i> solitary confinement and sets clear limits, oversight, and due-process rules for any use. <br> + === TL;DR === - <b>Q2: “Does this make prisons less safe for staff?”</b> TL;DR: No—HB35 keeps exceptions for imminent threats and requires documentation; it’s about targeted use, not “never.” + <b>Q1: “Does this end solitary confinement in Virginia?”</b> TL;DR: No—it ends <i>prolonged</i> solitary confinement and sets clear limits, oversight, and due-process rules for any use. <br> - + <b>Q2: “Does this make prisons less safe for staff?”</b> TL;DR: No—HB35 keeps exceptions for imminent threats and requires documentation; it’s about targeted use, not “never.” - <br> + - <b>Q3: “What changes day-to-day?”</b> TL;DR: Frequent reviews, rapid medical/mental health checks, real programming/out-of-cell time, and written accountability when isolation is used. + <br> - + <b>Q3: “What changes day-to-day?”</b> TL;DR: Frequent reviews, rapid medical/mental health checks, real programming/out-of-cell time, and written accountability when isolation is used. - <br> + - <b>Q4: “Can DOC just use ‘lockdowns’ instead?”</b> TL;DR: The bill defines lockdown and regulates it, and the requested amendment strengthens this further by applying the same time limits to lockdown explicitly. + <br> - + <b>Q4: “Can DOC just use ‘lockdowns’ instead?”</b> TL;DR: The bill defines lockdown and regulates it, and the requested amendment strengthens this further by applying the same time limits to lockdown explicitly. - <br> + - + <br> - === Q1: “What does the bill aim to accomplish?” === + - <b>Answer you can use:</b> HB35 ends prolonged solitary confinement by setting clear time limits and requiring real oversight—regular reviews, rapid medical and mental health evaluations, documentation, and in-person due process when isolation continues. + === Q1: “What does the bill aim to accomplish?” === - + <b>Answer you can use:</b> HB35 ends prolonged solitary confinement by setting clear time limits and requiring real oversight—regular reviews, rapid medical and mental health evaluations, documentation, and in-person due process when isolation continues. - <br> + - + <br> - === Q2: “How often is placement reviewed?” === + - <b>Answer you can use:</b> Placement is reviewed frequently, including a required 48-hour review cycle with written documentation explaining why less restrictive settings were not used. + === Q2: “How often is placement reviewed?” === - + <b>Answer you can use:</b> Placement is reviewed frequently, including a required 48-hour review cycle with written documentation explaining why less restrictive settings were not used. - <br> + - + <br> - === Q3: “What health protections are required?” === + - <b>Answer you can use:</b> HB35 requires medical and mental health evaluations by certified professionals within one working day of placement in restorative housing or isolated confinement (with limited exceptions). + === Q3: “What health protections are required?” === - + <b>Answer you can use:</b> HB35 requires medical and mental health evaluations by certified professionals within one working day of placement in restorative housing or isolated confinement (with limited exceptions). - <br> + - + <br> - === Q4: “Does this stop people from getting programming or recreation?” === + - <b>Answer you can use:</b> No—the bill requires at least four hours of out-of-cell programming or congregate activity daily, plus at least one hour of congregate recreation unless exceptional safety circumstances apply. + === Q4: “Does this stop people from getting programming or recreation?” === - + <b>Answer you can use:</b> No—the bill requires at least four hours of out-of-cell programming or congregate activity daily, plus at least one hour of congregate recreation unless exceptional safety circumstances apply. - <br> + - + <br> - === Q5: “What stops indefinite ‘lockdowns’?” === + - <b>Answer you can use:</b> Lockdowns that interrupt programming must have a specific documented security purpose, must end as soon as the purpose is served, are time-limited, require approvals to extend or repeat, and must be documented and published. + === Q5: “What stops indefinite ‘lockdowns’?” === - + <b>Answer you can use:</b> Lockdowns that interrupt programming must have a specific documented security purpose, must end as soon as the purpose is served, are time-limited, require approvals to extend or repeat, and must be documented and published. - <hr> + - + <hr> - == Additional Information == + - <b>1. Definitions are the enforcement backbone</b> + == Additional Information == - • The bill defines isolated confinement and lockdown by hours-per-day and loss of programming, so policy can’t be evaded by unit names. + <b>1. Definitions are the enforcement backbone</b> - + • The bill defines isolated confinement and lockdown by hours-per-day and loss of programming, so policy can’t be evaded by unit names. - <b>Policy implication:</b> Regulates conditions, not labels. + - + <b>Policy implication:</b> Regulates conditions, not labels. - <br> + - + <br> - <b>2. The “less restrictive first” rule targets protective-custody misuse</b> + - • For “own protection” placements, the facility must use less restrictive options first, including transfers or special-purpose housing for similarly threatened individuals, unless infeasible. + <b>2. The “less restrictive first” rule targets protective-custody misuse</b> - + • For “own protection” placements, the facility must use less restrictive options first, including transfers or special-purpose housing for similarly threatened individuals, unless infeasible. - <b>Policy implication:</b> Safety without defaulting to isolation. + - + <b>Policy implication:</b> Safety without defaulting to isolation. - <br> + - + <br> - <b>3. Reviews + documentation create accountability</b> + - • Requires regular reviews, documentation in the institutional file, notice up the chain, and formal in-person reviews with appeal rights. + <b>3. Reviews + documentation create accountability</b> - + • Requires regular reviews, documentation in the institutional file, notice up the chain, and formal in-person reviews with appeal rights. - <b>Policy implication:</b> Isolation becomes a documented exception, not a routine. + - + <b>Policy implication:</b> Isolation becomes a documented exception, not a routine. - <br> + - + <br> - <b>4. Lockdown limits matter because lockdown can function like solitary</b> + - • The bill regulates lockdowns that interrupt programming and requires publication of documentation. + <b>4. Lockdown limits matter because lockdown can function like solitary</b> - + • The bill regulates lockdowns that interrupt programming and requires publication of documentation. - <b>Policy implication:</b> Prevents “unit-wide solitary” from becoming the workaround. + - + <b>Policy implication:</b> Prevents “unit-wide solitary” from becoming the workaround. - [[Category:2026 Session]] + + [[Category:2026 Session]]
2026-01-22 07:31:32
Edited by: 74.110.183.75
Edited by: 74.110.183.75
= HB35 Restorative housing and isolated confinement; restrictions on use. = == Status == [https://house.vga.virginia.gov/subcommittees/H15002/agendas/5187 Public Safety | Subcommittee #2 — agenda] <hr> == Overview == === Summary as Introduced === <b>Restorative housing and isolated confinement; restrictions on use.</b> Prohibits the use of isolated confinement, defined in the bill, in state correctional facilities, subject to certain exceptions. The bill requires that before placing an incarcerated person in restorative housing or isolated confinement for his own protection, the facility administrator shall place an incarcerated person in a less-restrictive setting, including by transferring such person to another institution or to a special-purpose housing unit for incarcerated persons who face similar threats. The bill requires that if an incarcerated person is placed in restorative housing or isolated confinement, such placement shall be reviewed every 48 hours and the facility administrator shall ensure that the incarcerated person receives a medical and mental health evaluation from certified medical and mental health professionals within one working day of placement in restorative housing or any form of isolated confinement. The bill also requires the facility administrator to notify the regional administrator in writing that an incarcerated person was placed in restorative housing or isolated confinement within 24 hours of such placement. Finally, the bill requires that formal reviews of an incarcerated person's placement in any form of isolated confinement shall be held in such person's presence, inform him of any reasons administrative officials believe isolated confinement remains necessary, and give the incarcerated person an opportunity to respond to those reasons, and a formal ruling shall be provided to the incarcerated individual within 24 hours. <hr> === Patrons === ==== House Patrons ==== • Joshua G. Cole (chief patron) • Patrick A. Hope (chief-co-patron) • Sam Rasoul (co-patron • Holly Seibold ==== Senate Patrons ==== • Lamont Bagby <hr> == Language == The language of [https://lis.virginia.gov/bill-details/20261/HB35/text/HB35 HB35] can be viewed here. <hr> == Proposed Amendment == === Amendment Offered for Consideration (requested for subcommittee) === ==== Add “Lockdown” throughout relevant provisions ==== Amend the bill to explicitly include “lockdown” alongside “solitary confinement/isolated confinement” and “restorative housing” in all relevant sections, to prevent facilities from using unit-wide lockdown practices as a functional substitute for individual isolated confinement. ==== Strengthen the time-limit clause (close the cumulative-days gap) ==== Replace the current time-limit phrasing with: “No individual shall be held in solitary confinement, lockdown, or restorative housing for more than 15 consecutive days, nor 15 days in any 60-day period.” <b>Purpose of the amendment:</b> The introduced text already uses “15 consecutive days…in any 60-day period,” but stakeholders have raised concerns that “consecutive” language can be worked around by cycling people in and out (or shifting to lockdown practices) without ever hitting a “consecutive” threshold. The amendment makes the limit explicitly <i>both</i> consecutive and cumulative. Again, the intent is to prohibit the outcome of prolonged, solitary isolation, not to jeopardize the safety of anyone, but to ensure the constraint of this practice. <hr> == Opening Statement == === House Subcommittee Statement === <blockquote> ====Notes on delivery: ==== <mark> <b>bold</b>—emphasize, increase volume; </mark> <mark> <i>italicized</i>—stressed, extended pronunciation, sing-songy; </mark> <mark> <i><b>bold italicized</i></b>—climactic, stressed and emphatic; </mark> <mark> »chevrons«—deliver jokingly, with humor; </mark> <mark> • bulleted—drum-like repetition, think of MLK's "I Have a Dream," "I have a dream that..." repeated for emphasis; </mark> <mark> — a half pause, slight build-up; </mark> <mark> — — a full pause, major build-up. <mark> <mark><b>VIBE:</b> think <i>"victory lap;"</i> sell the idea that this bill is a done deal and that doubters should get on board while they still have a chance to be on the right side of history. This is a <b><i>pathos</i></b> and <i><b>ethos</i></b> argument, not <i>logos</i>; lean on expert testimonies for questions of <i>logic</i>. - Eric</mark> </blockquote> <br> Mister Chair, members of the subcommittee— <i>This is not our first time here.</i> For <b>two straight years</b>, the General Assembly has passed this reform — — <b>In 2024</b>, I gave you a »sermon« — — and then we passed <i>HB 1244.</i> <b>In 2025</b>, • my sister, • my friend, • and my <i>esteemed colleague</i>, <b>Delegate Karen Keys-Gamarra</b>, took up the torch — — and then we passed <i>HB 2647.</i> Twice, this body has said—<i><b>clearly</b></i>—that we are ready to turn the page on solitary confinement. And after <b>two straight years</b>, nobody can pretend this is new... • You know this bill. • You know this issue. • You know how overdue this change is — — <br> Mister Chair, members of the committee, this is not our first time here—<b>»BUT it will be our last«</b>—because this year <i>we will <b>make history.</b></i> - And what is so great about this year is that we all have a <i>chance</i>—a <i>chance</i> to be part of making history. + And what is so great about this year is that we all have a <i>chance</i>—a <i><b>chance</b></i> to be part of making history. If you're still on the fence, I want you to look <i>forward</i> into the future with me. <b>Don't let the past hold you back — —</b> • Because when we look back in 25 years, <b>we will know this legislation was the right thing to do.</b> • Because when we look back in 50 years, <b>we will know this legislation was the right thing to do.</b> • Because when we look back in <b>one-hundred years</b>, <i><b>we will know this legislation was the right thing to do!</b></i> Today—I hope everyone in this room joins us in doing the <i><b>right thing.</b></i> <br> We know the counterarguments. We know the questions. And we're happy to answer them. <b>But</b> I encourage us to <i>listen</i>— • To listen to the <i>testimonies</i> of those who have suffered; • To listen to the voices who are ready for change; • To listen so that we may be reminded—again—<i>just how overdue this legislation is.</i> <br> Thank you, Mister Chair and members of the committee. I hope you report this bill favorably to full committee. <hr> == Support and Opposition == === Support === • ACLU People Power Fairfax • Bridging The Gap In Virginia • Charlottesville Chapter National Organization for Women • Coalition for Justice • EJUSA Evangelical Network • Fighting 4 Freedom • Greater Washington (JCRC) • Inmate Support Virginia • Interfaith Action for Human Rights (IAHR) • HALT Solitary • Jewish Community Relations Council of Just Future Project • Justice & Witness Action Network- VA • United Church of Christ Central Atlantic Conference • LatinoJustice PRLDEF • NAACP Loudoun • National Association of Social Workers • National Association of Social Workers, Virginia Chapter • National Religious Campaign Against Torture • No Left Turns • Resource Information Help for the Disadvantaged and Disenfranchised (RIHD) • RISE for Youth • RVA Health Alliance for Social Justice and Equity • Social Action Linking Together (SALT) • Social Workers and Allies Against Solitary Confinement • The Humanization Project • The Sentencing Project • Unitarian Universalist Legislative Ministry of Virginia • Unlock the Box Campaign • Virginia CURE • Virginia Defenders for Freedom, Justice & Equality • Virginia Justice Democrats • Virginia Justice for Life • Virginia Justice Alliance • Virginia Prisons Accountability Committee • Virginia Prisoner Of Conscience • Virginia Prison Justice Network • WJCC Coalition for Community Justice • 40 Strong === Opposition === • (to be updated) === No Recommendation / Neutral === • (to be updated) === No Position Provided === • Department of Corrections <hr> == Fiscal Impact == No fiscal impact statement is posted for HB35. The Department of Corrections may try to bring forward a claim for a fiscal impact; however, LIS and Appropriations Committee have currently not provided any impact statement. <hr> == Possible Questions == === TL;DR === <b>Q1: “Does this end solitary confinement in Virginia?”</b> TL;DR: No—it ends <i>prolonged</i> solitary confinement and sets clear limits, oversight, and due-process rules for any use. <br> <b>Q2: “Does this make prisons less safe for staff?”</b> TL;DR: No—HB35 keeps exceptions for imminent threats and requires documentation; it’s about targeted use, not “never.” <br> <b>Q3: “What changes day-to-day?”</b> TL;DR: Frequent reviews, rapid medical/mental health checks, real programming/out-of-cell time, and written accountability when isolation is used. <br> <b>Q4: “Can DOC just use ‘lockdowns’ instead?”</b> TL;DR: The bill defines lockdown and regulates it, and the requested amendment strengthens this further by applying the same time limits to lockdown explicitly. <br> === Q1: “What does the bill aim to accomplish?” === <b>Answer you can use:</b> HB35 ends prolonged solitary confinement by setting clear time limits and requiring real oversight—regular reviews, rapid medical and mental health evaluations, documentation, and in-person due process when isolation continues. <br> === Q2: “How often is placement reviewed?” === <b>Answer you can use:</b> Placement is reviewed frequently, including a required 48-hour review cycle with written documentation explaining why less restrictive settings were not used. <br> === Q3: “What health protections are required?” === <b>Answer you can use:</b> HB35 requires medical and mental health evaluations by certified professionals within one working day of placement in restorative housing or isolated confinement (with limited exceptions). <br> === Q4: “Does this stop people from getting programming or recreation?” === <b>Answer you can use:</b> No—the bill requires at least four hours of out-of-cell programming or congregate activity daily, plus at least one hour of congregate recreation unless exceptional safety circumstances apply. <br> === Q5: “What stops indefinite ‘lockdowns’?” === <b>Answer you can use:</b> Lockdowns that interrupt programming must have a specific documented security purpose, must end as soon as the purpose is served, are time-limited, require approvals to extend or repeat, and must be documented and published. <hr> == Additional Information == <b>1. Definitions are the enforcement backbone</b> • The bill defines isolated confinement and lockdown by hours-per-day and loss of programming, so policy can’t be evaded by unit names. <b>Policy implication:</b> Regulates conditions, not labels. <br> <b>2. The “less restrictive first” rule targets protective-custody misuse</b> • For “own protection” placements, the facility must use less restrictive options first, including transfers or special-purpose housing for similarly threatened individuals, unless infeasible. <b>Policy implication:</b> Safety without defaulting to isolation. <br> <b>3. Reviews + documentation create accountability</b> • Requires regular reviews, documentation in the institutional file, notice up the chain, and formal in-person reviews with appeal rights. <b>Policy implication:</b> Isolation becomes a documented exception, not a routine. <br> <b>4. Lockdown limits matter because lockdown can function like solitary</b> • The bill regulates lockdowns that interrupt programming and requires publication of documentation. <b>Policy implication:</b> Prevents “unit-wide solitary” from becoming the workaround. [[Category:2026 Session]]
2026-01-22 07:29:47
Edited by: 74.110.183.75
Edited by: 74.110.183.75
= HB35 Restorative housing and isolated confinement; restrictions on use. = == Status == [https://house.vga.virginia.gov/subcommittees/H15002/agendas/5187 Public Safety | Subcommittee #2 — agenda] <hr> == Overview == === Summary as Introduced === <b>Restorative housing and isolated confinement; restrictions on use.</b> Prohibits the use of isolated confinement, defined in the bill, in state correctional facilities, subject to certain exceptions. The bill requires that before placing an incarcerated person in restorative housing or isolated confinement for his own protection, the facility administrator shall place an incarcerated person in a less-restrictive setting, including by transferring such person to another institution or to a special-purpose housing unit for incarcerated persons who face similar threats. The bill requires that if an incarcerated person is placed in restorative housing or isolated confinement, such placement shall be reviewed every 48 hours and the facility administrator shall ensure that the incarcerated person receives a medical and mental health evaluation from certified medical and mental health professionals within one working day of placement in restorative housing or any form of isolated confinement. The bill also requires the facility administrator to notify the regional administrator in writing that an incarcerated person was placed in restorative housing or isolated confinement within 24 hours of such placement. Finally, the bill requires that formal reviews of an incarcerated person's placement in any form of isolated confinement shall be held in such person's presence, inform him of any reasons administrative officials believe isolated confinement remains necessary, and give the incarcerated person an opportunity to respond to those reasons, and a formal ruling shall be provided to the incarcerated individual within 24 hours. <hr> === Patrons === ==== House Patrons ==== • Joshua G. Cole (chief patron) • Patrick A. Hope (chief-co-patron) • Sam Rasoul (co-patron • Holly Seibold ==== Senate Patrons ==== • Lamont Bagby <hr> == Language == The language of [https://lis.virginia.gov/bill-details/20261/HB35/text/HB35 HB35] can be viewed here. <hr> == Proposed Amendment == === Amendment Offered for Consideration (requested for subcommittee) === ==== Add “Lockdown” throughout relevant provisions ==== Amend the bill to explicitly include “lockdown” alongside “solitary confinement/isolated confinement” and “restorative housing” in all relevant sections, to prevent facilities from using unit-wide lockdown practices as a functional substitute for individual isolated confinement. ==== Strengthen the time-limit clause (close the cumulative-days gap) ==== Replace the current time-limit phrasing with: “No individual shall be held in solitary confinement, lockdown, or restorative housing for more than 15 consecutive days, nor 15 days in any 60-day period.” <b>Purpose of the amendment:</b> The introduced text already uses “15 consecutive days…in any 60-day period,” but stakeholders have raised concerns that “consecutive” language can be worked around by cycling people in and out (or shifting to lockdown practices) without ever hitting a “consecutive” threshold. The amendment makes the limit explicitly <i>both</i> consecutive and cumulative. Again, the intent is to prohibit the outcome of prolonged, solitary isolation, not to jeopardize the safety of anyone, but to ensure the constraint of this practice. <hr> == Opening Statement == === House Subcommittee Statement === <blockquote> ====Notes on delivery: ==== <mark> <b>bold</b>—emphasize, increase volume; </mark> <mark> <i>italicized</i>—stressed, extended pronunciation, sing-songy; </mark> <mark> <i><b>bold italicized</i></b>—climactic, stressed and emphatic; </mark> <mark> »chevrons«—deliver jokingly, with humor; </mark> <mark> • bulleted—drum-like repetition, think of MLK's "I Have a Dream," "I have a dream that..." repeated for emphasis; </mark> <mark> — a half pause, slight build-up; </mark> <mark> — — a full pause, major build-up. <mark> <mark><b>VIBE:</b> think <i>"victory lap;"</i> sell the idea that this bill is a done deal and that doubters should get on board while they still have a chance to be on the right side of history. This is a <b><i>pathos</i></b> and <i><b>ethos</i></b> argument, not <i>logos</i>; lean on expert testimonies for questions of <i>logic</i>. - Eric</mark> </blockquote> <br> Mister Chair, members of the subcommittee— <i>This is not our first time here.</i> For <b>two straight years</b>, the General Assembly has passed this reform — — <b>In 2024</b>, I gave you a »sermon« — — and then we passed <i>HB 1244.</i> <b>In 2025</b>, • my sister, • my friend, • and my <i>esteemed colleague</i>, <b>Delegate Karen Keys-Gamarra</b>, took up the torch — — and then we passed <i>HB 2647.</i> Twice, this body has said—<i><b>clearly</b></i>—that we are ready to turn the page on solitary confinement. And after <b>two straight years</b>, nobody can pretend this is new... • You know this bill. • You know this issue. • You know how overdue this change is — — - Mister Chair, members of the committee, this is not our first time here—<b>»BUT it will be our last«</b>—because this year <i>we will <b>make history.</b></i> + <br> - And what is so great about this year is that we all have a <i>chance</i>—a <i>chance</i> to be part of making history. + Mister Chair, members of the committee, this is not our first time here—<b>»BUT it will be our last«</b>—because this year <i>we will <b>make history.</b></i> - If you're still on the fence, I want you to look <i>forward</i> into the future with me. <b>Don't let the past hold you back — —</b> + And what is so great about this year is that we all have a <i>chance</i>—a <i>chance</i> to be part of making history. - • Because when we look back in 25 years, <b>we will know this legislation was the right thing to do.</b> + If you're still on the fence, I want you to look <i>forward</i> into the future with me. <b>Don't let the past hold you back — —</b> - • Because when we look back in 50 years, <b>we will know this legislation was the right thing to do.</b> + • Because when we look back in 25 years, <b>we will know this legislation was the right thing to do.</b> - • Because when we look back in <b>one-hundred years</b>, <i><b>we will know this legislation was the right thing to do!</b></i> + • Because when we look back in 50 years, <b>we will know this legislation was the right thing to do.</b> - Today—I hope everyone in this room joins us in doing the <i><b>right thing.</b></i> + • Because when we look back in <b>one-hundred years</b>, <i><b>we will know this legislation was the right thing to do!</b></i> - We know the counterarguments. We know the questions. And we're happy to answer them. <b>But</b> I encourage us to <i>listen</i>— + Today—I hope everyone in this room joins us in doing the <i><b>right thing.</b></i> - • To listen to the <i>testimonies</i> of those who have suffered; + <br> - • To listen to the voices who are ready for change; + We know the counterarguments. We know the questions. And we're happy to answer them. <b>But</b> I encourage us to <i>listen</i>— - • To listen so that we may be reminded—again—<i>just how overdue this legislation is.</i> + • To listen to the <i>testimonies</i> of those who have suffered; - Thank you, Mister Chair and members of the committee. I hope you report this bill favorably to full committee. + • To listen to the voices who are ready for change; - <hr> + • To listen so that we may be reminded—again—<i>just how overdue this legislation is.</i> - == Support and Opposition == + <br> - === Support === + Thank you, Mister Chair and members of the committee. I hope you report this bill favorably to full committee. - • ACLU People Power Fairfax + - • Bridging The Gap In Virginia + <hr> - • Charlottesville Chapter National Organization for Women + - • Coalition for Justice + == Support and Opposition == - • EJUSA Evangelical Network + - • Fighting 4 Freedom + === Support === - • Greater Washington (JCRC) + • ACLU People Power Fairfax - • Inmate Support Virginia + • Bridging The Gap In Virginia - • Interfaith Action for Human Rights (IAHR) + • Charlottesville Chapter National Organization for Women - • HALT Solitary + • Coalition for Justice - • Jewish Community Relations Council of Just Future Project + • EJUSA Evangelical Network - • Justice & Witness Action Network- VA + • Fighting 4 Freedom - • United Church of Christ Central Atlantic Conference + • Greater Washington (JCRC) - • LatinoJustice PRLDEF + • Inmate Support Virginia - • NAACP Loudoun + • Interfaith Action for Human Rights (IAHR) - • National Association of Social Workers + • HALT Solitary - • National Association of Social Workers, Virginia Chapter + • Jewish Community Relations Council of Just Future Project - • National Religious Campaign Against Torture + • Justice & Witness Action Network- VA - • No Left Turns + • United Church of Christ Central Atlantic Conference - • Resource Information Help for the Disadvantaged and Disenfranchised (RIHD) + • LatinoJustice PRLDEF - • RISE for Youth + • NAACP Loudoun - • RVA Health Alliance for Social Justice and Equity + • National Association of Social Workers - • Social Action Linking Together (SALT) + • National Association of Social Workers, Virginia Chapter - • Social Workers and Allies Against Solitary Confinement + • National Religious Campaign Against Torture - • The Humanization Project + • No Left Turns - • The Sentencing Project + • Resource Information Help for the Disadvantaged and Disenfranchised (RIHD) - • Unitarian Universalist Legislative Ministry of Virginia + • RISE for Youth - • Unlock the Box Campaign + • RVA Health Alliance for Social Justice and Equity - • Virginia CURE + • Social Action Linking Together (SALT) - • Virginia Defenders for Freedom, Justice & Equality + • Social Workers and Allies Against Solitary Confinement - • Virginia Justice Democrats + • The Humanization Project - • Virginia Justice for Life + • The Sentencing Project - • Virginia Justice Alliance + • Unitarian Universalist Legislative Ministry of Virginia - • Virginia Prisons Accountability Committee + • Unlock the Box Campaign - • Virginia Prisoner Of Conscience + • Virginia CURE - • Virginia Prison Justice Network + • Virginia Defenders for Freedom, Justice & Equality - • WJCC Coalition for Community Justice + • Virginia Justice Democrats - • 40 Strong + • Virginia Justice for Life - + • Virginia Justice Alliance - === Opposition === + • Virginia Prisons Accountability Committee - • (to be updated) + • Virginia Prisoner Of Conscience - + • Virginia Prison Justice Network - === No Recommendation / Neutral === + • WJCC Coalition for Community Justice - • (to be updated) + • 40 Strong - === No Position Provided === + === Opposition === - • Department of Corrections + • (to be updated) - <hr> + === No Recommendation / Neutral === - + • (to be updated) - == Fiscal Impact == + - No fiscal impact statement is posted for HB35. The Department of Corrections may try to bring forward a claim for a fiscal impact; however, LIS and Appropriations Committee have currently not provided any impact statement. + === No Position Provided === - + • Department of Corrections - <hr> + - + <hr> - == Possible Questions == + - + == Fiscal Impact == - === TL;DR === + No fiscal impact statement is posted for HB35. The Department of Corrections may try to bring forward a claim for a fiscal impact; however, LIS and Appropriations Committee have currently not provided any impact statement. - <b>Q1: “Does this end solitary confinement in Virginia?”</b> TL;DR: No—it ends <i>prolonged</i> solitary confinement and sets clear limits, oversight, and due-process rules for any use. <br> + - <b>Q2: “Does this make prisons less safe for staff?”</b> TL;DR: No—HB35 keeps exceptions for imminent threats and requires documentation; it’s about targeted use, not “never.” + <hr> - <br> + == Possible Questions == - <b>Q3: “What changes day-to-day?”</b> TL;DR: Frequent reviews, rapid medical/mental health checks, real programming/out-of-cell time, and written accountability when isolation is used. + - + === TL;DR === - <br> + <b>Q1: “Does this end solitary confinement in Virginia?”</b> TL;DR: No—it ends <i>prolonged</i> solitary confinement and sets clear limits, oversight, and due-process rules for any use. <br> - <b>Q4: “Can DOC just use ‘lockdowns’ instead?”</b> TL;DR: The bill defines lockdown and regulates it, and the requested amendment strengthens this further by applying the same time limits to lockdown explicitly. + <b>Q2: “Does this make prisons less safe for staff?”</b> TL;DR: No—HB35 keeps exceptions for imminent threats and requires documentation; it’s about targeted use, not “never.” <br> - + <b>Q3: “What changes day-to-day?”</b> TL;DR: Frequent reviews, rapid medical/mental health checks, real programming/out-of-cell time, and written accountability when isolation is used. - === Q1: “What does the bill aim to accomplish?” === + - <b>Answer you can use:</b> HB35 ends prolonged solitary confinement by setting clear time limits and requiring real oversight—regular reviews, rapid medical and mental health evaluations, documentation, and in-person due process when isolation continues. + <br> - + <b>Q4: “Can DOC just use ‘lockdowns’ instead?”</b> TL;DR: The bill defines lockdown and regulates it, and the requested amendment strengthens this further by applying the same time limits to lockdown explicitly. - <br> + - + <br> - === Q2: “How often is placement reviewed?” === + - <b>Answer you can use:</b> Placement is reviewed frequently, including a required 48-hour review cycle with written documentation explaining why less restrictive settings were not used. + === Q1: “What does the bill aim to accomplish?” === - + <b>Answer you can use:</b> HB35 ends prolonged solitary confinement by setting clear time limits and requiring real oversight—regular reviews, rapid medical and mental health evaluations, documentation, and in-person due process when isolation continues. - <br> + - + <br> - === Q3: “What health protections are required?” === + - <b>Answer you can use:</b> HB35 requires medical and mental health evaluations by certified professionals within one working day of placement in restorative housing or isolated confinement (with limited exceptions). + === Q2: “How often is placement reviewed?” === - + <b>Answer you can use:</b> Placement is reviewed frequently, including a required 48-hour review cycle with written documentation explaining why less restrictive settings were not used. - <br> + - + <br> - === Q4: “Does this stop people from getting programming or recreation?” === + - <b>Answer you can use:</b> No—the bill requires at least four hours of out-of-cell programming or congregate activity daily, plus at least one hour of congregate recreation unless exceptional safety circumstances apply. + === Q3: “What health protections are required?” === - + <b>Answer you can use:</b> HB35 requires medical and mental health evaluations by certified professionals within one working day of placement in restorative housing or isolated confinement (with limited exceptions). - <br> + - + <br> - === Q5: “What stops indefinite ‘lockdowns’?” === + - <b>Answer you can use:</b> Lockdowns that interrupt programming must have a specific documented security purpose, must end as soon as the purpose is served, are time-limited, require approvals to extend or repeat, and must be documented and published. + === Q4: “Does this stop people from getting programming or recreation?” === - + <b>Answer you can use:</b> No—the bill requires at least four hours of out-of-cell programming or congregate activity daily, plus at least one hour of congregate recreation unless exceptional safety circumstances apply. - <hr> + - + <br> - == Additional Information == + - <b>1. Definitions are the enforcement backbone</b> + === Q5: “What stops indefinite ‘lockdowns’?” === - • The bill defines isolated confinement and lockdown by hours-per-day and loss of programming, so policy can’t be evaded by unit names. + <b>Answer you can use:</b> Lockdowns that interrupt programming must have a specific documented security purpose, must end as soon as the purpose is served, are time-limited, require approvals to extend or repeat, and must be documented and published. - + <hr> - <b>Policy implication:</b> Regulates conditions, not labels. + - + == Additional Information == - <br> + <b>1. Definitions are the enforcement backbone</b> - + • The bill defines isolated confinement and lockdown by hours-per-day and loss of programming, so policy can’t be evaded by unit names. - <b>2. The “less restrictive first” rule targets protective-custody misuse</b> + - • For “own protection” placements, the facility must use less restrictive options first, including transfers or special-purpose housing for similarly threatened individuals, unless infeasible. + - + <b>Policy implication:</b> Regulates conditions, not labels. - <b>Policy implication:</b> Safety without defaulting to isolation. + - + <br> - <br> + - + <b>2. The “less restrictive first” rule targets protective-custody misuse</b> - <b>3. Reviews + documentation create accountability</b> + • For “own protection” placements, the facility must use less restrictive options first, including transfers or special-purpose housing for similarly threatened individuals, unless infeasible. - • Requires regular reviews, documentation in the institutional file, notice up the chain, and formal in-person reviews with appeal rights. + - + <b>Policy implication:</b> Safety without defaulting to isolation. - <b>Policy implication:</b> Isolation becomes a documented exception, not a routine. + - + <br> - <br> + - + <b>3. Reviews + documentation create accountability</b> - <b>4. Lockdown limits matter because lockdown can function like solitary</b> + • Requires regular reviews, documentation in the institutional file, notice up the chain, and formal in-person reviews with appeal rights. - • The bill regulates lockdowns that interrupt programming and requires publication of documentation. + - + <b>Policy implication:</b> Isolation becomes a documented exception, not a routine. - <b>Policy implication:</b> Prevents “unit-wide solitary” from becoming the workaround. + <br> - [[Category:2026 Session]] + <b>4. Lockdown limits matter because lockdown can function like solitary</b> + • The bill regulates lockdowns that interrupt programming and requires publication of documentation. + + + <b>Policy implication:</b> Prevents “unit-wide solitary” from becoming the workaround. + + [[Category:2026 Session]]
2026-01-22 07:28:06
Edited by: 74.110.183.75
Edited by: 74.110.183.75
= HB35 Restorative housing and isolated confinement; restrictions on use. = == Status == [https://house.vga.virginia.gov/subcommittees/H15002/agendas/5187 Public Safety | Subcommittee #2 — agenda] <hr> == Overview == === Summary as Introduced === <b>Restorative housing and isolated confinement; restrictions on use.</b> Prohibits the use of isolated confinement, defined in the bill, in state correctional facilities, subject to certain exceptions. The bill requires that before placing an incarcerated person in restorative housing or isolated confinement for his own protection, the facility administrator shall place an incarcerated person in a less-restrictive setting, including by transferring such person to another institution or to a special-purpose housing unit for incarcerated persons who face similar threats. The bill requires that if an incarcerated person is placed in restorative housing or isolated confinement, such placement shall be reviewed every 48 hours and the facility administrator shall ensure that the incarcerated person receives a medical and mental health evaluation from certified medical and mental health professionals within one working day of placement in restorative housing or any form of isolated confinement. The bill also requires the facility administrator to notify the regional administrator in writing that an incarcerated person was placed in restorative housing or isolated confinement within 24 hours of such placement. Finally, the bill requires that formal reviews of an incarcerated person's placement in any form of isolated confinement shall be held in such person's presence, inform him of any reasons administrative officials believe isolated confinement remains necessary, and give the incarcerated person an opportunity to respond to those reasons, and a formal ruling shall be provided to the incarcerated individual within 24 hours. <hr> === Patrons === ==== House Patrons ==== • Joshua G. Cole (chief patron) • Patrick A. Hope (chief-co-patron) • Sam Rasoul (co-patron • Holly Seibold ==== Senate Patrons ==== • Lamont Bagby <hr> == Language == The language of [https://lis.virginia.gov/bill-details/20261/HB35/text/HB35 HB35] can be viewed here. <hr> == Proposed Amendment == === Amendment Offered for Consideration (requested for subcommittee) === ==== Add “Lockdown” throughout relevant provisions ==== Amend the bill to explicitly include “lockdown” alongside “solitary confinement/isolated confinement” and “restorative housing” in all relevant sections, to prevent facilities from using unit-wide lockdown practices as a functional substitute for individual isolated confinement. ==== Strengthen the time-limit clause (close the cumulative-days gap) ==== Replace the current time-limit phrasing with: “No individual shall be held in solitary confinement, lockdown, or restorative housing for more than 15 consecutive days, nor 15 days in any 60-day period.” <b>Purpose of the amendment:</b> The introduced text already uses “15 consecutive days…in any 60-day period,” but stakeholders have raised concerns that “consecutive” language can be worked around by cycling people in and out (or shifting to lockdown practices) without ever hitting a “consecutive” threshold. The amendment makes the limit explicitly <i>both</i> consecutive and cumulative. Again, the intent is to prohibit the outcome of prolonged, solitary isolation, not to jeopardize the safety of anyone, but to ensure the constraint of this practice. <hr> == Opening Statement == === House Subcommittee Statement === <blockquote> ====Notes on delivery: ==== <mark> <b>bold</b>—emphasize, increase volume; </mark> <mark> <i>italicized</i>—stressed, extended pronunciation, sing-songy; </mark> <mark> <i><b>bold italicized</i></b>—climactic, stressed and emphatic; </mark> <mark> »chevrons«—deliver jokingly, with humor; </mark> <mark> • bulleted—drum-like repetition, think of MLK's "I Have a Dream," "I have a dream that..." repeated for emphasis; </mark> <mark> — a half pause, slight build-up; </mark> <mark> — — a full pause, major build-up. <mark> <mark><b>VIBE:</b> think <i>"victory lap;"</i> sell the idea that this bill is a done deal and that doubters should get on board while they still have a chance to be on the right side of history. This is a <b><i>pathos</i></b> and <i><b>ethos</i></b> argument, not <i>logos</i>; lean on expert testimonies for questions of <i>logic</i>. - Eric</mark> </blockquote> <br> Mister Chair, members of the subcommittee— <i>This is not our first time here.</i> For <b>two straight years</b>, the General Assembly has passed this reform — — <b>In 2024</b>, I gave you a »sermon« — — and then we passed <i>HB 1244.</i> <b>In 2025</b>, • my sister, • my friend, • and my <i>esteemed colleague</i>, <b>Delegate Karen Keys-Gamarra</b>, took up the torch — — and then we passed <i>HB 2647.</i> Twice, this body has said—<i><b>clearly</b></i>—that we are ready to turn the page on solitary confinement. And after <b>two straight years</b>, nobody can pretend this is new... • You know this bill. • You know this issue. • You know how overdue this change is — — Mister Chair, members of the committee, this is not our first time here—<b>»BUT it will be our last«</b>—because this year <i>we will <b>make history.</b></i> And what is so great about this year is that we all have a <i>chance</i>—a <i>chance</i> to be part of making history. If you're still on the fence, I want you to look <i>forward</i> into the future with me. <b>Don't let the past hold you back — —</b> • Because when we look back in 25 years, <b>we will know this legislation was the right thing to do.</b> • Because when we look back in 50 years, <b>we will know this legislation was the right thing to do.</b> • Because when we look back in <b>one-hundred years</b>, <i><b>we will know this legislation was the right thing to do!</b></i> Today—I hope everyone in this room joins us in doing the <i><b>right thing.</b></i> We know the counterarguments. We know the questions. And we're happy to answer them. <b>But</b> I encourage us to <i>listen</i>— - • To listen to the <i>testimonies</i> of those who have suffered— + • To listen to the <i>testimonies</i> of those who have suffered; - • To listen to the voices who are ready for change, + • To listen to the voices who are ready for change; • To listen so that we may be reminded—again—<i>just how overdue this legislation is.</i> Thank you, Mister Chair and members of the committee. I hope you report this bill favorably to full committee. <hr> == Support and Opposition == === Support === • ACLU People Power Fairfax • Bridging The Gap In Virginia • Charlottesville Chapter National Organization for Women • Coalition for Justice • EJUSA Evangelical Network • Fighting 4 Freedom • Greater Washington (JCRC) • Inmate Support Virginia • Interfaith Action for Human Rights (IAHR) • HALT Solitary • Jewish Community Relations Council of Just Future Project • Justice & Witness Action Network- VA • United Church of Christ Central Atlantic Conference • LatinoJustice PRLDEF • NAACP Loudoun • National Association of Social Workers • National Association of Social Workers, Virginia Chapter • National Religious Campaign Against Torture • No Left Turns • Resource Information Help for the Disadvantaged and Disenfranchised (RIHD) • RISE for Youth • RVA Health Alliance for Social Justice and Equity • Social Action Linking Together (SALT) • Social Workers and Allies Against Solitary Confinement • The Humanization Project • The Sentencing Project • Unitarian Universalist Legislative Ministry of Virginia • Unlock the Box Campaign • Virginia CURE • Virginia Defenders for Freedom, Justice & Equality • Virginia Justice Democrats • Virginia Justice for Life • Virginia Justice Alliance • Virginia Prisons Accountability Committee • Virginia Prisoner Of Conscience • Virginia Prison Justice Network • WJCC Coalition for Community Justice • 40 Strong === Opposition === • (to be updated) === No Recommendation / Neutral === • (to be updated) === No Position Provided === • Department of Corrections <hr> == Fiscal Impact == No fiscal impact statement is posted for HB35. The Department of Corrections may try to bring forward a claim for a fiscal impact; however, LIS and Appropriations Committee have currently not provided any impact statement. <hr> == Possible Questions == === TL;DR === <b>Q1: “Does this end solitary confinement in Virginia?”</b> TL;DR: No—it ends <i>prolonged</i> solitary confinement and sets clear limits, oversight, and due-process rules for any use. <br> <b>Q2: “Does this make prisons less safe for staff?”</b> TL;DR: No—HB35 keeps exceptions for imminent threats and requires documentation; it’s about targeted use, not “never.” <br> <b>Q3: “What changes day-to-day?”</b> TL;DR: Frequent reviews, rapid medical/mental health checks, real programming/out-of-cell time, and written accountability when isolation is used. <br> <b>Q4: “Can DOC just use ‘lockdowns’ instead?”</b> TL;DR: The bill defines lockdown and regulates it, and the requested amendment strengthens this further by applying the same time limits to lockdown explicitly. <br> === Q1: “What does the bill aim to accomplish?” === <b>Answer you can use:</b> HB35 ends prolonged solitary confinement by setting clear time limits and requiring real oversight—regular reviews, rapid medical and mental health evaluations, documentation, and in-person due process when isolation continues. <br> === Q2: “How often is placement reviewed?” === <b>Answer you can use:</b> Placement is reviewed frequently, including a required 48-hour review cycle with written documentation explaining why less restrictive settings were not used. <br> === Q3: “What health protections are required?” === <b>Answer you can use:</b> HB35 requires medical and mental health evaluations by certified professionals within one working day of placement in restorative housing or isolated confinement (with limited exceptions). <br> === Q4: “Does this stop people from getting programming or recreation?” === <b>Answer you can use:</b> No—the bill requires at least four hours of out-of-cell programming or congregate activity daily, plus at least one hour of congregate recreation unless exceptional safety circumstances apply. <br> === Q5: “What stops indefinite ‘lockdowns’?” === <b>Answer you can use:</b> Lockdowns that interrupt programming must have a specific documented security purpose, must end as soon as the purpose is served, are time-limited, require approvals to extend or repeat, and must be documented and published. <hr> == Additional Information == <b>1. Definitions are the enforcement backbone</b> • The bill defines isolated confinement and lockdown by hours-per-day and loss of programming, so policy can’t be evaded by unit names. <b>Policy implication:</b> Regulates conditions, not labels. <br> <b>2. The “less restrictive first” rule targets protective-custody misuse</b> • For “own protection” placements, the facility must use less restrictive options first, including transfers or special-purpose housing for similarly threatened individuals, unless infeasible. <b>Policy implication:</b> Safety without defaulting to isolation. <br> <b>3. Reviews + documentation create accountability</b> • Requires regular reviews, documentation in the institutional file, notice up the chain, and formal in-person reviews with appeal rights. <b>Policy implication:</b> Isolation becomes a documented exception, not a routine. <br> <b>4. Lockdown limits matter because lockdown can function like solitary</b> • The bill regulates lockdowns that interrupt programming and requires publication of documentation. <b>Policy implication:</b> Prevents “unit-wide solitary” from becoming the workaround. [[Category:2026 Session]]
2026-01-22 07:26:48
Edited by: 74.110.183.75
Edited by: 74.110.183.75
= HB35 Restorative housing and isolated confinement; restrictions on use. = == Status == [https://house.vga.virginia.gov/subcommittees/H15002/agendas/5187 Public Safety | Subcommittee #2 — agenda] <hr> == Overview == === Summary as Introduced === <b>Restorative housing and isolated confinement; restrictions on use.</b> Prohibits the use of isolated confinement, defined in the bill, in state correctional facilities, subject to certain exceptions. The bill requires that before placing an incarcerated person in restorative housing or isolated confinement for his own protection, the facility administrator shall place an incarcerated person in a less-restrictive setting, including by transferring such person to another institution or to a special-purpose housing unit for incarcerated persons who face similar threats. The bill requires that if an incarcerated person is placed in restorative housing or isolated confinement, such placement shall be reviewed every 48 hours and the facility administrator shall ensure that the incarcerated person receives a medical and mental health evaluation from certified medical and mental health professionals within one working day of placement in restorative housing or any form of isolated confinement. The bill also requires the facility administrator to notify the regional administrator in writing that an incarcerated person was placed in restorative housing or isolated confinement within 24 hours of such placement. Finally, the bill requires that formal reviews of an incarcerated person's placement in any form of isolated confinement shall be held in such person's presence, inform him of any reasons administrative officials believe isolated confinement remains necessary, and give the incarcerated person an opportunity to respond to those reasons, and a formal ruling shall be provided to the incarcerated individual within 24 hours. <hr> === Patrons === ==== House Patrons ==== • Joshua G. Cole (chief patron) • Patrick A. Hope (chief-co-patron) • Sam Rasoul (co-patron • Holly Seibold ==== Senate Patrons ==== • Lamont Bagby <hr> == Language == The language of [https://lis.virginia.gov/bill-details/20261/HB35/text/HB35 HB35] can be viewed here. <hr> == Proposed Amendment == === Amendment Offered for Consideration (requested for subcommittee) === ==== Add “Lockdown” throughout relevant provisions ==== Amend the bill to explicitly include “lockdown” alongside “solitary confinement/isolated confinement” and “restorative housing” in all relevant sections, to prevent facilities from using unit-wide lockdown practices as a functional substitute for individual isolated confinement. ==== Strengthen the time-limit clause (close the cumulative-days gap) ==== Replace the current time-limit phrasing with: “No individual shall be held in solitary confinement, lockdown, or restorative housing for more than 15 consecutive days, nor 15 days in any 60-day period.” <b>Purpose of the amendment:</b> The introduced text already uses “15 consecutive days…in any 60-day period,” but stakeholders have raised concerns that “consecutive” language can be worked around by cycling people in and out (or shifting to lockdown practices) without ever hitting a “consecutive” threshold. The amendment makes the limit explicitly <i>both</i> consecutive and cumulative. Again, the intent is to prohibit the outcome of prolonged, solitary isolation, not to jeopardize the safety of anyone, but to ensure the constraint of this practice. <hr> == Opening Statement == === House Subcommittee Statement === <blockquote> ====Notes on delivery: ==== <mark> <b>bold</b>—emphasize, increase volume; </mark> <mark> <i>italicized</i>—stressed, extended pronunciation, sing-songy; </mark> <mark> <i><b>bold italicized</i></b>—climactic, stressed and emphatic; </mark> <mark> »chevrons«—deliver jokingly, with humor; </mark> <mark> • bulleted—drum-like repetition, think of MLK's "I Have a Dream," "I have a dream that..." repeated for emphasis; </mark> <mark> — a half pause, slight build-up; </mark> <mark> — — a full pause, major build-up. <mark> <mark><b>VIBE:</b> think <i>"victory lap;"</i> sell the idea that this bill is a done deal and that doubters should get on board while they still have a chance to be on the right side of history. This is a <b><i>pathos</i></b> and <i><b>ethos</i></b> argument, not <i>logos</i>; lean on expert testimonies for questions of <i>logic</i>. - Eric</mark> </blockquote> <br> Mister Chair, members of the subcommittee— <i>This is not our first time here.</i> For <b>two straight years</b>, the General Assembly has passed this reform — — <b>In 2024</b>, I gave you a »sermon« — — and then we passed <i>HB 1244.</i> <b>In 2025</b>, • my sister, • my friend, • and my <i>esteemed colleague</i>, <b>Delegate Karen Keys-Gamarra</b>, took up the torch — — and then we passed <i>HB 2647.</i> Twice, this body has said—<i><b>clearly</b></i>—that we are ready to turn the page on solitary confinement. And after <b>two straight years</b>, nobody can pretend this is new... • You know this bill. • You know this issue. • You know how overdue this change is — — Mister Chair, members of the committee, this is not our first time here—<b>»BUT it will be our last«</b>—because this year <i>we will <b>make history.</b></i> And what is so great about this year is that we all have a <i>chance</i>—a <i>chance</i> to be part of making history. If you're still on the fence, I want you to look <i>forward</i> into the future with me. <b>Don't let the past hold you back — —</b> • Because when we look back in 25 years, <b>we will know this legislation was the right thing to do.</b> • Because when we look back in 50 years, <b>we will know this legislation was the right thing to do.</b> • Because when we look back in <b>one-hundred years</b>, <i><b>we will know this legislation was the right thing to do!</b></i> Today—I hope everyone in this room joins us in doing the <i><b>right thing.</b></i> - We know the counterarguments. We know the questions. And we're happy to answer them. <b>But</b> I encourage us to <i>listen</i>—to <i>listen</i> to the <i>testimonies</i>—to listen to the voices who are ready for change, so that we may be reminded—again—<i>just how overdue this legislation is.</i> + We know the counterarguments. We know the questions. And we're happy to answer them. <b>But</b> I encourage us to <i>listen</i>— - Thank you, Mister Chair and members of the committee. I hope you report this bill favorably to full committee. + • To listen to the <i>testimonies</i> of those who have suffered— - <hr> + • To listen to the voices who are ready for change, - == Support and Opposition == + • To listen so that we may be reminded—again—<i>just how overdue this legislation is.</i> - === Support === + Thank you, Mister Chair and members of the committee. I hope you report this bill favorably to full committee. - • ACLU People Power Fairfax + - • Bridging The Gap In Virginia + <hr> - • Charlottesville Chapter National Organization for Women + - • Coalition for Justice + == Support and Opposition == - • EJUSA Evangelical Network + - • Fighting 4 Freedom + === Support === - • Greater Washington (JCRC) + • ACLU People Power Fairfax - • Inmate Support Virginia + • Bridging The Gap In Virginia - • Interfaith Action for Human Rights (IAHR) + • Charlottesville Chapter National Organization for Women - • HALT Solitary + • Coalition for Justice - • Jewish Community Relations Council of Just Future Project + • EJUSA Evangelical Network - • Justice & Witness Action Network- VA + • Fighting 4 Freedom - • United Church of Christ Central Atlantic Conference + • Greater Washington (JCRC) - • LatinoJustice PRLDEF + • Inmate Support Virginia - • NAACP Loudoun + • Interfaith Action for Human Rights (IAHR) - • National Association of Social Workers + • HALT Solitary - • National Association of Social Workers, Virginia Chapter + • Jewish Community Relations Council of Just Future Project - • National Religious Campaign Against Torture + • Justice & Witness Action Network- VA - • No Left Turns + • United Church of Christ Central Atlantic Conference - • Resource Information Help for the Disadvantaged and Disenfranchised (RIHD) + • LatinoJustice PRLDEF - • RISE for Youth + • NAACP Loudoun - • RVA Health Alliance for Social Justice and Equity + • National Association of Social Workers - • Social Action Linking Together (SALT) + • National Association of Social Workers, Virginia Chapter - • Social Workers and Allies Against Solitary Confinement + • National Religious Campaign Against Torture - • The Humanization Project + • No Left Turns - • The Sentencing Project + • Resource Information Help for the Disadvantaged and Disenfranchised (RIHD) - • Unitarian Universalist Legislative Ministry of Virginia + • RISE for Youth - • Unlock the Box Campaign + • RVA Health Alliance for Social Justice and Equity - • Virginia CURE + • Social Action Linking Together (SALT) - • Virginia Defenders for Freedom, Justice & Equality + • Social Workers and Allies Against Solitary Confinement - • Virginia Justice Democrats + • The Humanization Project - • Virginia Justice for Life + • The Sentencing Project - • Virginia Justice Alliance + • Unitarian Universalist Legislative Ministry of Virginia - • Virginia Prisons Accountability Committee + • Unlock the Box Campaign - • Virginia Prisoner Of Conscience + • Virginia CURE - • Virginia Prison Justice Network + • Virginia Defenders for Freedom, Justice & Equality - • WJCC Coalition for Community Justice + • Virginia Justice Democrats - • 40 Strong + • Virginia Justice for Life - + • Virginia Justice Alliance - === Opposition === + • Virginia Prisons Accountability Committee - • (to be updated) + • Virginia Prisoner Of Conscience - + • Virginia Prison Justice Network - === No Recommendation / Neutral === + • WJCC Coalition for Community Justice - • (to be updated) + • 40 Strong - === No Position Provided === + === Opposition === - • Department of Corrections + • (to be updated) - <hr> + === No Recommendation / Neutral === - + • (to be updated) - == Fiscal Impact == + - No fiscal impact statement is posted for HB35. The Department of Corrections may try to bring forward a claim for a fiscal impact; however, LIS and Appropriations Committee have currently not provided any impact statement. + === No Position Provided === - + • Department of Corrections - <hr> + - + <hr> - == Possible Questions == + - + == Fiscal Impact == - === TL;DR === + No fiscal impact statement is posted for HB35. The Department of Corrections may try to bring forward a claim for a fiscal impact; however, LIS and Appropriations Committee have currently not provided any impact statement. - <b>Q1: “Does this end solitary confinement in Virginia?”</b> TL;DR: No—it ends <i>prolonged</i> solitary confinement and sets clear limits, oversight, and due-process rules for any use. <br> + - <b>Q2: “Does this make prisons less safe for staff?”</b> TL;DR: No—HB35 keeps exceptions for imminent threats and requires documentation; it’s about targeted use, not “never.” + <hr> - <br> + == Possible Questions == - <b>Q3: “What changes day-to-day?”</b> TL;DR: Frequent reviews, rapid medical/mental health checks, real programming/out-of-cell time, and written accountability when isolation is used. + - + === TL;DR === - <br> + <b>Q1: “Does this end solitary confinement in Virginia?”</b> TL;DR: No—it ends <i>prolonged</i> solitary confinement and sets clear limits, oversight, and due-process rules for any use. <br> - <b>Q4: “Can DOC just use ‘lockdowns’ instead?”</b> TL;DR: The bill defines lockdown and regulates it, and the requested amendment strengthens this further by applying the same time limits to lockdown explicitly. + <b>Q2: “Does this make prisons less safe for staff?”</b> TL;DR: No—HB35 keeps exceptions for imminent threats and requires documentation; it’s about targeted use, not “never.” <br> - + <b>Q3: “What changes day-to-day?”</b> TL;DR: Frequent reviews, rapid medical/mental health checks, real programming/out-of-cell time, and written accountability when isolation is used. - === Q1: “What does the bill aim to accomplish?” === + - <b>Answer you can use:</b> HB35 ends prolonged solitary confinement by setting clear time limits and requiring real oversight—regular reviews, rapid medical and mental health evaluations, documentation, and in-person due process when isolation continues. + <br> - + <b>Q4: “Can DOC just use ‘lockdowns’ instead?”</b> TL;DR: The bill defines lockdown and regulates it, and the requested amendment strengthens this further by applying the same time limits to lockdown explicitly. - <br> + - + <br> - === Q2: “How often is placement reviewed?” === + - <b>Answer you can use:</b> Placement is reviewed frequently, including a required 48-hour review cycle with written documentation explaining why less restrictive settings were not used. + === Q1: “What does the bill aim to accomplish?” === - + <b>Answer you can use:</b> HB35 ends prolonged solitary confinement by setting clear time limits and requiring real oversight—regular reviews, rapid medical and mental health evaluations, documentation, and in-person due process when isolation continues. - <br> + - + <br> - === Q3: “What health protections are required?” === + - <b>Answer you can use:</b> HB35 requires medical and mental health evaluations by certified professionals within one working day of placement in restorative housing or isolated confinement (with limited exceptions). + === Q2: “How often is placement reviewed?” === - + <b>Answer you can use:</b> Placement is reviewed frequently, including a required 48-hour review cycle with written documentation explaining why less restrictive settings were not used. - <br> + - + <br> - === Q4: “Does this stop people from getting programming or recreation?” === + - <b>Answer you can use:</b> No—the bill requires at least four hours of out-of-cell programming or congregate activity daily, plus at least one hour of congregate recreation unless exceptional safety circumstances apply. + === Q3: “What health protections are required?” === - + <b>Answer you can use:</b> HB35 requires medical and mental health evaluations by certified professionals within one working day of placement in restorative housing or isolated confinement (with limited exceptions). - <br> + - + <br> - === Q5: “What stops indefinite ‘lockdowns’?” === + - <b>Answer you can use:</b> Lockdowns that interrupt programming must have a specific documented security purpose, must end as soon as the purpose is served, are time-limited, require approvals to extend or repeat, and must be documented and published. + === Q4: “Does this stop people from getting programming or recreation?” === - + <b>Answer you can use:</b> No—the bill requires at least four hours of out-of-cell programming or congregate activity daily, plus at least one hour of congregate recreation unless exceptional safety circumstances apply. - <hr> + - + <br> - == Additional Information == + - <b>1. Definitions are the enforcement backbone</b> + === Q5: “What stops indefinite ‘lockdowns’?” === - • The bill defines isolated confinement and lockdown by hours-per-day and loss of programming, so policy can’t be evaded by unit names. + <b>Answer you can use:</b> Lockdowns that interrupt programming must have a specific documented security purpose, must end as soon as the purpose is served, are time-limited, require approvals to extend or repeat, and must be documented and published. - + <hr> - <b>Policy implication:</b> Regulates conditions, not labels. + - + == Additional Information == - <br> + <b>1. Definitions are the enforcement backbone</b> - + • The bill defines isolated confinement and lockdown by hours-per-day and loss of programming, so policy can’t be evaded by unit names. - <b>2. The “less restrictive first” rule targets protective-custody misuse</b> + - • For “own protection” placements, the facility must use less restrictive options first, including transfers or special-purpose housing for similarly threatened individuals, unless infeasible. + - + <b>Policy implication:</b> Regulates conditions, not labels. - <b>Policy implication:</b> Safety without defaulting to isolation. + - + <br> - <br> + - + <b>2. The “less restrictive first” rule targets protective-custody misuse</b> - <b>3. Reviews + documentation create accountability</b> + • For “own protection” placements, the facility must use less restrictive options first, including transfers or special-purpose housing for similarly threatened individuals, unless infeasible. - • Requires regular reviews, documentation in the institutional file, notice up the chain, and formal in-person reviews with appeal rights. + - + <b>Policy implication:</b> Safety without defaulting to isolation. - <b>Policy implication:</b> Isolation becomes a documented exception, not a routine. + - + <br> - <br> + - + <b>3. Reviews + documentation create accountability</b> - <b>4. Lockdown limits matter because lockdown can function like solitary</b> + • Requires regular reviews, documentation in the institutional file, notice up the chain, and formal in-person reviews with appeal rights. - • The bill regulates lockdowns that interrupt programming and requires publication of documentation. + - + <b>Policy implication:</b> Isolation becomes a documented exception, not a routine. - <b>Policy implication:</b> Prevents “unit-wide solitary” from becoming the workaround. + <br> - [[Category:2026 Session]] + <b>4. Lockdown limits matter because lockdown can function like solitary</b> + • The bill regulates lockdowns that interrupt programming and requires publication of documentation. + + + <b>Policy implication:</b> Prevents “unit-wide solitary” from becoming the workaround. + + [[Category:2026 Session]]
2026-01-22 07:26:32
Edited by: 74.110.183.75
Edited by: 74.110.183.75
= HB35 Restorative housing and isolated confinement; restrictions on use. = == Status == [https://house.vga.virginia.gov/subcommittees/H15002/agendas/5187 Public Safety | Subcommittee #2 — agenda] <hr> == Overview == === Summary as Introduced === <b>Restorative housing and isolated confinement; restrictions on use.</b> Prohibits the use of isolated confinement, defined in the bill, in state correctional facilities, subject to certain exceptions. The bill requires that before placing an incarcerated person in restorative housing or isolated confinement for his own protection, the facility administrator shall place an incarcerated person in a less-restrictive setting, including by transferring such person to another institution or to a special-purpose housing unit for incarcerated persons who face similar threats. The bill requires that if an incarcerated person is placed in restorative housing or isolated confinement, such placement shall be reviewed every 48 hours and the facility administrator shall ensure that the incarcerated person receives a medical and mental health evaluation from certified medical and mental health professionals within one working day of placement in restorative housing or any form of isolated confinement. The bill also requires the facility administrator to notify the regional administrator in writing that an incarcerated person was placed in restorative housing or isolated confinement within 24 hours of such placement. Finally, the bill requires that formal reviews of an incarcerated person's placement in any form of isolated confinement shall be held in such person's presence, inform him of any reasons administrative officials believe isolated confinement remains necessary, and give the incarcerated person an opportunity to respond to those reasons, and a formal ruling shall be provided to the incarcerated individual within 24 hours. <hr> === Patrons === ==== House Patrons ==== • Joshua G. Cole (chief patron) • Patrick A. Hope (chief-co-patron) • Sam Rasoul (co-patron • Holly Seibold ==== Senate Patrons ==== • Lamont Bagby <hr> == Language == The language of [https://lis.virginia.gov/bill-details/20261/HB35/text/HB35 HB35] can be viewed here. <hr> == Proposed Amendment == === Amendment Offered for Consideration (requested for subcommittee) === ==== Add “Lockdown” throughout relevant provisions ==== Amend the bill to explicitly include “lockdown” alongside “solitary confinement/isolated confinement” and “restorative housing” in all relevant sections, to prevent facilities from using unit-wide lockdown practices as a functional substitute for individual isolated confinement. ==== Strengthen the time-limit clause (close the cumulative-days gap) ==== Replace the current time-limit phrasing with: “No individual shall be held in solitary confinement, lockdown, or restorative housing for more than 15 consecutive days, nor 15 days in any 60-day period.” <b>Purpose of the amendment:</b> The introduced text already uses “15 consecutive days…in any 60-day period,” but stakeholders have raised concerns that “consecutive” language can be worked around by cycling people in and out (or shifting to lockdown practices) without ever hitting a “consecutive” threshold. The amendment makes the limit explicitly <i>both</i> consecutive and cumulative. Again, the intent is to prohibit the outcome of prolonged, solitary isolation, not to jeopardize the safety of anyone, but to ensure the constraint of this practice. <hr> == Opening Statement == === House Subcommittee Statement === <blockquote> ====Notes on delivery: ==== <mark> <b>bold</b>—emphasize, increase volume; </mark> <mark> <i>italicized</i>—stressed, extended pronunciation, sing-songy; </mark> <mark> <i><b>bold italicized</i></b>—climactic, stressed and emphatic; </mark> <mark> »chevrons«—deliver jokingly, with humor; </mark> <mark> • bulleted—drum-like repetition, think of MLK's "I Have a Dream," "I have a dream that..." repeated for emphasis; </mark> <mark> — a half pause, slight build-up; </mark> <mark> — — a full pause, major build-up. <mark> <mark><b>VIBE:</b> think <i>"victory lap;"</i> sell the idea that this bill is a done deal and that doubters should get on board while they still have a chance to be on the right side of history. This is a <b><i>pathos</i></b> and <i><b>ethos</i></b> argument, not <i>logos</i>; lean on expert testimonies for questions of <i>logic</i>. - Eric</mark> </blockquote> <br> Mister Chair, members of the subcommittee— <i>This is not our first time here.</i> For <b>two straight years</b>, the General Assembly has passed this reform — — <b>In 2024</b>, I gave you a »sermon« — — and then we passed <i>HB 1244.</i> <b>In 2025</b>, • my sister, • my friend, • and my <i>esteemed colleague</i>, <b>Delegate Karen Keys-Gamarra</b>, took up the torch — — and then we passed <i>HB 2647.</i> Twice, this body has said—<i><b>clearly</b></i>—that we are ready to turn the page on solitary confinement. And after <b>two straight years</b>, nobody can pretend this is new... • You know this bill. • You know this issue. • You know how overdue this change is — — Mister Chair, members of the committee, this is not our first time here—<b>»BUT it will be our last«</b>—because this year <i>we will <b>make history.</b></i> And what is so great about this year is that we all have a <i>chance</i>—a <i>chance</i> to be part of making history. If you're still on the fence, I want you to look <i>forward</i> into the future with me. <b>Don't let the past hold you back — —</b> • Because when we look back in 25 years, <b>we will know this legislation was the right thing to do.</b> • Because when we look back in 50 years, <b>we will know this legislation was the right thing to do.</b> • Because when we look back in <b>one-hundred years</b>, <i><b>we will know this legislation was the right thing to do!</b></i> Today—I hope everyone in this room joins us in doing the <i><b>right thing.</b></i> - We know the counterarguments. We know the questions. And we're happy to answer them. <b>But</b> I encourage us to <i>listen</i>—to listen to the <i>testimonies</i>—to listen to the voices who are ready for change, so that we may be reminded—again—<i>just how overdue this legislation is.</i> + We know the counterarguments. We know the questions. And we're happy to answer them. <b>But</b> I encourage us to <i>listen</i>—to <i>listen</i> to the <i>testimonies</i>—to listen to the voices who are ready for change, so that we may be reminded—again—<i>just how overdue this legislation is.</i> Thank you, Mister Chair and members of the committee. I hope you report this bill favorably to full committee. <hr> == Support and Opposition == === Support === • ACLU People Power Fairfax • Bridging The Gap In Virginia • Charlottesville Chapter National Organization for Women • Coalition for Justice • EJUSA Evangelical Network • Fighting 4 Freedom • Greater Washington (JCRC) • Inmate Support Virginia • Interfaith Action for Human Rights (IAHR) • HALT Solitary • Jewish Community Relations Council of Just Future Project • Justice & Witness Action Network- VA • United Church of Christ Central Atlantic Conference • LatinoJustice PRLDEF • NAACP Loudoun • National Association of Social Workers • National Association of Social Workers, Virginia Chapter • National Religious Campaign Against Torture • No Left Turns • Resource Information Help for the Disadvantaged and Disenfranchised (RIHD) • RISE for Youth • RVA Health Alliance for Social Justice and Equity • Social Action Linking Together (SALT) • Social Workers and Allies Against Solitary Confinement • The Humanization Project • The Sentencing Project • Unitarian Universalist Legislative Ministry of Virginia • Unlock the Box Campaign • Virginia CURE • Virginia Defenders for Freedom, Justice & Equality • Virginia Justice Democrats • Virginia Justice for Life • Virginia Justice Alliance • Virginia Prisons Accountability Committee • Virginia Prisoner Of Conscience • Virginia Prison Justice Network • WJCC Coalition for Community Justice • 40 Strong === Opposition === • (to be updated) === No Recommendation / Neutral === • (to be updated) === No Position Provided === • Department of Corrections <hr> == Fiscal Impact == No fiscal impact statement is posted for HB35. The Department of Corrections may try to bring forward a claim for a fiscal impact; however, LIS and Appropriations Committee have currently not provided any impact statement. <hr> == Possible Questions == === TL;DR === <b>Q1: “Does this end solitary confinement in Virginia?”</b> TL;DR: No—it ends <i>prolonged</i> solitary confinement and sets clear limits, oversight, and due-process rules for any use. <br> <b>Q2: “Does this make prisons less safe for staff?”</b> TL;DR: No—HB35 keeps exceptions for imminent threats and requires documentation; it’s about targeted use, not “never.” <br> <b>Q3: “What changes day-to-day?”</b> TL;DR: Frequent reviews, rapid medical/mental health checks, real programming/out-of-cell time, and written accountability when isolation is used. <br> <b>Q4: “Can DOC just use ‘lockdowns’ instead?”</b> TL;DR: The bill defines lockdown and regulates it, and the requested amendment strengthens this further by applying the same time limits to lockdown explicitly. <br> === Q1: “What does the bill aim to accomplish?” === <b>Answer you can use:</b> HB35 ends prolonged solitary confinement by setting clear time limits and requiring real oversight—regular reviews, rapid medical and mental health evaluations, documentation, and in-person due process when isolation continues. <br> === Q2: “How often is placement reviewed?” === <b>Answer you can use:</b> Placement is reviewed frequently, including a required 48-hour review cycle with written documentation explaining why less restrictive settings were not used. <br> === Q3: “What health protections are required?” === <b>Answer you can use:</b> HB35 requires medical and mental health evaluations by certified professionals within one working day of placement in restorative housing or isolated confinement (with limited exceptions). <br> === Q4: “Does this stop people from getting programming or recreation?” === <b>Answer you can use:</b> No—the bill requires at least four hours of out-of-cell programming or congregate activity daily, plus at least one hour of congregate recreation unless exceptional safety circumstances apply. <br> === Q5: “What stops indefinite ‘lockdowns’?” === <b>Answer you can use:</b> Lockdowns that interrupt programming must have a specific documented security purpose, must end as soon as the purpose is served, are time-limited, require approvals to extend or repeat, and must be documented and published. <hr> == Additional Information == <b>1. Definitions are the enforcement backbone</b> • The bill defines isolated confinement and lockdown by hours-per-day and loss of programming, so policy can’t be evaded by unit names. <b>Policy implication:</b> Regulates conditions, not labels. <br> <b>2. The “less restrictive first” rule targets protective-custody misuse</b> • For “own protection” placements, the facility must use less restrictive options first, including transfers or special-purpose housing for similarly threatened individuals, unless infeasible. <b>Policy implication:</b> Safety without defaulting to isolation. <br> <b>3. Reviews + documentation create accountability</b> • Requires regular reviews, documentation in the institutional file, notice up the chain, and formal in-person reviews with appeal rights. <b>Policy implication:</b> Isolation becomes a documented exception, not a routine. <br> <b>4. Lockdown limits matter because lockdown can function like solitary</b> • The bill regulates lockdowns that interrupt programming and requires publication of documentation. <b>Policy implication:</b> Prevents “unit-wide solitary” from becoming the workaround. [[Category:2026 Session]]
2026-01-22 07:25:08
Edited by: 74.110.183.75
Edited by: 74.110.183.75
= HB35 Restorative housing and isolated confinement; restrictions on use. = == Status == [https://house.vga.virginia.gov/subcommittees/H15002/agendas/5187 Public Safety | Subcommittee #2 — agenda] <hr> == Overview == === Summary as Introduced === <b>Restorative housing and isolated confinement; restrictions on use.</b> Prohibits the use of isolated confinement, defined in the bill, in state correctional facilities, subject to certain exceptions. The bill requires that before placing an incarcerated person in restorative housing or isolated confinement for his own protection, the facility administrator shall place an incarcerated person in a less-restrictive setting, including by transferring such person to another institution or to a special-purpose housing unit for incarcerated persons who face similar threats. The bill requires that if an incarcerated person is placed in restorative housing or isolated confinement, such placement shall be reviewed every 48 hours and the facility administrator shall ensure that the incarcerated person receives a medical and mental health evaluation from certified medical and mental health professionals within one working day of placement in restorative housing or any form of isolated confinement. The bill also requires the facility administrator to notify the regional administrator in writing that an incarcerated person was placed in restorative housing or isolated confinement within 24 hours of such placement. Finally, the bill requires that formal reviews of an incarcerated person's placement in any form of isolated confinement shall be held in such person's presence, inform him of any reasons administrative officials believe isolated confinement remains necessary, and give the incarcerated person an opportunity to respond to those reasons, and a formal ruling shall be provided to the incarcerated individual within 24 hours. <hr> === Patrons === ==== House Patrons ==== • Joshua G. Cole (chief patron) • Patrick A. Hope (chief-co-patron) • Sam Rasoul (co-patron • Holly Seibold ==== Senate Patrons ==== • Lamont Bagby <hr> == Language == The language of [https://lis.virginia.gov/bill-details/20261/HB35/text/HB35 HB35] can be viewed here. <hr> == Proposed Amendment == === Amendment Offered for Consideration (requested for subcommittee) === ==== Add “Lockdown” throughout relevant provisions ==== Amend the bill to explicitly include “lockdown” alongside “solitary confinement/isolated confinement” and “restorative housing” in all relevant sections, to prevent facilities from using unit-wide lockdown practices as a functional substitute for individual isolated confinement. ==== Strengthen the time-limit clause (close the cumulative-days gap) ==== Replace the current time-limit phrasing with: “No individual shall be held in solitary confinement, lockdown, or restorative housing for more than 15 consecutive days, nor 15 days in any 60-day period.” <b>Purpose of the amendment:</b> The introduced text already uses “15 consecutive days…in any 60-day period,” but stakeholders have raised concerns that “consecutive” language can be worked around by cycling people in and out (or shifting to lockdown practices) without ever hitting a “consecutive” threshold. The amendment makes the limit explicitly <i>both</i> consecutive and cumulative. Again, the intent is to prohibit the outcome of prolonged, solitary isolation, not to jeopardize the safety of anyone, but to ensure the constraint of this practice. <hr> == Opening Statement == === House Subcommittee Statement === <blockquote> ====Notes on delivery: ==== <mark> <b>bold</b>—emphasize, increase volume; </mark> <mark> <i>italicized</i>—stressed, extended pronunciation, sing-songy; </mark> <mark> <i><b>bold italicized</i></b>—climactic, stressed and emphatic; </mark> <mark> »chevrons«—deliver jokingly, with humor; </mark> <mark> • bulleted—drum-like repetition, think of MLK's "I Have a Dream," "I have a dream that..." repeated for emphasis; </mark> <mark> — a half pause, slight build-up; </mark> <mark> — — a full pause, major build-up. <mark> <mark><b>VIBE:</b> think <i>"victory lap;"</i> sell the idea that this bill is a done deal and that doubters should get on board while they still have a chance to be on the right side of history. This is a <b><i>pathos</i></b> and <i><b>ethos</i></b> argument, not <i>logos</i>; lean on expert testimonies for questions of <i>logic</i>. - Eric</mark> </blockquote> <br> Mister Chair, members of the subcommittee— <i>This is not our first time here.</i> For <b>two straight years</b>, the General Assembly has passed this reform — — <b>In 2024</b>, I gave you a »sermon« — — and then we passed <i>HB 1244.</i> <b>In 2025</b>, • my sister, • my friend, • and my <i>esteemed colleague</i>, <b>Delegate Karen Keys-Gamarra</b>, took up the torch — — and then we passed <i>HB 2647.</i> Twice, this body has said—<i><b>clearly</b></i>—that we are ready to turn the page on solitary confinement. And after <b>two straight years</b>, nobody can pretend this is new... • You know this bill. • You know this issue. • You know how overdue this change is — — Mister Chair, members of the committee, this is not our first time here—<b>»BUT it will be our last«</b>—because this year <i>we will <b>make history.</b></i> And what is so great about this year is that we all have a <i>chance</i>—a <i>chance</i> to be part of making history. If you're still on the fence, I want you to look <i>forward</i> into the future with me. <b>Don't let the past hold you back — —</b> • Because when we look back in 25 years, <b>we will know this legislation was the right thing to do.</b> • Because when we look back in 50 years, <b>we will know this legislation was the right thing to do.</b> - • Because when we look back in <b>one-hundred</b> years, <i><b>we will know this legislation was the right thing to do!</b></i> + • Because when we look back in <b>one-hundred years</b>, <i><b>we will know this legislation was the right thing to do!</b></i> Today—I hope everyone in this room joins us in doing the <i><b>right thing.</b></i> We know the counterarguments. We know the questions. And we're happy to answer them. <b>But</b> I encourage us to <i>listen</i>—to listen to the <i>testimonies</i>—to listen to the voices who are ready for change, so that we may be reminded—again—<i>just how overdue this legislation is.</i> Thank you, Mister Chair and members of the committee. I hope you report this bill favorably to full committee. <hr> == Support and Opposition == === Support === • ACLU People Power Fairfax • Bridging The Gap In Virginia • Charlottesville Chapter National Organization for Women • Coalition for Justice • EJUSA Evangelical Network • Fighting 4 Freedom • Greater Washington (JCRC) • Inmate Support Virginia • Interfaith Action for Human Rights (IAHR) • HALT Solitary • Jewish Community Relations Council of Just Future Project • Justice & Witness Action Network- VA • United Church of Christ Central Atlantic Conference • LatinoJustice PRLDEF • NAACP Loudoun • National Association of Social Workers • National Association of Social Workers, Virginia Chapter • National Religious Campaign Against Torture • No Left Turns • Resource Information Help for the Disadvantaged and Disenfranchised (RIHD) • RISE for Youth • RVA Health Alliance for Social Justice and Equity • Social Action Linking Together (SALT) • Social Workers and Allies Against Solitary Confinement • The Humanization Project • The Sentencing Project • Unitarian Universalist Legislative Ministry of Virginia • Unlock the Box Campaign • Virginia CURE • Virginia Defenders for Freedom, Justice & Equality • Virginia Justice Democrats • Virginia Justice for Life • Virginia Justice Alliance • Virginia Prisons Accountability Committee • Virginia Prisoner Of Conscience • Virginia Prison Justice Network • WJCC Coalition for Community Justice • 40 Strong === Opposition === • (to be updated) === No Recommendation / Neutral === • (to be updated) === No Position Provided === • Department of Corrections <hr> == Fiscal Impact == No fiscal impact statement is posted for HB35. The Department of Corrections may try to bring forward a claim for a fiscal impact; however, LIS and Appropriations Committee have currently not provided any impact statement. <hr> == Possible Questions == === TL;DR === <b>Q1: “Does this end solitary confinement in Virginia?”</b> TL;DR: No—it ends <i>prolonged</i> solitary confinement and sets clear limits, oversight, and due-process rules for any use. <br> <b>Q2: “Does this make prisons less safe for staff?”</b> TL;DR: No—HB35 keeps exceptions for imminent threats and requires documentation; it’s about targeted use, not “never.” <br> <b>Q3: “What changes day-to-day?”</b> TL;DR: Frequent reviews, rapid medical/mental health checks, real programming/out-of-cell time, and written accountability when isolation is used. <br> <b>Q4: “Can DOC just use ‘lockdowns’ instead?”</b> TL;DR: The bill defines lockdown and regulates it, and the requested amendment strengthens this further by applying the same time limits to lockdown explicitly. <br> === Q1: “What does the bill aim to accomplish?” === <b>Answer you can use:</b> HB35 ends prolonged solitary confinement by setting clear time limits and requiring real oversight—regular reviews, rapid medical and mental health evaluations, documentation, and in-person due process when isolation continues. <br> === Q2: “How often is placement reviewed?” === <b>Answer you can use:</b> Placement is reviewed frequently, including a required 48-hour review cycle with written documentation explaining why less restrictive settings were not used. <br> === Q3: “What health protections are required?” === <b>Answer you can use:</b> HB35 requires medical and mental health evaluations by certified professionals within one working day of placement in restorative housing or isolated confinement (with limited exceptions). <br> === Q4: “Does this stop people from getting programming or recreation?” === <b>Answer you can use:</b> No—the bill requires at least four hours of out-of-cell programming or congregate activity daily, plus at least one hour of congregate recreation unless exceptional safety circumstances apply. <br> === Q5: “What stops indefinite ‘lockdowns’?” === <b>Answer you can use:</b> Lockdowns that interrupt programming must have a specific documented security purpose, must end as soon as the purpose is served, are time-limited, require approvals to extend or repeat, and must be documented and published. <hr> == Additional Information == <b>1. Definitions are the enforcement backbone</b> • The bill defines isolated confinement and lockdown by hours-per-day and loss of programming, so policy can’t be evaded by unit names. <b>Policy implication:</b> Regulates conditions, not labels. <br> <b>2. The “less restrictive first” rule targets protective-custody misuse</b> • For “own protection” placements, the facility must use less restrictive options first, including transfers or special-purpose housing for similarly threatened individuals, unless infeasible. <b>Policy implication:</b> Safety without defaulting to isolation. <br> <b>3. Reviews + documentation create accountability</b> • Requires regular reviews, documentation in the institutional file, notice up the chain, and formal in-person reviews with appeal rights. <b>Policy implication:</b> Isolation becomes a documented exception, not a routine. <br> <b>4. Lockdown limits matter because lockdown can function like solitary</b> • The bill regulates lockdowns that interrupt programming and requires publication of documentation. <b>Policy implication:</b> Prevents “unit-wide solitary” from becoming the workaround. [[Category:2026 Session]]
2026-01-22 07:24:18
Edited by: 74.110.183.75
Edited by: 74.110.183.75
= HB35 Restorative housing and isolated confinement; restrictions on use. = == Status == [https://house.vga.virginia.gov/subcommittees/H15002/agendas/5187 Public Safety | Subcommittee #2 — agenda] <hr> == Overview == === Summary as Introduced === <b>Restorative housing and isolated confinement; restrictions on use.</b> Prohibits the use of isolated confinement, defined in the bill, in state correctional facilities, subject to certain exceptions. The bill requires that before placing an incarcerated person in restorative housing or isolated confinement for his own protection, the facility administrator shall place an incarcerated person in a less-restrictive setting, including by transferring such person to another institution or to a special-purpose housing unit for incarcerated persons who face similar threats. The bill requires that if an incarcerated person is placed in restorative housing or isolated confinement, such placement shall be reviewed every 48 hours and the facility administrator shall ensure that the incarcerated person receives a medical and mental health evaluation from certified medical and mental health professionals within one working day of placement in restorative housing or any form of isolated confinement. The bill also requires the facility administrator to notify the regional administrator in writing that an incarcerated person was placed in restorative housing or isolated confinement within 24 hours of such placement. Finally, the bill requires that formal reviews of an incarcerated person's placement in any form of isolated confinement shall be held in such person's presence, inform him of any reasons administrative officials believe isolated confinement remains necessary, and give the incarcerated person an opportunity to respond to those reasons, and a formal ruling shall be provided to the incarcerated individual within 24 hours. <hr> === Patrons === ==== House Patrons ==== • Joshua G. Cole (chief patron) • Patrick A. Hope (chief-co-patron) • Sam Rasoul (co-patron • Holly Seibold ==== Senate Patrons ==== • Lamont Bagby <hr> == Language == The language of [https://lis.virginia.gov/bill-details/20261/HB35/text/HB35 HB35] can be viewed here. <hr> == Proposed Amendment == === Amendment Offered for Consideration (requested for subcommittee) === ==== Add “Lockdown” throughout relevant provisions ==== Amend the bill to explicitly include “lockdown” alongside “solitary confinement/isolated confinement” and “restorative housing” in all relevant sections, to prevent facilities from using unit-wide lockdown practices as a functional substitute for individual isolated confinement. ==== Strengthen the time-limit clause (close the cumulative-days gap) ==== Replace the current time-limit phrasing with: “No individual shall be held in solitary confinement, lockdown, or restorative housing for more than 15 consecutive days, nor 15 days in any 60-day period.” <b>Purpose of the amendment:</b> The introduced text already uses “15 consecutive days…in any 60-day period,” but stakeholders have raised concerns that “consecutive” language can be worked around by cycling people in and out (or shifting to lockdown practices) without ever hitting a “consecutive” threshold. The amendment makes the limit explicitly <i>both</i> consecutive and cumulative. Again, the intent is to prohibit the outcome of prolonged, solitary isolation, not to jeopardize the safety of anyone, but to ensure the constraint of this practice. <hr> == Opening Statement == === House Subcommittee Statement === <blockquote> ====Notes on delivery: ==== <mark> <b>bold</b>—emphasize, increase volume; </mark> <mark> <i>italicized</i>—stressed, extended pronunciation, sing-songy; </mark> <mark> <i><b>bold italicized</i></b>—climactic, stressed and emphatic; </mark> <mark> »chevrons«—deliver jokingly, with humor; </mark> <mark> • bulleted—drum-like repetition, think of MLK's "I Have a Dream," "I have a dream that..." repeated for emphasis; </mark> <mark> — a half pause, slight build-up; </mark> <mark> — — a full pause, major build-up. <mark> <mark><b>VIBE:</b> think <i>"victory lap;"</i> sell the idea that this bill is a done deal and that doubters should get on board while they still have a chance to be on the right side of history. This is a <b><i>pathos</i></b> and <i><b>ethos</i></b> argument, not <i>logos</i>; lean on expert testimonies for questions of <i>logic</i>. - Eric</mark> </blockquote> <br> Mister Chair, members of the subcommittee— <i>This is not our first time here.</i> For <b>two straight years</b>, the General Assembly has passed this reform — — <b>In 2024</b>, I gave you a »sermon« — — and then we passed <i>HB 1244.</i> <b>In 2025</b>, • my sister, • my friend, • and my <i>esteemed colleague</i>, <b>Delegate Karen Keys-Gamarra</b>, took up the torch — — and then we passed <i>HB 2647.</i> Twice, this body has said—<i><b>clearly</b></i>—that we are ready to turn the page on solitary confinement. And after <b>two straight years</b>, nobody can pretend this is new... • You know this bill. • You know this issue. • You know how overdue this change is — — - Mister Chair, members of the committee, this is not our first time here, <b>BUT it will be our last</b>—because this year <i>we will make history.</i> + Mister Chair, members of the committee, this is not our first time here—<b>»BUT it will be our last«</b>—because this year <i>we will <b>make history.</b></i> And what is so great about this year is that we all have a <i>chance</i>—a <i>chance</i> to be part of making history. If you're still on the fence, I want you to look <i>forward</i> into the future with me. <b>Don't let the past hold you back — —</b> • Because when we look back in 25 years, <b>we will know this legislation was the right thing to do.</b> • Because when we look back in 50 years, <b>we will know this legislation was the right thing to do.</b> • Because when we look back in <b>one-hundred</b> years, <i><b>we will know this legislation was the right thing to do!</b></i> Today—I hope everyone in this room joins us in doing the <i><b>right thing.</b></i> We know the counterarguments. We know the questions. And we're happy to answer them. <b>But</b> I encourage us to <i>listen</i>—to listen to the <i>testimonies</i>—to listen to the voices who are ready for change, so that we may be reminded—again—<i>just how overdue this legislation is.</i> Thank you, Mister Chair and members of the committee. I hope you report this bill favorably to full committee. <hr> == Support and Opposition == === Support === • ACLU People Power Fairfax • Bridging The Gap In Virginia • Charlottesville Chapter National Organization for Women • Coalition for Justice • EJUSA Evangelical Network • Fighting 4 Freedom • Greater Washington (JCRC) • Inmate Support Virginia • Interfaith Action for Human Rights (IAHR) • HALT Solitary • Jewish Community Relations Council of Just Future Project • Justice & Witness Action Network- VA • United Church of Christ Central Atlantic Conference • LatinoJustice PRLDEF • NAACP Loudoun • National Association of Social Workers • National Association of Social Workers, Virginia Chapter • National Religious Campaign Against Torture • No Left Turns • Resource Information Help for the Disadvantaged and Disenfranchised (RIHD) • RISE for Youth • RVA Health Alliance for Social Justice and Equity • Social Action Linking Together (SALT) • Social Workers and Allies Against Solitary Confinement • The Humanization Project • The Sentencing Project • Unitarian Universalist Legislative Ministry of Virginia • Unlock the Box Campaign • Virginia CURE • Virginia Defenders for Freedom, Justice & Equality • Virginia Justice Democrats • Virginia Justice for Life • Virginia Justice Alliance • Virginia Prisons Accountability Committee • Virginia Prisoner Of Conscience • Virginia Prison Justice Network • WJCC Coalition for Community Justice • 40 Strong === Opposition === • (to be updated) === No Recommendation / Neutral === • (to be updated) === No Position Provided === • Department of Corrections <hr> == Fiscal Impact == No fiscal impact statement is posted for HB35. The Department of Corrections may try to bring forward a claim for a fiscal impact; however, LIS and Appropriations Committee have currently not provided any impact statement. <hr> == Possible Questions == === TL;DR === <b>Q1: “Does this end solitary confinement in Virginia?”</b> TL;DR: No—it ends <i>prolonged</i> solitary confinement and sets clear limits, oversight, and due-process rules for any use. <br> <b>Q2: “Does this make prisons less safe for staff?”</b> TL;DR: No—HB35 keeps exceptions for imminent threats and requires documentation; it’s about targeted use, not “never.” <br> <b>Q3: “What changes day-to-day?”</b> TL;DR: Frequent reviews, rapid medical/mental health checks, real programming/out-of-cell time, and written accountability when isolation is used. <br> <b>Q4: “Can DOC just use ‘lockdowns’ instead?”</b> TL;DR: The bill defines lockdown and regulates it, and the requested amendment strengthens this further by applying the same time limits to lockdown explicitly. <br> === Q1: “What does the bill aim to accomplish?” === <b>Answer you can use:</b> HB35 ends prolonged solitary confinement by setting clear time limits and requiring real oversight—regular reviews, rapid medical and mental health evaluations, documentation, and in-person due process when isolation continues. <br> === Q2: “How often is placement reviewed?” === <b>Answer you can use:</b> Placement is reviewed frequently, including a required 48-hour review cycle with written documentation explaining why less restrictive settings were not used. <br> === Q3: “What health protections are required?” === <b>Answer you can use:</b> HB35 requires medical and mental health evaluations by certified professionals within one working day of placement in restorative housing or isolated confinement (with limited exceptions). <br> === Q4: “Does this stop people from getting programming or recreation?” === <b>Answer you can use:</b> No—the bill requires at least four hours of out-of-cell programming or congregate activity daily, plus at least one hour of congregate recreation unless exceptional safety circumstances apply. <br> === Q5: “What stops indefinite ‘lockdowns’?” === <b>Answer you can use:</b> Lockdowns that interrupt programming must have a specific documented security purpose, must end as soon as the purpose is served, are time-limited, require approvals to extend or repeat, and must be documented and published. <hr> == Additional Information == <b>1. Definitions are the enforcement backbone</b> • The bill defines isolated confinement and lockdown by hours-per-day and loss of programming, so policy can’t be evaded by unit names. <b>Policy implication:</b> Regulates conditions, not labels. <br> <b>2. The “less restrictive first” rule targets protective-custody misuse</b> • For “own protection” placements, the facility must use less restrictive options first, including transfers or special-purpose housing for similarly threatened individuals, unless infeasible. <b>Policy implication:</b> Safety without defaulting to isolation. <br> <b>3. Reviews + documentation create accountability</b> • Requires regular reviews, documentation in the institutional file, notice up the chain, and formal in-person reviews with appeal rights. <b>Policy implication:</b> Isolation becomes a documented exception, not a routine. <br> <b>4. Lockdown limits matter because lockdown can function like solitary</b> • The bill regulates lockdowns that interrupt programming and requires publication of documentation. <b>Policy implication:</b> Prevents “unit-wide solitary” from becoming the workaround. [[Category:2026 Session]]
2026-01-22 07:23:11
Edited by: 74.110.183.75
Edited by: 74.110.183.75
= HB35 Restorative housing and isolated confinement; restrictions on use. = == Status == [https://house.vga.virginia.gov/subcommittees/H15002/agendas/5187 Public Safety | Subcommittee #2 — agenda] <hr> == Overview == === Summary as Introduced === <b>Restorative housing and isolated confinement; restrictions on use.</b> Prohibits the use of isolated confinement, defined in the bill, in state correctional facilities, subject to certain exceptions. The bill requires that before placing an incarcerated person in restorative housing or isolated confinement for his own protection, the facility administrator shall place an incarcerated person in a less-restrictive setting, including by transferring such person to another institution or to a special-purpose housing unit for incarcerated persons who face similar threats. The bill requires that if an incarcerated person is placed in restorative housing or isolated confinement, such placement shall be reviewed every 48 hours and the facility administrator shall ensure that the incarcerated person receives a medical and mental health evaluation from certified medical and mental health professionals within one working day of placement in restorative housing or any form of isolated confinement. The bill also requires the facility administrator to notify the regional administrator in writing that an incarcerated person was placed in restorative housing or isolated confinement within 24 hours of such placement. Finally, the bill requires that formal reviews of an incarcerated person's placement in any form of isolated confinement shall be held in such person's presence, inform him of any reasons administrative officials believe isolated confinement remains necessary, and give the incarcerated person an opportunity to respond to those reasons, and a formal ruling shall be provided to the incarcerated individual within 24 hours. <hr> === Patrons === ==== House Patrons ==== • Joshua G. Cole (chief patron) • Patrick A. Hope (chief-co-patron) • Sam Rasoul (co-patron • Holly Seibold ==== Senate Patrons ==== • Lamont Bagby <hr> == Language == The language of [https://lis.virginia.gov/bill-details/20261/HB35/text/HB35 HB35] can be viewed here. <hr> == Proposed Amendment == === Amendment Offered for Consideration (requested for subcommittee) === ==== Add “Lockdown” throughout relevant provisions ==== Amend the bill to explicitly include “lockdown” alongside “solitary confinement/isolated confinement” and “restorative housing” in all relevant sections, to prevent facilities from using unit-wide lockdown practices as a functional substitute for individual isolated confinement. ==== Strengthen the time-limit clause (close the cumulative-days gap) ==== Replace the current time-limit phrasing with: “No individual shall be held in solitary confinement, lockdown, or restorative housing for more than 15 consecutive days, nor 15 days in any 60-day period.” <b>Purpose of the amendment:</b> The introduced text already uses “15 consecutive days…in any 60-day period,” but stakeholders have raised concerns that “consecutive” language can be worked around by cycling people in and out (or shifting to lockdown practices) without ever hitting a “consecutive” threshold. The amendment makes the limit explicitly <i>both</i> consecutive and cumulative. Again, the intent is to prohibit the outcome of prolonged, solitary isolation, not to jeopardize the safety of anyone, but to ensure the constraint of this practice. <hr> == Opening Statement == === House Subcommittee Statement === <blockquote> ====Notes on delivery: ==== <mark> <b>bold</b>—emphasize, increase volume; </mark> <mark> <i>italicized</i>—stressed, extended pronunciation, sing-songy; </mark> <mark> <i><b>bold italicized</i></b>—climactic, stressed and emphatic; </mark> - <mark> 'single quote'—deliver jokingly, with humor; </mark> + <mark> »chevrons«—deliver jokingly, with humor; </mark> <mark> • bulleted—drum-like repetition, think of MLK's "I Have a Dream," "I have a dream that..." repeated for emphasis; </mark> <mark> — a half pause, slight build-up; </mark> <mark> — — a full pause, major build-up. <mark> <mark><b>VIBE:</b> think <i>"victory lap;"</i> sell the idea that this bill is a done deal and that doubters should get on board while they still have a chance to be on the right side of history. This is a <b><i>pathos</i></b> and <i><b>ethos</i></b> argument, not <i>logos</i>; lean on expert testimonies for questions of <i>logic</i>. - Eric</mark> </blockquote> <br> Mister Chair, members of the subcommittee— <i>This is not our first time here.</i> For <b>two straight years</b>, the General Assembly has passed this reform — — - <b>In 2024</b>, I gave you a 'sermon' — — and then we passed <i>HB 1244.</i> + <b>In 2024</b>, I gave you a »sermon« — — and then we passed <i>HB 1244.</i> <b>In 2025</b>, • my sister, • my friend, • and my <i>esteemed colleague</i>, <b>Delegate Karen Keys-Gamarra</b>, took up the torch — — and then we passed <i>HB 2647.</i> Twice, this body has said—<i><b>clearly</b></i>—that we are ready to turn the page on solitary confinement. And after <b>two straight years</b>, nobody can pretend this is new... • You know this bill. • You know this issue. • You know how overdue this change is — — Mister Chair, members of the committee, this is not our first time here, <b>BUT it will be our last</b>—because this year <i>we will make history.</i> And what is so great about this year is that we all have a <i>chance</i>—a <i>chance</i> to be part of making history. If you're still on the fence, I want you to look <i>forward</i> into the future with me. <b>Don't let the past hold you back — —</b> • Because when we look back in 25 years, <b>we will know this legislation was the right thing to do.</b> • Because when we look back in 50 years, <b>we will know this legislation was the right thing to do.</b> • Because when we look back in <b>one-hundred</b> years, <i><b>we will know this legislation was the right thing to do!</b></i> Today—I hope everyone in this room joins us in doing the <i><b>right thing.</b></i> We know the counterarguments. We know the questions. And we're happy to answer them. <b>But</b> I encourage us to <i>listen</i>—to listen to the <i>testimonies</i>—to listen to the voices who are ready for change, so that we may be reminded—again—<i>just how overdue this legislation is.</i> Thank you, Mister Chair and members of the committee. I hope you report this bill favorably to full committee. <hr> == Support and Opposition == === Support === • ACLU People Power Fairfax • Bridging The Gap In Virginia • Charlottesville Chapter National Organization for Women • Coalition for Justice • EJUSA Evangelical Network • Fighting 4 Freedom • Greater Washington (JCRC) • Inmate Support Virginia • Interfaith Action for Human Rights (IAHR) • HALT Solitary • Jewish Community Relations Council of Just Future Project • Justice & Witness Action Network- VA • United Church of Christ Central Atlantic Conference • LatinoJustice PRLDEF • NAACP Loudoun • National Association of Social Workers • National Association of Social Workers, Virginia Chapter • National Religious Campaign Against Torture • No Left Turns • Resource Information Help for the Disadvantaged and Disenfranchised (RIHD) • RISE for Youth • RVA Health Alliance for Social Justice and Equity • Social Action Linking Together (SALT) • Social Workers and Allies Against Solitary Confinement • The Humanization Project • The Sentencing Project • Unitarian Universalist Legislative Ministry of Virginia • Unlock the Box Campaign • Virginia CURE • Virginia Defenders for Freedom, Justice & Equality • Virginia Justice Democrats • Virginia Justice for Life • Virginia Justice Alliance • Virginia Prisons Accountability Committee • Virginia Prisoner Of Conscience • Virginia Prison Justice Network • WJCC Coalition for Community Justice • 40 Strong === Opposition === • (to be updated) === No Recommendation / Neutral === • (to be updated) === No Position Provided === • Department of Corrections <hr> == Fiscal Impact == No fiscal impact statement is posted for HB35. The Department of Corrections may try to bring forward a claim for a fiscal impact; however, LIS and Appropriations Committee have currently not provided any impact statement. <hr> == Possible Questions == === TL;DR === <b>Q1: “Does this end solitary confinement in Virginia?”</b> TL;DR: No—it ends <i>prolonged</i> solitary confinement and sets clear limits, oversight, and due-process rules for any use. <br> <b>Q2: “Does this make prisons less safe for staff?”</b> TL;DR: No—HB35 keeps exceptions for imminent threats and requires documentation; it’s about targeted use, not “never.” <br> <b>Q3: “What changes day-to-day?”</b> TL;DR: Frequent reviews, rapid medical/mental health checks, real programming/out-of-cell time, and written accountability when isolation is used. <br> <b>Q4: “Can DOC just use ‘lockdowns’ instead?”</b> TL;DR: The bill defines lockdown and regulates it, and the requested amendment strengthens this further by applying the same time limits to lockdown explicitly. <br> === Q1: “What does the bill aim to accomplish?” === <b>Answer you can use:</b> HB35 ends prolonged solitary confinement by setting clear time limits and requiring real oversight—regular reviews, rapid medical and mental health evaluations, documentation, and in-person due process when isolation continues. <br> === Q2: “How often is placement reviewed?” === <b>Answer you can use:</b> Placement is reviewed frequently, including a required 48-hour review cycle with written documentation explaining why less restrictive settings were not used. <br> === Q3: “What health protections are required?” === <b>Answer you can use:</b> HB35 requires medical and mental health evaluations by certified professionals within one working day of placement in restorative housing or isolated confinement (with limited exceptions). <br> === Q4: “Does this stop people from getting programming or recreation?” === <b>Answer you can use:</b> No—the bill requires at least four hours of out-of-cell programming or congregate activity daily, plus at least one hour of congregate recreation unless exceptional safety circumstances apply. <br> === Q5: “What stops indefinite ‘lockdowns’?” === <b>Answer you can use:</b> Lockdowns that interrupt programming must have a specific documented security purpose, must end as soon as the purpose is served, are time-limited, require approvals to extend or repeat, and must be documented and published. <hr> == Additional Information == <b>1. Definitions are the enforcement backbone</b> • The bill defines isolated confinement and lockdown by hours-per-day and loss of programming, so policy can’t be evaded by unit names. <b>Policy implication:</b> Regulates conditions, not labels. <br> <b>2. The “less restrictive first” rule targets protective-custody misuse</b> • For “own protection” placements, the facility must use less restrictive options first, including transfers or special-purpose housing for similarly threatened individuals, unless infeasible. <b>Policy implication:</b> Safety without defaulting to isolation. <br> <b>3. Reviews + documentation create accountability</b> • Requires regular reviews, documentation in the institutional file, notice up the chain, and formal in-person reviews with appeal rights. <b>Policy implication:</b> Isolation becomes a documented exception, not a routine. <br> <b>4. Lockdown limits matter because lockdown can function like solitary</b> • The bill regulates lockdowns that interrupt programming and requires publication of documentation. <b>Policy implication:</b> Prevents “unit-wide solitary” from becoming the workaround. [[Category:2026 Session]]
2026-01-22 07:20:53
Edited by: 74.110.183.75
Edited by: 74.110.183.75
= HB35 Restorative housing and isolated confinement; restrictions on use. = == Status == [https://house.vga.virginia.gov/subcommittees/H15002/agendas/5187 Public Safety | Subcommittee #2 — agenda] <hr> == Overview == === Summary as Introduced === <b>Restorative housing and isolated confinement; restrictions on use.</b> Prohibits the use of isolated confinement, defined in the bill, in state correctional facilities, subject to certain exceptions. The bill requires that before placing an incarcerated person in restorative housing or isolated confinement for his own protection, the facility administrator shall place an incarcerated person in a less-restrictive setting, including by transferring such person to another institution or to a special-purpose housing unit for incarcerated persons who face similar threats. The bill requires that if an incarcerated person is placed in restorative housing or isolated confinement, such placement shall be reviewed every 48 hours and the facility administrator shall ensure that the incarcerated person receives a medical and mental health evaluation from certified medical and mental health professionals within one working day of placement in restorative housing or any form of isolated confinement. The bill also requires the facility administrator to notify the regional administrator in writing that an incarcerated person was placed in restorative housing or isolated confinement within 24 hours of such placement. Finally, the bill requires that formal reviews of an incarcerated person's placement in any form of isolated confinement shall be held in such person's presence, inform him of any reasons administrative officials believe isolated confinement remains necessary, and give the incarcerated person an opportunity to respond to those reasons, and a formal ruling shall be provided to the incarcerated individual within 24 hours. <hr> === Patrons === ==== House Patrons ==== • Joshua G. Cole (chief patron) • Patrick A. Hope (chief-co-patron) • Sam Rasoul (co-patron • Holly Seibold ==== Senate Patrons ==== • Lamont Bagby <hr> == Language == The language of [https://lis.virginia.gov/bill-details/20261/HB35/text/HB35 HB35] can be viewed here. <hr> == Proposed Amendment == === Amendment Offered for Consideration (requested for subcommittee) === ==== Add “Lockdown” throughout relevant provisions ==== Amend the bill to explicitly include “lockdown” alongside “solitary confinement/isolated confinement” and “restorative housing” in all relevant sections, to prevent facilities from using unit-wide lockdown practices as a functional substitute for individual isolated confinement. ==== Strengthen the time-limit clause (close the cumulative-days gap) ==== Replace the current time-limit phrasing with: “No individual shall be held in solitary confinement, lockdown, or restorative housing for more than 15 consecutive days, nor 15 days in any 60-day period.” <b>Purpose of the amendment:</b> The introduced text already uses “15 consecutive days…in any 60-day period,” but stakeholders have raised concerns that “consecutive” language can be worked around by cycling people in and out (or shifting to lockdown practices) without ever hitting a “consecutive” threshold. The amendment makes the limit explicitly <i>both</i> consecutive and cumulative. Again, the intent is to prohibit the outcome of prolonged, solitary isolation, not to jeopardize the safety of anyone, but to ensure the constraint of this practice. <hr> == Opening Statement == === House Subcommittee Statement === <blockquote> ====Notes on delivery: ==== <mark> <b>bold</b>—emphasize, increase volume; </mark> <mark> <i>italicized</i>—stressed, extended pronunciation, sing-songy; </mark> <mark> <i><b>bold italicized</i></b>—climactic, stressed and emphatic; </mark> <mark> 'single quote'—deliver jokingly, with humor; </mark> <mark> • bulleted—drum-like repetition, think of MLK's "I Have a Dream," "I have a dream that..." repeated for emphasis; </mark> <mark> — a half pause, slight build-up; </mark> <mark> — — a full pause, major build-up. <mark> <mark><b>VIBE:</b> think <i>"victory lap;"</i> sell the idea that this bill is a done deal and that doubters should get on board while they still have a chance to be on the right side of history. This is a <b><i>pathos</i></b> and <i><b>ethos</i></b> argument, not <i>logos</i>; lean on expert testimonies for questions of <i>logic</i>. - Eric</mark> </blockquote> <br> Mister Chair, members of the subcommittee— <i>This is not our first time here.</i> For <b>two straight years</b>, the General Assembly has passed this reform — — <b>In 2024</b>, I gave you a 'sermon' — — and then we passed <i>HB 1244.</i> <b>In 2025</b>, • my sister, • my friend, • and my <i>esteemed colleague</i>, <b>Delegate Karen Keys-Gamarra</b>, took up the torch — — and then we passed <i>HB 2647.</i> Twice, this body has said—<i><b>clearly</b></i>—that we are ready to turn the page on solitary confinement. - And after two straight years, nobody can pretend this is new... + And after <b>two straight years</b>, nobody can pretend this is new... • You know this bill. • You know this issue. • You know how overdue this change is — — Mister Chair, members of the committee, this is not our first time here, <b>BUT it will be our last</b>—because this year <i>we will make history.</i> And what is so great about this year is that we all have a <i>chance</i>—a <i>chance</i> to be part of making history. If you're still on the fence, I want you to look <i>forward</i> into the future with me. <b>Don't let the past hold you back — —</b> • Because when we look back in 25 years, <b>we will know this legislation was the right thing to do.</b> • Because when we look back in 50 years, <b>we will know this legislation was the right thing to do.</b> • Because when we look back in <b>one-hundred</b> years, <i><b>we will know this legislation was the right thing to do!</b></i> Today—I hope everyone in this room joins us in doing the <i><b>right thing.</b></i> We know the counterarguments. We know the questions. And we're happy to answer them. <b>But</b> I encourage us to <i>listen</i>—to listen to the <i>testimonies</i>—to listen to the voices who are ready for change, so that we may be reminded—again—<i>just how overdue this legislation is.</i> Thank you, Mister Chair and members of the committee. I hope you report this bill favorably to full committee. <hr> == Support and Opposition == === Support === • ACLU People Power Fairfax • Bridging The Gap In Virginia • Charlottesville Chapter National Organization for Women • Coalition for Justice • EJUSA Evangelical Network • Fighting 4 Freedom • Greater Washington (JCRC) • Inmate Support Virginia • Interfaith Action for Human Rights (IAHR) • HALT Solitary • Jewish Community Relations Council of Just Future Project • Justice & Witness Action Network- VA • United Church of Christ Central Atlantic Conference • LatinoJustice PRLDEF • NAACP Loudoun • National Association of Social Workers • National Association of Social Workers, Virginia Chapter • National Religious Campaign Against Torture • No Left Turns • Resource Information Help for the Disadvantaged and Disenfranchised (RIHD) • RISE for Youth • RVA Health Alliance for Social Justice and Equity • Social Action Linking Together (SALT) • Social Workers and Allies Against Solitary Confinement • The Humanization Project • The Sentencing Project • Unitarian Universalist Legislative Ministry of Virginia • Unlock the Box Campaign • Virginia CURE • Virginia Defenders for Freedom, Justice & Equality • Virginia Justice Democrats • Virginia Justice for Life • Virginia Justice Alliance • Virginia Prisons Accountability Committee • Virginia Prisoner Of Conscience • Virginia Prison Justice Network • WJCC Coalition for Community Justice • 40 Strong === Opposition === • (to be updated) === No Recommendation / Neutral === • (to be updated) === No Position Provided === • Department of Corrections <hr> == Fiscal Impact == No fiscal impact statement is posted for HB35. The Department of Corrections may try to bring forward a claim for a fiscal impact; however, LIS and Appropriations Committee have currently not provided any impact statement. <hr> == Possible Questions == === TL;DR === <b>Q1: “Does this end solitary confinement in Virginia?”</b> TL;DR: No—it ends <i>prolonged</i> solitary confinement and sets clear limits, oversight, and due-process rules for any use. <br> <b>Q2: “Does this make prisons less safe for staff?”</b> TL;DR: No—HB35 keeps exceptions for imminent threats and requires documentation; it’s about targeted use, not “never.” <br> <b>Q3: “What changes day-to-day?”</b> TL;DR: Frequent reviews, rapid medical/mental health checks, real programming/out-of-cell time, and written accountability when isolation is used. <br> <b>Q4: “Can DOC just use ‘lockdowns’ instead?”</b> TL;DR: The bill defines lockdown and regulates it, and the requested amendment strengthens this further by applying the same time limits to lockdown explicitly. <br> === Q1: “What does the bill aim to accomplish?” === <b>Answer you can use:</b> HB35 ends prolonged solitary confinement by setting clear time limits and requiring real oversight—regular reviews, rapid medical and mental health evaluations, documentation, and in-person due process when isolation continues. <br> === Q2: “How often is placement reviewed?” === <b>Answer you can use:</b> Placement is reviewed frequently, including a required 48-hour review cycle with written documentation explaining why less restrictive settings were not used. <br> === Q3: “What health protections are required?” === <b>Answer you can use:</b> HB35 requires medical and mental health evaluations by certified professionals within one working day of placement in restorative housing or isolated confinement (with limited exceptions). <br> === Q4: “Does this stop people from getting programming or recreation?” === <b>Answer you can use:</b> No—the bill requires at least four hours of out-of-cell programming or congregate activity daily, plus at least one hour of congregate recreation unless exceptional safety circumstances apply. <br> === Q5: “What stops indefinite ‘lockdowns’?” === <b>Answer you can use:</b> Lockdowns that interrupt programming must have a specific documented security purpose, must end as soon as the purpose is served, are time-limited, require approvals to extend or repeat, and must be documented and published. <hr> == Additional Information == <b>1. Definitions are the enforcement backbone</b> • The bill defines isolated confinement and lockdown by hours-per-day and loss of programming, so policy can’t be evaded by unit names. <b>Policy implication:</b> Regulates conditions, not labels. <br> <b>2. The “less restrictive first” rule targets protective-custody misuse</b> • For “own protection” placements, the facility must use less restrictive options first, including transfers or special-purpose housing for similarly threatened individuals, unless infeasible. <b>Policy implication:</b> Safety without defaulting to isolation. <br> <b>3. Reviews + documentation create accountability</b> • Requires regular reviews, documentation in the institutional file, notice up the chain, and formal in-person reviews with appeal rights. <b>Policy implication:</b> Isolation becomes a documented exception, not a routine. <br> <b>4. Lockdown limits matter because lockdown can function like solitary</b> • The bill regulates lockdowns that interrupt programming and requires publication of documentation. <b>Policy implication:</b> Prevents “unit-wide solitary” from becoming the workaround. [[Category:2026 Session]]
2026-01-22 07:18:10
Edited by: 74.110.183.75
Edited by: 74.110.183.75
= HB35 Restorative housing and isolated confinement; restrictions on use. = == Status == [https://house.vga.virginia.gov/subcommittees/H15002/agendas/5187 Public Safety | Subcommittee #2 — agenda] <hr> == Overview == === Summary as Introduced === <b>Restorative housing and isolated confinement; restrictions on use.</b> Prohibits the use of isolated confinement, defined in the bill, in state correctional facilities, subject to certain exceptions. The bill requires that before placing an incarcerated person in restorative housing or isolated confinement for his own protection, the facility administrator shall place an incarcerated person in a less-restrictive setting, including by transferring such person to another institution or to a special-purpose housing unit for incarcerated persons who face similar threats. The bill requires that if an incarcerated person is placed in restorative housing or isolated confinement, such placement shall be reviewed every 48 hours and the facility administrator shall ensure that the incarcerated person receives a medical and mental health evaluation from certified medical and mental health professionals within one working day of placement in restorative housing or any form of isolated confinement. The bill also requires the facility administrator to notify the regional administrator in writing that an incarcerated person was placed in restorative housing or isolated confinement within 24 hours of such placement. Finally, the bill requires that formal reviews of an incarcerated person's placement in any form of isolated confinement shall be held in such person's presence, inform him of any reasons administrative officials believe isolated confinement remains necessary, and give the incarcerated person an opportunity to respond to those reasons, and a formal ruling shall be provided to the incarcerated individual within 24 hours. <hr> === Patrons === ==== House Patrons ==== • Joshua G. Cole (chief patron) • Patrick A. Hope (chief-co-patron) • Sam Rasoul (co-patron • Holly Seibold ==== Senate Patrons ==== • Lamont Bagby <hr> == Language == The language of [https://lis.virginia.gov/bill-details/20261/HB35/text/HB35 HB35] can be viewed here. <hr> == Proposed Amendment == === Amendment Offered for Consideration (requested for subcommittee) === ==== Add “Lockdown” throughout relevant provisions ==== Amend the bill to explicitly include “lockdown” alongside “solitary confinement/isolated confinement” and “restorative housing” in all relevant sections, to prevent facilities from using unit-wide lockdown practices as a functional substitute for individual isolated confinement. ==== Strengthen the time-limit clause (close the cumulative-days gap) ==== Replace the current time-limit phrasing with: “No individual shall be held in solitary confinement, lockdown, or restorative housing for more than 15 consecutive days, nor 15 days in any 60-day period.” <b>Purpose of the amendment:</b> The introduced text already uses “15 consecutive days…in any 60-day period,” but stakeholders have raised concerns that “consecutive” language can be worked around by cycling people in and out (or shifting to lockdown practices) without ever hitting a “consecutive” threshold. The amendment makes the limit explicitly <i>both</i> consecutive and cumulative. Again, the intent is to prohibit the outcome of prolonged, solitary isolation, not to jeopardize the safety of anyone, but to ensure the constraint of this practice. <hr> == Opening Statement == === House Subcommittee Statement === <blockquote> ====Notes on delivery: ==== <mark> <b>bold</b>—emphasize, increase volume; </mark> <mark> <i>italicized</i>—stressed, extended pronunciation, sing-songy; </mark> <mark> <i><b>bold italicized</i></b>—climactic, stressed and emphatic; </mark> - <mark> • bulleted—drum-like repetition, think of MLK's "I Have a Dream," "I have a dream that..." repeated for emphasis; </mark> + <mark> 'single quote'—deliver jokingly, with humor; </mark> - <mark> — a half pause, slight build-up; </mark> + <mark> • bulleted—drum-like repetition, think of MLK's "I Have a Dream," "I have a dream that..." repeated for emphasis; </mark> - <mark> — — a full pause, major build-up. <mark> + <mark> — a half pause, slight build-up; </mark> - + <mark> — — a full pause, major build-up. <mark> - <mark><b>VIBE:</b> think <i>"victory lap;"</i> sell the idea that this bill is a done deal and that doubters should get on board while they still have a chance to be on the right side of history. This is a <b><i>pathos</i></b> and <i><b>ethos</i></b> argument, not <i>logos</i>; lean on expert testimonies for questions of <i>logic</i>. - Eric</mark> + - </blockquote> + <mark><b>VIBE:</b> think <i>"victory lap;"</i> sell the idea that this bill is a done deal and that doubters should get on board while they still have a chance to be on the right side of history. This is a <b><i>pathos</i></b> and <i><b>ethos</i></b> argument, not <i>logos</i>; lean on expert testimonies for questions of <i>logic</i>. - Eric</mark> - + </blockquote> - <br> + - + <br> - Mister Chair, members of the subcommittee— + - + Mister Chair, members of the subcommittee— - <i>This is not our first time here.</i> + - + <i>This is not our first time here.</i> - For <b>two straight years</b>, the General Assembly has passed this reform — — + - + For <b>two straight years</b>, the General Assembly has passed this reform — — - <b>In 2024</b>, I gave you a sermon — — and then we passed <i>HB 1244.</i> + - + <b>In 2024</b>, I gave you a 'sermon' — — and then we passed <i>HB 1244.</i> - <b>In 2025</b>, • my sister, • my friend, • and my <i>esteemed colleague</i>, <b>Delegate Karen Keys-Gamarra</b>, took up the torch — — and then we passed <i>HB 2647.</i> + - + <b>In 2025</b>, • my sister, • my friend, • and my <i>esteemed colleague</i>, <b>Delegate Karen Keys-Gamarra</b>, took up the torch — — and then we passed <i>HB 2647.</i> - Twice, this body has said—<i><b>clearly</b></i>—that we are ready to turn the page on solitary confinement. + - + Twice, this body has said—<i><b>clearly</b></i>—that we are ready to turn the page on solitary confinement. - And after two straight years, nobody can pretend this is new... + - + And after two straight years, nobody can pretend this is new... - • You know this bill. + - • You know this issue. + • You know this bill. - • You know how overdue this change is — — + • You know this issue. - + • You know how overdue this change is — — - Mister Chair, members of the committee, this is not our first time here, <b>BUT it will be our last</b>—because this year <i>we will make history.</i> + - + Mister Chair, members of the committee, this is not our first time here, <b>BUT it will be our last</b>—because this year <i>we will make history.</i> - And what is so great about this year is that we all have a <i>chance</i>—a <i>chance</i> to be part of making history. + - + And what is so great about this year is that we all have a <i>chance</i>—a <i>chance</i> to be part of making history. - If you're still on the fence, I want you to look <i>forward</i> into the future with me. <b>Don't let the past hold you back — —</b> + - + If you're still on the fence, I want you to look <i>forward</i> into the future with me. <b>Don't let the past hold you back — —</b> - • Because when we look back in 25 years, <b>we will know this legislation was the right thing to do.</b> + - + • Because when we look back in 25 years, <b>we will know this legislation was the right thing to do.</b> - • Because when we look back in 50 years, <b>we will know this legislation was the right thing to do.</b> + - + • Because when we look back in 50 years, <b>we will know this legislation was the right thing to do.</b> - • Because when we look back in <b>one-hundred</b> years, <i><b>we will know this legislation was the right thing to do!</b></i> + - + • Because when we look back in <b>one-hundred</b> years, <i><b>we will know this legislation was the right thing to do!</b></i> - Today—I hope everyone in this room joins us in doing the <i><b>right thing.</b></i> + - + Today—I hope everyone in this room joins us in doing the <i><b>right thing.</b></i> - We know the counterarguments. We know the questions. And we're happy to answer them. <b>But</b> I encourage us to <i>listen</i>—to listen to the <i>testimonies</i>—to listen to the voices who are ready for change, so that we may be reminded—again—<i>just how overdue this legislation is.</i> + - + We know the counterarguments. We know the questions. And we're happy to answer them. <b>But</b> I encourage us to <i>listen</i>—to listen to the <i>testimonies</i>—to listen to the voices who are ready for change, so that we may be reminded—again—<i>just how overdue this legislation is.</i> - Thank you, Mister Chair and members of the committee. I hope you report this bill favorably to full committee. + - + Thank you, Mister Chair and members of the committee. I hope you report this bill favorably to full committee. - <hr> + - + <hr> - == Support and Opposition == + - + == Support and Opposition == - === Support === + - • ACLU People Power Fairfax + === Support === - • Bridging The Gap In Virginia + • ACLU People Power Fairfax - • Charlottesville Chapter National Organization for Women + • Bridging The Gap In Virginia - • Coalition for Justice + • Charlottesville Chapter National Organization for Women - • EJUSA Evangelical Network + • Coalition for Justice - • Fighting 4 Freedom + • EJUSA Evangelical Network - • Greater Washington (JCRC) + • Fighting 4 Freedom - • Inmate Support Virginia + • Greater Washington (JCRC) - • Interfaith Action for Human Rights (IAHR) + • Inmate Support Virginia - • HALT Solitary + • Interfaith Action for Human Rights (IAHR) - • Jewish Community Relations Council of Just Future Project + • HALT Solitary - • Justice & Witness Action Network- VA + • Jewish Community Relations Council of Just Future Project - • United Church of Christ Central Atlantic Conference + • Justice & Witness Action Network- VA - • LatinoJustice PRLDEF + • United Church of Christ Central Atlantic Conference - • NAACP Loudoun + • LatinoJustice PRLDEF - • National Association of Social Workers + • NAACP Loudoun - • National Association of Social Workers, Virginia Chapter + • National Association of Social Workers - • National Religious Campaign Against Torture + • National Association of Social Workers, Virginia Chapter - • No Left Turns + • National Religious Campaign Against Torture - • Resource Information Help for the Disadvantaged and Disenfranchised (RIHD) + • No Left Turns - • RISE for Youth + • Resource Information Help for the Disadvantaged and Disenfranchised (RIHD) - • RVA Health Alliance for Social Justice and Equity + • RISE for Youth - • Social Action Linking Together (SALT) + • RVA Health Alliance for Social Justice and Equity - • Social Workers and Allies Against Solitary Confinement + • Social Action Linking Together (SALT) - • The Humanization Project + • Social Workers and Allies Against Solitary Confinement - • The Sentencing Project + • The Humanization Project - • Unitarian Universalist Legislative Ministry of Virginia + • The Sentencing Project - • Unlock the Box Campaign + • Unitarian Universalist Legislative Ministry of Virginia - • Virginia CURE + • Unlock the Box Campaign - • Virginia Defenders for Freedom, Justice & Equality + • Virginia CURE - • Virginia Justice Democrats + • Virginia Defenders for Freedom, Justice & Equality - • Virginia Justice for Life + • Virginia Justice Democrats - • Virginia Justice Alliance + • Virginia Justice for Life - • Virginia Prisons Accountability Committee + • Virginia Justice Alliance - • Virginia Prisoner Of Conscience + • Virginia Prisons Accountability Committee - • Virginia Prison Justice Network + • Virginia Prisoner Of Conscience - • WJCC Coalition for Community Justice + • Virginia Prison Justice Network - • 40 Strong + • WJCC Coalition for Community Justice - + • 40 Strong - === Opposition === + - • (to be updated) + === Opposition === - + • (to be updated) - === No Recommendation / Neutral === + - • (to be updated) + === No Recommendation / Neutral === - + • (to be updated) - === No Position Provided === + - • Department of Corrections + === No Position Provided === - + • Department of Corrections - <hr> + - + <hr> - == Fiscal Impact == + - No fiscal impact statement is posted for HB35. The Department of Corrections may try to bring forward a claim for a fiscal impact; however, LIS and Appropriations Committee have currently not provided any impact statement. + == Fiscal Impact == - + No fiscal impact statement is posted for HB35. The Department of Corrections may try to bring forward a claim for a fiscal impact; however, LIS and Appropriations Committee have currently not provided any impact statement. - <hr> + - + <hr> - == Possible Questions == + - + == Possible Questions == - === TL;DR === + - <b>Q1: “Does this end solitary confinement in Virginia?”</b> TL;DR: No—it ends <i>prolonged</i> solitary confinement and sets clear limits, oversight, and due-process rules for any use. <br> + === TL;DR === - <b>Q2: “Does this make prisons less safe for staff?”</b> TL;DR: No—HB35 keeps exceptions for imminent threats and requires documentation; it’s about targeted use, not “never.” + <b>Q1: “Does this end solitary confinement in Virginia?”</b> TL;DR: No—it ends <i>prolonged</i> solitary confinement and sets clear limits, oversight, and due-process rules for any use. <br> - + <b>Q2: “Does this make prisons less safe for staff?”</b> TL;DR: No—HB35 keeps exceptions for imminent threats and requires documentation; it’s about targeted use, not “never.” - <br> + - <b>Q3: “What changes day-to-day?”</b> TL;DR: Frequent reviews, rapid medical/mental health checks, real programming/out-of-cell time, and written accountability when isolation is used. + <br> - + <b>Q3: “What changes day-to-day?”</b> TL;DR: Frequent reviews, rapid medical/mental health checks, real programming/out-of-cell time, and written accountability when isolation is used. - <br> + - <b>Q4: “Can DOC just use ‘lockdowns’ instead?”</b> TL;DR: The bill defines lockdown and regulates it, and the requested amendment strengthens this further by applying the same time limits to lockdown explicitly. + <br> - + <b>Q4: “Can DOC just use ‘lockdowns’ instead?”</b> TL;DR: The bill defines lockdown and regulates it, and the requested amendment strengthens this further by applying the same time limits to lockdown explicitly. - <br> + - + <br> - === Q1: “What does the bill aim to accomplish?” === + - <b>Answer you can use:</b> HB35 ends prolonged solitary confinement by setting clear time limits and requiring real oversight—regular reviews, rapid medical and mental health evaluations, documentation, and in-person due process when isolation continues. + === Q1: “What does the bill aim to accomplish?” === - + <b>Answer you can use:</b> HB35 ends prolonged solitary confinement by setting clear time limits and requiring real oversight—regular reviews, rapid medical and mental health evaluations, documentation, and in-person due process when isolation continues. - <br> + - + <br> - === Q2: “How often is placement reviewed?” === + - <b>Answer you can use:</b> Placement is reviewed frequently, including a required 48-hour review cycle with written documentation explaining why less restrictive settings were not used. + === Q2: “How often is placement reviewed?” === - + <b>Answer you can use:</b> Placement is reviewed frequently, including a required 48-hour review cycle with written documentation explaining why less restrictive settings were not used. - <br> + - + <br> - === Q3: “What health protections are required?” === + - <b>Answer you can use:</b> HB35 requires medical and mental health evaluations by certified professionals within one working day of placement in restorative housing or isolated confinement (with limited exceptions). + === Q3: “What health protections are required?” === - + <b>Answer you can use:</b> HB35 requires medical and mental health evaluations by certified professionals within one working day of placement in restorative housing or isolated confinement (with limited exceptions). - <br> + - + <br> - === Q4: “Does this stop people from getting programming or recreation?” === + - <b>Answer you can use:</b> No—the bill requires at least four hours of out-of-cell programming or congregate activity daily, plus at least one hour of congregate recreation unless exceptional safety circumstances apply. + === Q4: “Does this stop people from getting programming or recreation?” === - + <b>Answer you can use:</b> No—the bill requires at least four hours of out-of-cell programming or congregate activity daily, plus at least one hour of congregate recreation unless exceptional safety circumstances apply. - <br> + - + <br> - === Q5: “What stops indefinite ‘lockdowns’?” === + - <b>Answer you can use:</b> Lockdowns that interrupt programming must have a specific documented security purpose, must end as soon as the purpose is served, are time-limited, require approvals to extend or repeat, and must be documented and published. + === Q5: “What stops indefinite ‘lockdowns’?” === - + <b>Answer you can use:</b> Lockdowns that interrupt programming must have a specific documented security purpose, must end as soon as the purpose is served, are time-limited, require approvals to extend or repeat, and must be documented and published. - <hr> + - + <hr> - == Additional Information == + - <b>1. Definitions are the enforcement backbone</b> + == Additional Information == - • The bill defines isolated confinement and lockdown by hours-per-day and loss of programming, so policy can’t be evaded by unit names. + <b>1. Definitions are the enforcement backbone</b> - + • The bill defines isolated confinement and lockdown by hours-per-day and loss of programming, so policy can’t be evaded by unit names. - <b>Policy implication:</b> Regulates conditions, not labels. + - + <b>Policy implication:</b> Regulates conditions, not labels. - <br> + - + <br> - <b>2. The “less restrictive first” rule targets protective-custody misuse</b> + - • For “own protection” placements, the facility must use less restrictive options first, including transfers or special-purpose housing for similarly threatened individuals, unless infeasible. + <b>2. The “less restrictive first” rule targets protective-custody misuse</b> - + • For “own protection” placements, the facility must use less restrictive options first, including transfers or special-purpose housing for similarly threatened individuals, unless infeasible. - <b>Policy implication:</b> Safety without defaulting to isolation. + - + <b>Policy implication:</b> Safety without defaulting to isolation. - <br> + - + <br> - <b>3. Reviews + documentation create accountability</b> + - • Requires regular reviews, documentation in the institutional file, notice up the chain, and formal in-person reviews with appeal rights. + <b>3. Reviews + documentation create accountability</b> - + • Requires regular reviews, documentation in the institutional file, notice up the chain, and formal in-person reviews with appeal rights. - <b>Policy implication:</b> Isolation becomes a documented exception, not a routine. + - + <b>Policy implication:</b> Isolation becomes a documented exception, not a routine. - <br> + - + <br> - <b>4. Lockdown limits matter because lockdown can function like solitary</b> + - • The bill regulates lockdowns that interrupt programming and requires publication of documentation. + <b>4. Lockdown limits matter because lockdown can function like solitary</b> - + • The bill regulates lockdowns that interrupt programming and requires publication of documentation. - <b>Policy implication:</b> Prevents “unit-wide solitary” from becoming the workaround. + - + <b>Policy implication:</b> Prevents “unit-wide solitary” from becoming the workaround. - [[Category:2026 Session]] + + [[Category:2026 Session]]
2026-01-22 07:16:59
Edited by: 74.110.183.75
Edited by: 74.110.183.75
= HB35 Restorative housing and isolated confinement; restrictions on use. = == Status == [https://house.vga.virginia.gov/subcommittees/H15002/agendas/5187 Public Safety | Subcommittee #2 — agenda] <hr> == Overview == === Summary as Introduced === <b>Restorative housing and isolated confinement; restrictions on use.</b> Prohibits the use of isolated confinement, defined in the bill, in state correctional facilities, subject to certain exceptions. The bill requires that before placing an incarcerated person in restorative housing or isolated confinement for his own protection, the facility administrator shall place an incarcerated person in a less-restrictive setting, including by transferring such person to another institution or to a special-purpose housing unit for incarcerated persons who face similar threats. The bill requires that if an incarcerated person is placed in restorative housing or isolated confinement, such placement shall be reviewed every 48 hours and the facility administrator shall ensure that the incarcerated person receives a medical and mental health evaluation from certified medical and mental health professionals within one working day of placement in restorative housing or any form of isolated confinement. The bill also requires the facility administrator to notify the regional administrator in writing that an incarcerated person was placed in restorative housing or isolated confinement within 24 hours of such placement. Finally, the bill requires that formal reviews of an incarcerated person's placement in any form of isolated confinement shall be held in such person's presence, inform him of any reasons administrative officials believe isolated confinement remains necessary, and give the incarcerated person an opportunity to respond to those reasons, and a formal ruling shall be provided to the incarcerated individual within 24 hours. <hr> === Patrons === ==== House Patrons ==== • Joshua G. Cole (chief patron) - • Patrick A. Hope + • Patrick A. Hope (chief-co-patron) - • Sam Rasoul + • Sam Rasoul (co-patron • Holly Seibold ==== Senate Patrons ==== • Lamont Bagby <hr> == Language == The language of [https://lis.virginia.gov/bill-details/20261/HB35/text/HB35 HB35] can be viewed here. <hr> == Proposed Amendment == === Amendment Offered for Consideration (requested for subcommittee) === ==== Add “Lockdown” throughout relevant provisions ==== Amend the bill to explicitly include “lockdown” alongside “solitary confinement/isolated confinement” and “restorative housing” in all relevant sections, to prevent facilities from using unit-wide lockdown practices as a functional substitute for individual isolated confinement. ==== Strengthen the time-limit clause (close the cumulative-days gap) ==== Replace the current time-limit phrasing with: “No individual shall be held in solitary confinement, lockdown, or restorative housing for more than 15 consecutive days, nor 15 days in any 60-day period.” <b>Purpose of the amendment:</b> The introduced text already uses “15 consecutive days…in any 60-day period,” but stakeholders have raised concerns that “consecutive” language can be worked around by cycling people in and out (or shifting to lockdown practices) without ever hitting a “consecutive” threshold. The amendment makes the limit explicitly <i>both</i> consecutive and cumulative. - <hr> + Again, the intent is to prohibit the outcome of prolonged, solitary isolation, not to jeopardize the safety of anyone, but to ensure the constraint of this practice. - == Opening Statement == + <hr> - === House Subcommittee Statement === + == Opening Statement == - <blockquote> + - ====Notes on delivery: ==== + === House Subcommittee Statement === - <mark> <b>bold</b>—emphasize, increase volume; </mark> + <blockquote> - <mark> <i>italicized</i>—stressed, extended pronunciation, sing-songy; </mark> + ====Notes on delivery: ==== - <mark> <i><b>bold italicized</i></b>—climactic, stressed and emphatic; </mark> + <mark> <b>bold</b>—emphasize, increase volume; </mark> - <mark> • bulleted—drum-like repetition, think of MLK's "I Have a Dream," "I have a dream that..." repeated for emphasis; </mark> + <mark> <i>italicized</i>—stressed, extended pronunciation, sing-songy; </mark> - <mark> — a half pause, slight build-up; </mark> + <mark> <i><b>bold italicized</i></b>—climactic, stressed and emphatic; </mark> - <mark> — — a full pause, major build-up. <mark> + <mark> • bulleted—drum-like repetition, think of MLK's "I Have a Dream," "I have a dream that..." repeated for emphasis; </mark> - + <mark> — a half pause, slight build-up; </mark> - <mark><b>VIBE:</b> think <i>"victory lap;"</i> sell the idea that this bill is a done deal and that doubters should get on board while they still have a chance to be on the right side of history. This is a <b><i>pathos</i></b> and <i><b>ethos</i></b> argument, not <i>logos</i>; lean on expert testimonies for questions of <i>logic</i>. - Eric</mark> + <mark> — — a full pause, major build-up. <mark> - </blockquote> + - + <mark><b>VIBE:</b> think <i>"victory lap;"</i> sell the idea that this bill is a done deal and that doubters should get on board while they still have a chance to be on the right side of history. This is a <b><i>pathos</i></b> and <i><b>ethos</i></b> argument, not <i>logos</i>; lean on expert testimonies for questions of <i>logic</i>. - Eric</mark> - <br> + </blockquote> - Mister Chair, members of the subcommittee— + <br> - <i>This is not our first time here.</i> + Mister Chair, members of the subcommittee— - For <b>two straight years</b>, the General Assembly has passed this reform — — + <i>This is not our first time here.</i> - <b>In 2024</b>, I gave you a sermon — — and then we passed <i>HB 1244.</i> + For <b>two straight years</b>, the General Assembly has passed this reform — — - <b>In 2025</b>, • my sister, • my friend, • and my <i>esteemed colleague</i>, <b>Delegate Karen Keys-Gamarra</b>, took up the torch — — and then we passed <i>HB 2647.</i> + <b>In 2024</b>, I gave you a sermon — — and then we passed <i>HB 1244.</i> - Twice, this body has said—<i><b>clearly</b></i>—that we are ready to turn the page on solitary confinement. + <b>In 2025</b>, • my sister, • my friend, • and my <i>esteemed colleague</i>, <b>Delegate Karen Keys-Gamarra</b>, took up the torch — — and then we passed <i>HB 2647.</i> - And after two straight years, nobody can pretend this is new... + Twice, this body has said—<i><b>clearly</b></i>—that we are ready to turn the page on solitary confinement. - • You know this bill. + And after two straight years, nobody can pretend this is new... - • You know this issue. + - • You know how overdue this change is — — + • You know this bill. - + • You know this issue. - Mister Chair, members of the committee, this is not our first time here, <b>BUT it will be our last</b>—because this year <i>we will make history.</i> + • You know how overdue this change is — — - And what is so great about this year is that we all have a <i>chance</i>—a <i>chance</i> to be part of making history. + Mister Chair, members of the committee, this is not our first time here, <b>BUT it will be our last</b>—because this year <i>we will make history.</i> - If you're still on the fence, I want you to look <i>forward</i> into the future with me. <b>Don't let the past hold you back — —</b> + And what is so great about this year is that we all have a <i>chance</i>—a <i>chance</i> to be part of making history. - • Because when we look back in 25 years, <b>we will know this legislation was the right thing to do.</b> + If you're still on the fence, I want you to look <i>forward</i> into the future with me. <b>Don't let the past hold you back — —</b> - • Because when we look back in 50 years, <b>we will know this legislation was the right thing to do.</b> + • Because when we look back in 25 years, <b>we will know this legislation was the right thing to do.</b> - • Because when we look back in <b>one-hundred</b> years, <i><b>we will know this legislation was the right thing to do!</b></i> + • Because when we look back in 50 years, <b>we will know this legislation was the right thing to do.</b> - Today—I hope everyone in this room joins us in doing the <i><b>right thing.</b></i> + • Because when we look back in <b>one-hundred</b> years, <i><b>we will know this legislation was the right thing to do!</b></i> - We know the counterarguments. We know the questions. And we're happy to answer them. <b>But</b> I encourage us to <i>listen</i>—to listen to the <i>testimonies</i>—to listen to the voices who are ready for change, so that we may be reminded—again—<i>just how overdue this legislation is.</i> + Today—I hope everyone in this room joins us in doing the <i><b>right thing.</b></i> - Thank you, Mister Chair and members of the committee. I hope you report this bill favorably to full committee. + We know the counterarguments. We know the questions. And we're happy to answer them. <b>But</b> I encourage us to <i>listen</i>—to listen to the <i>testimonies</i>—to listen to the voices who are ready for change, so that we may be reminded—again—<i>just how overdue this legislation is.</i> - <hr> + Thank you, Mister Chair and members of the committee. I hope you report this bill favorably to full committee. - == Support and Opposition == + <hr> - === Support === + == Support and Opposition == - • ACLU People Power Fairfax + - • Bridging The Gap In Virginia + === Support === - • Charlottesville Chapter National Organization for Women + • ACLU People Power Fairfax - • Coalition for Justice + • Bridging The Gap In Virginia - • EJUSA Evangelical Network + • Charlottesville Chapter National Organization for Women - • Fighting 4 Freedom + • Coalition for Justice - • Greater Washington (JCRC) + • EJUSA Evangelical Network - • Inmate Support Virginia + • Fighting 4 Freedom - • Interfaith Action for Human Rights (IAHR) + • Greater Washington (JCRC) - • HALT Solitary + • Inmate Support Virginia - • Jewish Community Relations Council of Just Future Project + • Interfaith Action for Human Rights (IAHR) - • Justice & Witness Action Network- VA + • HALT Solitary - • United Church of Christ Central Atlantic Conference + • Jewish Community Relations Council of Just Future Project - • LatinoJustice PRLDEF + • Justice & Witness Action Network- VA - • NAACP Loudoun + • United Church of Christ Central Atlantic Conference - • National Association of Social Workers + • LatinoJustice PRLDEF - • National Association of Social Workers, Virginia Chapter + • NAACP Loudoun - • National Religious Campaign Against Torture + • National Association of Social Workers - • No Left Turns + • National Association of Social Workers, Virginia Chapter - • Resource Information Help for the Disadvantaged and Disenfranchised (RIHD) + • National Religious Campaign Against Torture - • RISE for Youth + • No Left Turns - • RVA Health Alliance for Social Justice and Equity + • Resource Information Help for the Disadvantaged and Disenfranchised (RIHD) - • Social Action Linking Together (SALT) + • RISE for Youth - • Social Workers and Allies Against Solitary Confinement + • RVA Health Alliance for Social Justice and Equity - • The Humanization Project + • Social Action Linking Together (SALT) - • The Sentencing Project + • Social Workers and Allies Against Solitary Confinement - • Unitarian Universalist Legislative Ministry of Virginia + • The Humanization Project - • Unlock the Box Campaign + • The Sentencing Project - • Virginia CURE + • Unitarian Universalist Legislative Ministry of Virginia - • Virginia Defenders for Freedom, Justice & Equality + • Unlock the Box Campaign - • Virginia Justice Democrats + • Virginia CURE - • Virginia Justice for Life + • Virginia Defenders for Freedom, Justice & Equality - • Virginia Justice Alliance + • Virginia Justice Democrats - • Virginia Prisons Accountability Committee + • Virginia Justice for Life - • Virginia Prisoner Of Conscience + • Virginia Justice Alliance - • Virginia Prison Justice Network + • Virginia Prisons Accountability Committee - • WJCC Coalition for Community Justice + • Virginia Prisoner Of Conscience - • 40 Strong + • Virginia Prison Justice Network - + • WJCC Coalition for Community Justice - === Opposition === + • 40 Strong - • (to be updated) + - + === Opposition === - === No Recommendation / Neutral === + • (to be updated) - • (to be updated) + - + === No Recommendation / Neutral === - === No Position Provided === + • (to be updated) - • Department of Corrections + - + === No Position Provided === - <hr> + • Department of Corrections - == Fiscal Impact == + <hr> - No fiscal impact statement is posted for HB35. The Department of Corrections may try to bring forward a claim for a fiscal impact; however, LIS and Appropriations Committee have currently not provided any impact statement. + - + == Fiscal Impact == - <hr> + No fiscal impact statement is posted for HB35. The Department of Corrections may try to bring forward a claim for a fiscal impact; however, LIS and Appropriations Committee have currently not provided any impact statement. - == Possible Questions == + <hr> - === TL;DR === + == Possible Questions == - <b>Q1: “Does this end solitary confinement in Virginia?”</b> TL;DR: No—it ends <i>prolonged</i> solitary confinement and sets clear limits, oversight, and due-process rules for any use. <br> + - <b>Q2: “Does this make prisons less safe for staff?”</b> TL;DR: No—HB35 keeps exceptions for imminent threats and requires documentation; it’s about targeted use, not “never.” + === TL;DR === - + <b>Q1: “Does this end solitary confinement in Virginia?”</b> TL;DR: No—it ends <i>prolonged</i> solitary confinement and sets clear limits, oversight, and due-process rules for any use. <br> - <br> + <b>Q2: “Does this make prisons less safe for staff?”</b> TL;DR: No—HB35 keeps exceptions for imminent threats and requires documentation; it’s about targeted use, not “never.” - <b>Q3: “What changes day-to-day?”</b> TL;DR: Frequent reviews, rapid medical/mental health checks, real programming/out-of-cell time, and written accountability when isolation is used. + - + <br> - <br> + <b>Q3: “What changes day-to-day?”</b> TL;DR: Frequent reviews, rapid medical/mental health checks, real programming/out-of-cell time, and written accountability when isolation is used. - <b>Q4: “Can DOC just use ‘lockdowns’ instead?”</b> TL;DR: The bill defines lockdown and regulates it, and the requested amendment strengthens this further by applying the same time limits to lockdown explicitly. + - + <br> - <br> + <b>Q4: “Can DOC just use ‘lockdowns’ instead?”</b> TL;DR: The bill defines lockdown and regulates it, and the requested amendment strengthens this further by applying the same time limits to lockdown explicitly. - === Q1: “What does the bill aim to accomplish?” === + <br> - <b>Answer you can use:</b> HB35 ends prolonged solitary confinement by setting clear time limits and requiring real oversight—regular reviews, rapid medical and mental health evaluations, documentation, and in-person due process when isolation continues. + - + === Q1: “What does the bill aim to accomplish?” === - <br> + <b>Answer you can use:</b> HB35 ends prolonged solitary confinement by setting clear time limits and requiring real oversight—regular reviews, rapid medical and mental health evaluations, documentation, and in-person due process when isolation continues. - === Q2: “How often is placement reviewed?” === + <br> - <b>Answer you can use:</b> Placement is reviewed frequently, including a required 48-hour review cycle with written documentation explaining why less restrictive settings were not used. + - + === Q2: “How often is placement reviewed?” === - <br> + <b>Answer you can use:</b> Placement is reviewed frequently, including a required 48-hour review cycle with written documentation explaining why less restrictive settings were not used. - === Q3: “What health protections are required?” === + <br> - <b>Answer you can use:</b> HB35 requires medical and mental health evaluations by certified professionals within one working day of placement in restorative housing or isolated confinement (with limited exceptions). + - + === Q3: “What health protections are required?” === - <br> + <b>Answer you can use:</b> HB35 requires medical and mental health evaluations by certified professionals within one working day of placement in restorative housing or isolated confinement (with limited exceptions). - === Q4: “Does this stop people from getting programming or recreation?” === + <br> - <b>Answer you can use:</b> No—the bill requires at least four hours of out-of-cell programming or congregate activity daily, plus at least one hour of congregate recreation unless exceptional safety circumstances apply. + - + === Q4: “Does this stop people from getting programming or recreation?” === - <br> + <b>Answer you can use:</b> No—the bill requires at least four hours of out-of-cell programming or congregate activity daily, plus at least one hour of congregate recreation unless exceptional safety circumstances apply. - === Q5: “What stops indefinite ‘lockdowns’?” === + <br> - <b>Answer you can use:</b> Lockdowns that interrupt programming must have a specific documented security purpose, must end as soon as the purpose is served, are time-limited, require approvals to extend or repeat, and must be documented and published. + - + === Q5: “What stops indefinite ‘lockdowns’?” === - <hr> + <b>Answer you can use:</b> Lockdowns that interrupt programming must have a specific documented security purpose, must end as soon as the purpose is served, are time-limited, require approvals to extend or repeat, and must be documented and published. - == Additional Information == + <hr> - <b>1. Definitions are the enforcement backbone</b> + - • The bill defines isolated confinement and lockdown by hours-per-day and loss of programming, so policy can’t be evaded by unit names. + == Additional Information == - + <b>1. Definitions are the enforcement backbone</b> - + • The bill defines isolated confinement and lockdown by hours-per-day and loss of programming, so policy can’t be evaded by unit names. - <b>Policy implication:</b> Regulates conditions, not labels. + - <br> + <b>Policy implication:</b> Regulates conditions, not labels. - <b>2. The “less restrictive first” rule targets protective-custody misuse</b> + <br> - • For “own protection” placements, the facility must use less restrictive options first, including transfers or special-purpose housing for similarly threatened individuals, unless infeasible. + - + <b>2. The “less restrictive first” rule targets protective-custody misuse</b> - <b>Policy implication:</b> Safety without defaulting to isolation. + • For “own protection” placements, the facility must use less restrictive options first, including transfers or special-purpose housing for similarly threatened individuals, unless infeasible. - <br> + <b>Policy implication:</b> Safety without defaulting to isolation. - <b>3. Reviews + documentation create accountability</b> + <br> - • Requires regular reviews, documentation in the institutional file, notice up the chain, and formal in-person reviews with appeal rights. + - + <b>3. Reviews + documentation create accountability</b> - <b>Policy implication:</b> Isolation becomes a documented exception, not a routine. + • Requires regular reviews, documentation in the institutional file, notice up the chain, and formal in-person reviews with appeal rights. - <br> + <b>Policy implication:</b> Isolation becomes a documented exception, not a routine. - <b>4. Lockdown limits matter because lockdown can function like solitary</b> + <br> - • The bill regulates lockdowns that interrupt programming and requires publication of documentation. + - + <b>4. Lockdown limits matter because lockdown can function like solitary</b> - + • The bill regulates lockdowns that interrupt programming and requires publication of documentation. - <b>Policy implication:</b> Prevents “unit-wide solitary” from becoming the workaround. + - [[Category:2026 Session]] + <b>Policy implication:</b> Prevents “unit-wide solitary” from becoming the workaround. + + [[Category:2026 Session]]
2026-01-22 07:14:46
Edited by: 74.110.183.75
Edited by: 74.110.183.75
= HB35 Restorative housing and isolated confinement; restrictions on use. = == Status == [https://house.vga.virginia.gov/subcommittees/H15002/agendas/5187 Public Safety | Subcommittee #2 — agenda] <hr> == Overview == === Summary as Introduced === <b>Restorative housing and isolated confinement; restrictions on use.</b> Prohibits the use of isolated confinement, defined in the bill, in state correctional facilities, subject to certain exceptions. The bill requires that before placing an incarcerated person in restorative housing or isolated confinement for his own protection, the facility administrator shall place an incarcerated person in a less-restrictive setting, including by transferring such person to another institution or to a special-purpose housing unit for incarcerated persons who face similar threats. The bill requires that if an incarcerated person is placed in restorative housing or isolated confinement, such placement shall be reviewed every 48 hours and the facility administrator shall ensure that the incarcerated person receives a medical and mental health evaluation from certified medical and mental health professionals within one working day of placement in restorative housing or any form of isolated confinement. The bill also requires the facility administrator to notify the regional administrator in writing that an incarcerated person was placed in restorative housing or isolated confinement within 24 hours of such placement. Finally, the bill requires that formal reviews of an incarcerated person's placement in any form of isolated confinement shall be held in such person's presence, inform him of any reasons administrative officials believe isolated confinement remains necessary, and give the incarcerated person an opportunity to respond to those reasons, and a formal ruling shall be provided to the incarcerated individual within 24 hours. <hr> === Patrons === ==== House Patrons ==== • Joshua G. Cole (chief patron) • Patrick A. Hope • Sam Rasoul • Holly Seibold ==== Senate Patrons ==== - • Bagby + • Lamont Bagby <hr> == Language == The language of [https://lis.virginia.gov/bill-details/20261/HB35/text/HB35 HB35] can be viewed here. <hr> == Proposed Amendment == === Amendment Offered for Consideration (requested for subcommittee) === ==== Add “Lockdown” throughout relevant provisions ==== Amend the bill to explicitly include “lockdown” alongside “solitary confinement/isolated confinement” and “restorative housing” in all relevant sections, to prevent facilities from using unit-wide lockdown practices as a functional substitute for individual isolated confinement. ==== Strengthen the time-limit clause (close the cumulative-days gap) ==== Replace the current time-limit phrasing with: “No individual shall be held in solitary confinement, lockdown, or restorative housing for more than 15 consecutive days, nor 15 days in any 60-day period.” <b>Purpose of the amendment:</b> The introduced text already uses “15 consecutive days…in any 60-day period,” but stakeholders have raised concerns that “consecutive” language can be worked around by cycling people in and out (or shifting to lockdown practices) without ever hitting a “consecutive” threshold. The amendment makes the limit explicitly <i>both</i> consecutive and cumulative. <hr> == Opening Statement == === House Subcommittee Statement === <blockquote> ====Notes on delivery: ==== <mark> <b>bold</b>—emphasize, increase volume; </mark> <mark> <i>italicized</i>—stressed, extended pronunciation, sing-songy; </mark> <mark> <i><b>bold italicized</i></b>—climactic, stressed and emphatic; </mark> <mark> • bulleted—drum-like repetition, think of MLK's "I Have a Dream," "I have a dream that..." repeated for emphasis; </mark> <mark> — a half pause, slight build-up; </mark> <mark> — — a full pause, major build-up. <mark> <mark><b>VIBE:</b> think <i>"victory lap;"</i> sell the idea that this bill is a done deal and that doubters should get on board while they still have a chance to be on the right side of history. This is a <b><i>pathos</i></b> and <i><b>ethos</i></b> argument, not <i>logos</i>; lean on expert testimonies for questions of <i>logic</i>. - Eric</mark> </blockquote> <br> Mister Chair, members of the subcommittee— <i>This is not our first time here.</i> For <b>two straight years</b>, the General Assembly has passed this reform — — <b>In 2024</b>, I gave you a sermon — — and then we passed <i>HB 1244.</i> <b>In 2025</b>, • my sister, • my friend, • and my <i>esteemed colleague</i>, <b>Delegate Karen Keys-Gamarra</b>, took up the torch — — and then we passed <i>HB 2647.</i> Twice, this body has said—<i><b>clearly</b></i>—that we are ready to turn the page on solitary confinement. And after two straight years, nobody can pretend this is new... • You know this bill. • You know this issue. • You know how overdue this change is — — Mister Chair, members of the committee, this is not our first time here, <b>BUT it will be our last</b>—because this year <i>we will make history.</i> And what is so great about this year is that we all have a <i>chance</i>—a <i>chance</i> to be part of making history. If you're still on the fence, I want you to look <i>forward</i> into the future with me. <b>Don't let the past hold you back — —</b> • Because when we look back in 25 years, <b>we will know this legislation was the right thing to do.</b> • Because when we look back in 50 years, <b>we will know this legislation was the right thing to do.</b> • Because when we look back in <b>one-hundred</b> years, <i><b>we will know this legislation was the right thing to do!</b></i> Today—I hope everyone in this room joins us in doing the <i><b>right thing.</b></i> We know the counterarguments. We know the questions. And we're happy to answer them. <b>But</b> I encourage us to <i>listen</i>—to listen to the <i>testimonies</i>—to listen to the voices who are ready for change, so that we may be reminded—again—<i>just how overdue this legislation is.</i> Thank you, Mister Chair and members of the committee. I hope you report this bill favorably to full committee. <hr> == Support and Opposition == === Support === • ACLU People Power Fairfax • Bridging The Gap In Virginia • Charlottesville Chapter National Organization for Women • Coalition for Justice • EJUSA Evangelical Network • Fighting 4 Freedom • Greater Washington (JCRC) • Inmate Support Virginia • Interfaith Action for Human Rights (IAHR) • HALT Solitary • Jewish Community Relations Council of Just Future Project • Justice & Witness Action Network- VA • United Church of Christ Central Atlantic Conference • LatinoJustice PRLDEF • NAACP Loudoun • National Association of Social Workers • National Association of Social Workers, Virginia Chapter • National Religious Campaign Against Torture • No Left Turns • Resource Information Help for the Disadvantaged and Disenfranchised (RIHD) • RISE for Youth • RVA Health Alliance for Social Justice and Equity • Social Action Linking Together (SALT) • Social Workers and Allies Against Solitary Confinement • The Humanization Project • The Sentencing Project • Unitarian Universalist Legislative Ministry of Virginia • Unlock the Box Campaign • Virginia CURE • Virginia Defenders for Freedom, Justice & Equality • Virginia Justice Democrats • Virginia Justice for Life • Virginia Justice Alliance • Virginia Prisons Accountability Committee • Virginia Prisoner Of Conscience • Virginia Prison Justice Network • WJCC Coalition for Community Justice • 40 Strong === Opposition === • (to be updated) === No Recommendation / Neutral === • (to be updated) === No Position Provided === • Department of Corrections <hr> == Fiscal Impact == No fiscal impact statement is posted for HB35. The Department of Corrections may try to bring forward a claim for a fiscal impact; however, LIS and Appropriations Committee have currently not provided any impact statement. <hr> == Possible Questions == === TL;DR === <b>Q1: “Does this end solitary confinement in Virginia?”</b> TL;DR: No—it ends <i>prolonged</i> solitary confinement and sets clear limits, oversight, and due-process rules for any use. <br> <b>Q2: “Does this make prisons less safe for staff?”</b> TL;DR: No—HB35 keeps exceptions for imminent threats and requires documentation; it’s about targeted use, not “never.” <br> <b>Q3: “What changes day-to-day?”</b> TL;DR: Frequent reviews, rapid medical/mental health checks, real programming/out-of-cell time, and written accountability when isolation is used. <br> <b>Q4: “Can DOC just use ‘lockdowns’ instead?”</b> TL;DR: The bill defines lockdown and regulates it, and the requested amendment strengthens this further by applying the same time limits to lockdown explicitly. <br> === Q1: “What does the bill aim to accomplish?” === <b>Answer you can use:</b> HB35 ends prolonged solitary confinement by setting clear time limits and requiring real oversight—regular reviews, rapid medical and mental health evaluations, documentation, and in-person due process when isolation continues. <br> === Q2: “How often is placement reviewed?” === <b>Answer you can use:</b> Placement is reviewed frequently, including a required 48-hour review cycle with written documentation explaining why less restrictive settings were not used. <br> === Q3: “What health protections are required?” === <b>Answer you can use:</b> HB35 requires medical and mental health evaluations by certified professionals within one working day of placement in restorative housing or isolated confinement (with limited exceptions). <br> === Q4: “Does this stop people from getting programming or recreation?” === <b>Answer you can use:</b> No—the bill requires at least four hours of out-of-cell programming or congregate activity daily, plus at least one hour of congregate recreation unless exceptional safety circumstances apply. <br> === Q5: “What stops indefinite ‘lockdowns’?” === <b>Answer you can use:</b> Lockdowns that interrupt programming must have a specific documented security purpose, must end as soon as the purpose is served, are time-limited, require approvals to extend or repeat, and must be documented and published. <hr> == Additional Information == <b>1. Definitions are the enforcement backbone</b> • The bill defines isolated confinement and lockdown by hours-per-day and loss of programming, so policy can’t be evaded by unit names. <b>Policy implication:</b> Regulates conditions, not labels. <br> <b>2. The “less restrictive first” rule targets protective-custody misuse</b> • For “own protection” placements, the facility must use less restrictive options first, including transfers or special-purpose housing for similarly threatened individuals, unless infeasible. <b>Policy implication:</b> Safety without defaulting to isolation. <br> <b>3. Reviews + documentation create accountability</b> • Requires regular reviews, documentation in the institutional file, notice up the chain, and formal in-person reviews with appeal rights. <b>Policy implication:</b> Isolation becomes a documented exception, not a routine. <br> <b>4. Lockdown limits matter because lockdown can function like solitary</b> • The bill regulates lockdowns that interrupt programming and requires publication of documentation. <b>Policy implication:</b> Prevents “unit-wide solitary” from becoming the workaround. [[Category:2026 Session]]
2026-01-22 07:08:40
Edited by: 74.110.183.75
Edited by: 74.110.183.75
= HB35 Restorative housing and isolated confinement; restrictions on use. = == Status == [https://house.vga.virginia.gov/subcommittees/H15002/agendas/5187 Public Safety | Subcommittee #2 — agenda] <hr> == Overview == === Summary as Introduced === <b>Restorative housing and isolated confinement; restrictions on use.</b> Prohibits the use of isolated confinement, defined in the bill, in state correctional facilities, subject to certain exceptions. The bill requires that before placing an incarcerated person in restorative housing or isolated confinement for his own protection, the facility administrator shall place an incarcerated person in a less-restrictive setting, including by transferring such person to another institution or to a special-purpose housing unit for incarcerated persons who face similar threats. The bill requires that if an incarcerated person is placed in restorative housing or isolated confinement, such placement shall be reviewed every 48 hours and the facility administrator shall ensure that the incarcerated person receives a medical and mental health evaluation from certified medical and mental health professionals within one working day of placement in restorative housing or any form of isolated confinement. The bill also requires the facility administrator to notify the regional administrator in writing that an incarcerated person was placed in restorative housing or isolated confinement within 24 hours of such placement. Finally, the bill requires that formal reviews of an incarcerated person's placement in any form of isolated confinement shall be held in such person's presence, inform him of any reasons administrative officials believe isolated confinement remains necessary, and give the incarcerated person an opportunity to respond to those reasons, and a formal ruling shall be provided to the incarcerated individual within 24 hours. <hr> === Patrons === ==== House Patrons ==== • Joshua G. Cole (chief patron) • Patrick A. Hope • Sam Rasoul • Holly Seibold ==== Senate Patrons ==== • Bagby <hr> == Language == The language of [https://lis.virginia.gov/bill-details/20261/HB35/text/HB35 HB35] can be viewed here. <hr> == Proposed Amendment == === Amendment Offered for Consideration (requested for subcommittee) === ==== Add “Lockdown” throughout relevant provisions ==== Amend the bill to explicitly include “lockdown” alongside “solitary confinement/isolated confinement” and “restorative housing” in all relevant sections, to prevent facilities from using unit-wide lockdown practices as a functional substitute for individual isolated confinement. ==== Strengthen the time-limit clause (close the cumulative-days gap) ==== Replace the current time-limit phrasing with: “No individual shall be held in solitary confinement, lockdown, or restorative housing for more than 15 consecutive days, nor 15 days in any 60-day period.” <b>Purpose of the amendment:</b> The introduced text already uses “15 consecutive days…in any 60-day period,” but stakeholders have raised concerns that “consecutive” language can be worked around by cycling people in and out (or shifting to lockdown practices) without ever hitting a “consecutive” threshold. The amendment makes the limit explicitly <i>both</i> consecutive and cumulative. <hr> == Opening Statement == === House Subcommittee Statement === <blockquote> ====Notes on delivery: ==== <mark> <b>bold</b>—emphasize, increase volume; </mark> <mark> <i>italicized</i>—stressed, extended pronunciation, sing-songy; </mark> <mark> <i><b>bold italicized</i></b>—climactic, stressed and emphatic; </mark> <mark> • bulleted—drum-like repetition, think of MLK's "I Have a Dream," "I have a dream that..." repeated for emphasis; </mark> <mark> — a half pause, slight build-up; </mark> <mark> — — a full pause, major build-up. <mark> <mark><b>VIBE:</b> think <i>"victory lap;"</i> sell the idea that this bill is a done deal and that doubters should get on board while they still have a chance to be on the right side of history. This is a <b><i>pathos</i></b> and <i><b>ethos</i></b> argument, not <i>logos</i>; lean on expert testimonies for questions of <i>logic</i>. - Eric</mark> </blockquote> <br> Mister Chair, members of the subcommittee— <i>This is not our first time here.</i> For <b>two straight years</b>, the General Assembly has passed this reform — — <b>In 2024</b>, I gave you a sermon — — and then we passed <i>HB 1244.</i> <b>In 2025</b>, • my sister, • my friend, • and my <i>esteemed colleague</i>, <b>Delegate Karen Keys-Gamarra</b>, took up the torch — — and then we passed <i>HB 2647.</i> Twice, this body has said—<i><b>clearly</b></i>—that we are ready to turn the page on solitary confinement. And after two straight years, nobody can pretend this is new... • You know this bill. • You know this issue. • You know how overdue this change is — — Mister Chair, members of the committee, this is not our first time here, <b>BUT it will be our last</b>—because this year <i>we will make history.</i> And what is so great about this year is that we all have a <i>chance</i>—a <i>chance</i> to be part of making history. If you're still on the fence, I want you to look <i>forward</i> into the future with me. <b>Don't let the past hold you back — —</b> • Because when we look back in 25 years, <b>we will know this legislation was the right thing to do.</b> • Because when we look back in 50 years, <b>we will know this legislation was the right thing to do.</b> • Because when we look back in <b>one-hundred</b> years, <i><b>we will know this legislation was the right thing to do!</b></i> Today—I hope everyone in this room joins us in doing the <i><b>right thing.</b></i> We know the counterarguments. We know the questions. And we're happy to answer them. <b>But</b> I encourage us to <i>listen</i>—to listen to the <i>testimonies</i>—to listen to the voices who are ready for change, so that we may be reminded—again—<i>just how overdue this legislation is.</i> Thank you, Mister Chair and members of the committee. I hope you report this bill favorably to full committee. <hr> == Support and Opposition == === Support === • ACLU People Power Fairfax • Bridging The Gap In Virginia • Charlottesville Chapter National Organization for Women • Coalition for Justice • EJUSA Evangelical Network • Fighting 4 Freedom • Greater Washington (JCRC) • Inmate Support Virginia • Interfaith Action for Human Rights (IAHR) • HALT Solitary • Jewish Community Relations Council of Just Future Project • Justice & Witness Action Network- VA • United Church of Christ Central Atlantic Conference • LatinoJustice PRLDEF • NAACP Loudoun • National Association of Social Workers • National Association of Social Workers, Virginia Chapter • National Religious Campaign Against Torture • No Left Turns • Resource Information Help for the Disadvantaged and Disenfranchised (RIHD) • RISE for Youth • RVA Health Alliance for Social Justice and Equity • Social Action Linking Together (SALT) • Social Workers and Allies Against Solitary Confinement • The Humanization Project • The Sentencing Project • Unitarian Universalist Legislative Ministry of Virginia • Unlock the Box Campaign • Virginia CURE • Virginia Defenders for Freedom, Justice & Equality • Virginia Justice Democrats • Virginia Justice for Life • Virginia Justice Alliance • Virginia Prisons Accountability Committee • Virginia Prisoner Of Conscience • Virginia Prison Justice Network • WJCC Coalition for Community Justice • 40 Strong === Opposition === • (to be updated) === No Recommendation / Neutral === • (to be updated) === No Position Provided === • Department of Corrections <hr> == Fiscal Impact == - No fiscal impact statement is posted for HB35. + No fiscal impact statement is posted for HB35. The Department of Corrections may try to bring forward a claim for a fiscal impact; however, LIS and Appropriations Committee have currently not provided any impact statement. <hr> == Possible Questions == === TL;DR === <b>Q1: “Does this end solitary confinement in Virginia?”</b> TL;DR: No—it ends <i>prolonged</i> solitary confinement and sets clear limits, oversight, and due-process rules for any use. <br> <b>Q2: “Does this make prisons less safe for staff?”</b> TL;DR: No—HB35 keeps exceptions for imminent threats and requires documentation; it’s about targeted use, not “never.” <br> <b>Q3: “What changes day-to-day?”</b> TL;DR: Frequent reviews, rapid medical/mental health checks, real programming/out-of-cell time, and written accountability when isolation is used. <br> <b>Q4: “Can DOC just use ‘lockdowns’ instead?”</b> TL;DR: The bill defines lockdown and regulates it, and the requested amendment strengthens this further by applying the same time limits to lockdown explicitly. <br> === Q1: “What does the bill aim to accomplish?” === <b>Answer you can use:</b> HB35 ends prolonged solitary confinement by setting clear time limits and requiring real oversight—regular reviews, rapid medical and mental health evaluations, documentation, and in-person due process when isolation continues. <br> === Q2: “How often is placement reviewed?” === <b>Answer you can use:</b> Placement is reviewed frequently, including a required 48-hour review cycle with written documentation explaining why less restrictive settings were not used. <br> === Q3: “What health protections are required?” === <b>Answer you can use:</b> HB35 requires medical and mental health evaluations by certified professionals within one working day of placement in restorative housing or isolated confinement (with limited exceptions). <br> === Q4: “Does this stop people from getting programming or recreation?” === <b>Answer you can use:</b> No—the bill requires at least four hours of out-of-cell programming or congregate activity daily, plus at least one hour of congregate recreation unless exceptional safety circumstances apply. <br> === Q5: “What stops indefinite ‘lockdowns’?” === <b>Answer you can use:</b> Lockdowns that interrupt programming must have a specific documented security purpose, must end as soon as the purpose is served, are time-limited, require approvals to extend or repeat, and must be documented and published. <hr> == Additional Information == <b>1. Definitions are the enforcement backbone</b> • The bill defines isolated confinement and lockdown by hours-per-day and loss of programming, so policy can’t be evaded by unit names. <b>Policy implication:</b> Regulates conditions, not labels. <br> <b>2. The “less restrictive first” rule targets protective-custody misuse</b> • For “own protection” placements, the facility must use less restrictive options first, including transfers or special-purpose housing for similarly threatened individuals, unless infeasible. <b>Policy implication:</b> Safety without defaulting to isolation. <br> <b>3. Reviews + documentation create accountability</b> • Requires regular reviews, documentation in the institutional file, notice up the chain, and formal in-person reviews with appeal rights. <b>Policy implication:</b> Isolation becomes a documented exception, not a routine. <br> <b>4. Lockdown limits matter because lockdown can function like solitary</b> • The bill regulates lockdowns that interrupt programming and requires publication of documentation. <b>Policy implication:</b> Prevents “unit-wide solitary” from becoming the workaround. [[Category:2026 Session]]
2026-01-22 07:08:11
Edited by: 74.110.183.75
Edited by: 74.110.183.75
= HB35 Restorative housing and isolated confinement; restrictions on use. = == Status == [https://house.vga.virginia.gov/subcommittees/H15002/agendas/5187 Public Safety | Subcommittee #2 — agenda] <hr> == Overview == === Summary as Introduced === <b>Restorative housing and isolated confinement; restrictions on use.</b> Prohibits the use of isolated confinement, defined in the bill, in state correctional facilities, subject to certain exceptions. The bill requires that before placing an incarcerated person in restorative housing or isolated confinement for his own protection, the facility administrator shall place an incarcerated person in a less-restrictive setting, including by transferring such person to another institution or to a special-purpose housing unit for incarcerated persons who face similar threats. The bill requires that if an incarcerated person is placed in restorative housing or isolated confinement, such placement shall be reviewed every 48 hours and the facility administrator shall ensure that the incarcerated person receives a medical and mental health evaluation from certified medical and mental health professionals within one working day of placement in restorative housing or any form of isolated confinement. The bill also requires the facility administrator to notify the regional administrator in writing that an incarcerated person was placed in restorative housing or isolated confinement within 24 hours of such placement. Finally, the bill requires that formal reviews of an incarcerated person's placement in any form of isolated confinement shall be held in such person's presence, inform him of any reasons administrative officials believe isolated confinement remains necessary, and give the incarcerated person an opportunity to respond to those reasons, and a formal ruling shall be provided to the incarcerated individual within 24 hours. <hr> === Patrons === ==== House Patrons ==== • Joshua G. Cole (chief patron) • Patrick A. Hope • Sam Rasoul • Holly Seibold ==== Senate Patrons ==== • Bagby <hr> == Language == The language of [https://lis.virginia.gov/bill-details/20261/HB35/text/HB35 HB35] can be viewed here. <hr> == Proposed Amendment == === Amendment Offered for Consideration (requested for subcommittee) === ==== Add “Lockdown” throughout relevant provisions ==== Amend the bill to explicitly include “lockdown” alongside “solitary confinement/isolated confinement” and “restorative housing” in all relevant sections, to prevent facilities from using unit-wide lockdown practices as a functional substitute for individual isolated confinement. ==== Strengthen the time-limit clause (close the cumulative-days gap) ==== Replace the current time-limit phrasing with: “No individual shall be held in solitary confinement, lockdown, or restorative housing for more than 15 consecutive days, nor 15 days in any 60-day period.” <b>Purpose of the amendment:</b> The introduced text already uses “15 consecutive days…in any 60-day period,” but stakeholders have raised concerns that “consecutive” language can be worked around by cycling people in and out (or shifting to lockdown practices) without ever hitting a “consecutive” threshold. The amendment makes the limit explicitly <i>both</i> consecutive and cumulative. <hr> == Opening Statement == === House Subcommittee Statement === <blockquote> ====Notes on delivery: ==== <mark> <b>bold</b>—emphasize, increase volume; </mark> <mark> <i>italicized</i>—stressed, extended pronunciation, sing-songy; </mark> <mark> <i><b>bold italicized</i></b>—climactic, stressed and emphatic; </mark> <mark> • bulleted—drum-like repetition, think of MLK's "I Have a Dream," "I have a dream that..." repeated for emphasis; </mark> <mark> — a half pause, slight build-up; </mark> <mark> — — a full pause, major build-up. <mark> <mark><b>VIBE:</b> think <i>"victory lap;"</i> sell the idea that this bill is a done deal and that doubters should get on board while they still have a chance to be on the right side of history. This is a <b><i>pathos</i></b> and <i><b>ethos</i></b> argument, not <i>logos</i>; lean on expert testimonies for questions of <i>logic</i>. - Eric</mark> </blockquote> <br> Mister Chair, members of the subcommittee— <i>This is not our first time here.</i> For <b>two straight years</b>, the General Assembly has passed this reform — — <b>In 2024</b>, I gave you a sermon — — and then we passed <i>HB 1244.</i> <b>In 2025</b>, • my sister, • my friend, • and my <i>esteemed colleague</i>, <b>Delegate Karen Keys-Gamarra</b>, took up the torch — — and then we passed <i>HB 2647.</i> Twice, this body has said—<i><b>clearly</b></i>—that we are ready to turn the page on solitary confinement. And after two straight years, nobody can pretend this is new... • You know this bill. • You know this issue. • You know how overdue this change is — — Mister Chair, members of the committee, this is not our first time here, <b>BUT it will be our last</b>—because this year <i>we will make history.</i> And what is so great about this year is that we all have a <i>chance</i>—a <i>chance</i> to be part of making history. If you're still on the fence, I want you to look <i>forward</i> into the future with me. <b>Don't let the past hold you back — —</b> • Because when we look back in 25 years, <b>we will know this legislation was the right thing to do.</b> • Because when we look back in 50 years, <b>we will know this legislation was the right thing to do.</b> • Because when we look back in <b>one-hundred</b> years, <i><b>we will know this legislation was the right thing to do!</b></i> Today—I hope everyone in this room joins us in doing the <i><b>right thing.</b></i> - We know the counterarguments. We know the questions. And we're happy to answer them. <b>But</b> I encourage us to listen—to listen to the <i>testimonies</i>—to listen to the voices who are ready for change, so that we may be reminded—again—<i>just how overdue this legislation is.</i> + We know the counterarguments. We know the questions. And we're happy to answer them. <b>But</b> I encourage us to <i>listen</i>—to listen to the <i>testimonies</i>—to listen to the voices who are ready for change, so that we may be reminded—again—<i>just how overdue this legislation is.</i> Thank you, Mister Chair and members of the committee. I hope you report this bill favorably to full committee. <hr> == Support and Opposition == === Support === • ACLU People Power Fairfax • Bridging The Gap In Virginia • Charlottesville Chapter National Organization for Women • Coalition for Justice • EJUSA Evangelical Network • Fighting 4 Freedom • Greater Washington (JCRC) • Inmate Support Virginia • Interfaith Action for Human Rights (IAHR) • HALT Solitary • Jewish Community Relations Council of Just Future Project • Justice & Witness Action Network- VA • United Church of Christ Central Atlantic Conference • LatinoJustice PRLDEF • NAACP Loudoun • National Association of Social Workers • National Association of Social Workers, Virginia Chapter • National Religious Campaign Against Torture • No Left Turns • Resource Information Help for the Disadvantaged and Disenfranchised (RIHD) • RISE for Youth • RVA Health Alliance for Social Justice and Equity • Social Action Linking Together (SALT) • Social Workers and Allies Against Solitary Confinement • The Humanization Project • The Sentencing Project • Unitarian Universalist Legislative Ministry of Virginia • Unlock the Box Campaign • Virginia CURE • Virginia Defenders for Freedom, Justice & Equality • Virginia Justice Democrats • Virginia Justice for Life • Virginia Justice Alliance • Virginia Prisons Accountability Committee • Virginia Prisoner Of Conscience • Virginia Prison Justice Network • WJCC Coalition for Community Justice • 40 Strong === Opposition === • (to be updated) === No Recommendation / Neutral === • (to be updated) === No Position Provided === • Department of Corrections <hr> == Fiscal Impact == No fiscal impact statement is posted for HB35. <hr> == Possible Questions == === TL;DR === <b>Q1: “Does this end solitary confinement in Virginia?”</b> TL;DR: No—it ends <i>prolonged</i> solitary confinement and sets clear limits, oversight, and due-process rules for any use. <br> <b>Q2: “Does this make prisons less safe for staff?”</b> TL;DR: No—HB35 keeps exceptions for imminent threats and requires documentation; it’s about targeted use, not “never.” <br> <b>Q3: “What changes day-to-day?”</b> TL;DR: Frequent reviews, rapid medical/mental health checks, real programming/out-of-cell time, and written accountability when isolation is used. <br> <b>Q4: “Can DOC just use ‘lockdowns’ instead?”</b> TL;DR: The bill defines lockdown and regulates it, and the requested amendment strengthens this further by applying the same time limits to lockdown explicitly. <br> === Q1: “What does the bill aim to accomplish?” === <b>Answer you can use:</b> HB35 ends prolonged solitary confinement by setting clear time limits and requiring real oversight—regular reviews, rapid medical and mental health evaluations, documentation, and in-person due process when isolation continues. <br> === Q2: “How often is placement reviewed?” === <b>Answer you can use:</b> Placement is reviewed frequently, including a required 48-hour review cycle with written documentation explaining why less restrictive settings were not used. <br> === Q3: “What health protections are required?” === <b>Answer you can use:</b> HB35 requires medical and mental health evaluations by certified professionals within one working day of placement in restorative housing or isolated confinement (with limited exceptions). <br> === Q4: “Does this stop people from getting programming or recreation?” === <b>Answer you can use:</b> No—the bill requires at least four hours of out-of-cell programming or congregate activity daily, plus at least one hour of congregate recreation unless exceptional safety circumstances apply. <br> === Q5: “What stops indefinite ‘lockdowns’?” === <b>Answer you can use:</b> Lockdowns that interrupt programming must have a specific documented security purpose, must end as soon as the purpose is served, are time-limited, require approvals to extend or repeat, and must be documented and published. <hr> == Additional Information == <b>1. Definitions are the enforcement backbone</b> • The bill defines isolated confinement and lockdown by hours-per-day and loss of programming, so policy can’t be evaded by unit names. <b>Policy implication:</b> Regulates conditions, not labels. <br> <b>2. The “less restrictive first” rule targets protective-custody misuse</b> • For “own protection” placements, the facility must use less restrictive options first, including transfers or special-purpose housing for similarly threatened individuals, unless infeasible. <b>Policy implication:</b> Safety without defaulting to isolation. <br> <b>3. Reviews + documentation create accountability</b> • Requires regular reviews, documentation in the institutional file, notice up the chain, and formal in-person reviews with appeal rights. <b>Policy implication:</b> Isolation becomes a documented exception, not a routine. <br> <b>4. Lockdown limits matter because lockdown can function like solitary</b> • The bill regulates lockdowns that interrupt programming and requires publication of documentation. <b>Policy implication:</b> Prevents “unit-wide solitary” from becoming the workaround. [[Category:2026 Session]]
2026-01-22 07:05:13
Edited by: 74.110.183.75
Edited by: 74.110.183.75
= HB35 Restorative housing and isolated confinement; restrictions on use. = == Status == [https://house.vga.virginia.gov/subcommittees/H15002/agendas/5187 Public Safety | Subcommittee #2 — agenda] <hr> == Overview == === Summary as Introduced === <b>Restorative housing and isolated confinement; restrictions on use.</b> Prohibits the use of isolated confinement, defined in the bill, in state correctional facilities, subject to certain exceptions. The bill requires that before placing an incarcerated person in restorative housing or isolated confinement for his own protection, the facility administrator shall place an incarcerated person in a less-restrictive setting, including by transferring such person to another institution or to a special-purpose housing unit for incarcerated persons who face similar threats. The bill requires that if an incarcerated person is placed in restorative housing or isolated confinement, such placement shall be reviewed every 48 hours and the facility administrator shall ensure that the incarcerated person receives a medical and mental health evaluation from certified medical and mental health professionals within one working day of placement in restorative housing or any form of isolated confinement. The bill also requires the facility administrator to notify the regional administrator in writing that an incarcerated person was placed in restorative housing or isolated confinement within 24 hours of such placement. Finally, the bill requires that formal reviews of an incarcerated person's placement in any form of isolated confinement shall be held in such person's presence, inform him of any reasons administrative officials believe isolated confinement remains necessary, and give the incarcerated person an opportunity to respond to those reasons, and a formal ruling shall be provided to the incarcerated individual within 24 hours. <hr> === Patrons === ==== House Patrons ==== • Joshua G. Cole (chief patron) • Patrick A. Hope • Sam Rasoul • Holly Seibold ==== Senate Patrons ==== • Bagby <hr> == Language == The language of [https://lis.virginia.gov/bill-details/20261/HB35/text/HB35 HB35] can be viewed here. <hr> == Proposed Amendment == === Amendment Offered for Consideration (requested for subcommittee) === ==== Add “Lockdown” throughout relevant provisions ==== Amend the bill to explicitly include “lockdown” alongside “solitary confinement/isolated confinement” and “restorative housing” in all relevant sections, to prevent facilities from using unit-wide lockdown practices as a functional substitute for individual isolated confinement. ==== Strengthen the time-limit clause (close the cumulative-days gap) ==== Replace the current time-limit phrasing with: “No individual shall be held in solitary confinement, lockdown, or restorative housing for more than 15 consecutive days, nor 15 days in any 60-day period.” <b>Purpose of the amendment:</b> The introduced text already uses “15 consecutive days…in any 60-day period,” but stakeholders have raised concerns that “consecutive” language can be worked around by cycling people in and out (or shifting to lockdown practices) without ever hitting a “consecutive” threshold. The amendment makes the limit explicitly <i>both</i> consecutive and cumulative. <hr> == Opening Statement == === House Subcommittee Statement === <blockquote> ====Notes on delivery: ==== <mark> <b>bold</b>—emphasize, increase volume; </mark> <mark> <i>italicized</i>—stressed, extended pronunciation, sing-songy; </mark> <mark> <i><b>bold italicized</i></b>—climactic, stressed and emphatic; </mark> <mark> • bulleted—drum-like repetition, think of MLK's "I Have a Dream," "I have a dream that..." repeated for emphasis; </mark> <mark> — a half pause, slight build-up; </mark> <mark> — — a full pause, major build-up. <mark> <mark><b>VIBE:</b> think <i>"victory lap;"</i> sell the idea that this bill is a done deal and that doubters should get on board while they still have a chance to be on the right side of history. This is a <b><i>pathos</i></b> and <i><b>ethos</i></b> argument, not <i>logos</i>; lean on expert testimonies for questions of <i>logic</i>. - Eric</mark> </blockquote> <br> Mister Chair, members of the subcommittee— <i>This is not our first time here.</i> For <b>two straight years</b>, the General Assembly has passed this reform — — <b>In 2024</b>, I gave you a sermon — — and then we passed <i>HB 1244.</i> <b>In 2025</b>, • my sister, • my friend, • and my <i>esteemed colleague</i>, <b>Delegate Karen Keys-Gamarra</b>, took up the torch — — and then we passed <i>HB 2647.</i> Twice, this body has said—<i><b>clearly</b></i>—that we are ready to turn the page on solitary confinement. And after two straight years, nobody can pretend this is new... • You know this bill. • You know this issue. • You know how overdue this change is — — Mister Chair, members of the committee, this is not our first time here, <b>BUT it will be our last</b>—because this year <i>we will make history.</i> And what is so great about this year is that we all have a <i>chance</i>—a <i>chance</i> to be part of making history. If you're still on the fence, I want you to look <i>forward</i> into the future with me. <b>Don't let the past hold you back — —</b> • Because when we look back in 25 years, <b>we will know this legislation was the right thing to do.</b> • Because when we look back in 50 years, <b>we will know this legislation was the right thing to do.</b> • Because when we look back in <b>one-hundred</b> years, <i><b>we will know this legislation was the right thing to do!</b></i> Today—I hope everyone in this room joins us in doing the <i><b>right thing.</b></i> - We know the counterarguments. We've heard the questions. And we're happy to answer them. But I encourage us to listen—to listen to the <i>testimonies</i>—to listen to the voices who are ready for change, so that we may be reminded—again—<i>just how overdue this legislation is.</i> + We know the counterarguments. We know the questions. And we're happy to answer them. <b>But</b> I encourage us to listen—to listen to the <i>testimonies</i>—to listen to the voices who are ready for change, so that we may be reminded—again—<i>just how overdue this legislation is.</i> Thank you, Mister Chair and members of the committee. I hope you report this bill favorably to full committee. <hr> == Support and Opposition == === Support === • ACLU People Power Fairfax • Bridging The Gap In Virginia • Charlottesville Chapter National Organization for Women • Coalition for Justice • EJUSA Evangelical Network • Fighting 4 Freedom • Greater Washington (JCRC) • Inmate Support Virginia • Interfaith Action for Human Rights (IAHR) • HALT Solitary • Jewish Community Relations Council of Just Future Project • Justice & Witness Action Network- VA • United Church of Christ Central Atlantic Conference • LatinoJustice PRLDEF • NAACP Loudoun • National Association of Social Workers • National Association of Social Workers, Virginia Chapter • National Religious Campaign Against Torture • No Left Turns • Resource Information Help for the Disadvantaged and Disenfranchised (RIHD) • RISE for Youth • RVA Health Alliance for Social Justice and Equity • Social Action Linking Together (SALT) • Social Workers and Allies Against Solitary Confinement • The Humanization Project • The Sentencing Project • Unitarian Universalist Legislative Ministry of Virginia • Unlock the Box Campaign • Virginia CURE • Virginia Defenders for Freedom, Justice & Equality • Virginia Justice Democrats • Virginia Justice for Life • Virginia Justice Alliance • Virginia Prisons Accountability Committee • Virginia Prisoner Of Conscience • Virginia Prison Justice Network • WJCC Coalition for Community Justice • 40 Strong === Opposition === • (to be updated) === No Recommendation / Neutral === • (to be updated) === No Position Provided === • Department of Corrections <hr> == Fiscal Impact == No fiscal impact statement is posted for HB35. <hr> == Possible Questions == === TL;DR === <b>Q1: “Does this end solitary confinement in Virginia?”</b> TL;DR: No—it ends <i>prolonged</i> solitary confinement and sets clear limits, oversight, and due-process rules for any use. <br> <b>Q2: “Does this make prisons less safe for staff?”</b> TL;DR: No—HB35 keeps exceptions for imminent threats and requires documentation; it’s about targeted use, not “never.” <br> <b>Q3: “What changes day-to-day?”</b> TL;DR: Frequent reviews, rapid medical/mental health checks, real programming/out-of-cell time, and written accountability when isolation is used. <br> <b>Q4: “Can DOC just use ‘lockdowns’ instead?”</b> TL;DR: The bill defines lockdown and regulates it, and the requested amendment strengthens this further by applying the same time limits to lockdown explicitly. <br> === Q1: “What does the bill aim to accomplish?” === <b>Answer you can use:</b> HB35 ends prolonged solitary confinement by setting clear time limits and requiring real oversight—regular reviews, rapid medical and mental health evaluations, documentation, and in-person due process when isolation continues. <br> === Q2: “How often is placement reviewed?” === <b>Answer you can use:</b> Placement is reviewed frequently, including a required 48-hour review cycle with written documentation explaining why less restrictive settings were not used. <br> === Q3: “What health protections are required?” === <b>Answer you can use:</b> HB35 requires medical and mental health evaluations by certified professionals within one working day of placement in restorative housing or isolated confinement (with limited exceptions). <br> === Q4: “Does this stop people from getting programming or recreation?” === <b>Answer you can use:</b> No—the bill requires at least four hours of out-of-cell programming or congregate activity daily, plus at least one hour of congregate recreation unless exceptional safety circumstances apply. <br> === Q5: “What stops indefinite ‘lockdowns’?” === <b>Answer you can use:</b> Lockdowns that interrupt programming must have a specific documented security purpose, must end as soon as the purpose is served, are time-limited, require approvals to extend or repeat, and must be documented and published. <hr> == Additional Information == <b>1. Definitions are the enforcement backbone</b> • The bill defines isolated confinement and lockdown by hours-per-day and loss of programming, so policy can’t be evaded by unit names. <b>Policy implication:</b> Regulates conditions, not labels. <br> <b>2. The “less restrictive first” rule targets protective-custody misuse</b> • For “own protection” placements, the facility must use less restrictive options first, including transfers or special-purpose housing for similarly threatened individuals, unless infeasible. <b>Policy implication:</b> Safety without defaulting to isolation. <br> <b>3. Reviews + documentation create accountability</b> • Requires regular reviews, documentation in the institutional file, notice up the chain, and formal in-person reviews with appeal rights. <b>Policy implication:</b> Isolation becomes a documented exception, not a routine. <br> <b>4. Lockdown limits matter because lockdown can function like solitary</b> • The bill regulates lockdowns that interrupt programming and requires publication of documentation. <b>Policy implication:</b> Prevents “unit-wide solitary” from becoming the workaround. [[Category:2026 Session]]
2026-01-22 07:04:58
Edited by: 74.110.183.75
Edited by: 74.110.183.75
= HB35 Restorative housing and isolated confinement; restrictions on use. = == Status == [https://house.vga.virginia.gov/subcommittees/H15002/agendas/5187 Public Safety | Subcommittee #2 — agenda] <hr> == Overview == === Summary as Introduced === <b>Restorative housing and isolated confinement; restrictions on use.</b> Prohibits the use of isolated confinement, defined in the bill, in state correctional facilities, subject to certain exceptions. The bill requires that before placing an incarcerated person in restorative housing or isolated confinement for his own protection, the facility administrator shall place an incarcerated person in a less-restrictive setting, including by transferring such person to another institution or to a special-purpose housing unit for incarcerated persons who face similar threats. The bill requires that if an incarcerated person is placed in restorative housing or isolated confinement, such placement shall be reviewed every 48 hours and the facility administrator shall ensure that the incarcerated person receives a medical and mental health evaluation from certified medical and mental health professionals within one working day of placement in restorative housing or any form of isolated confinement. The bill also requires the facility administrator to notify the regional administrator in writing that an incarcerated person was placed in restorative housing or isolated confinement within 24 hours of such placement. Finally, the bill requires that formal reviews of an incarcerated person's placement in any form of isolated confinement shall be held in such person's presence, inform him of any reasons administrative officials believe isolated confinement remains necessary, and give the incarcerated person an opportunity to respond to those reasons, and a formal ruling shall be provided to the incarcerated individual within 24 hours. <hr> === Patrons === ==== House Patrons ==== • Joshua G. Cole (chief patron) • Patrick A. Hope • Sam Rasoul • Holly Seibold ==== Senate Patrons ==== • Bagby <hr> == Language == The language of [https://lis.virginia.gov/bill-details/20261/HB35/text/HB35 HB35] can be viewed here. <hr> == Proposed Amendment == === Amendment Offered for Consideration (requested for subcommittee) === ==== Add “Lockdown” throughout relevant provisions ==== Amend the bill to explicitly include “lockdown” alongside “solitary confinement/isolated confinement” and “restorative housing” in all relevant sections, to prevent facilities from using unit-wide lockdown practices as a functional substitute for individual isolated confinement. ==== Strengthen the time-limit clause (close the cumulative-days gap) ==== Replace the current time-limit phrasing with: “No individual shall be held in solitary confinement, lockdown, or restorative housing for more than 15 consecutive days, nor 15 days in any 60-day period.” <b>Purpose of the amendment:</b> The introduced text already uses “15 consecutive days…in any 60-day period,” but stakeholders have raised concerns that “consecutive” language can be worked around by cycling people in and out (or shifting to lockdown practices) without ever hitting a “consecutive” threshold. The amendment makes the limit explicitly <i>both</i> consecutive and cumulative. <hr> == Opening Statement == === House Subcommittee Statement === <blockquote> ====Notes on delivery: ==== <mark> <b>bold</b>—emphasize, increase volume; </mark> <mark> <i>italicized</i>—stressed, extended pronunciation, sing-songy; </mark> <mark> <i><b>bold italicized</i></b>—climactic, stressed and emphatic; </mark> <mark> • bulleted—drum-like repetition, think of MLK's "I Have a Dream," "I have a dream that..." repeated for emphasis; </mark> <mark> — a half pause, slight build-up; </mark> <mark> — — a full pause, major build-up. <mark> <mark><b>VIBE:</b> think <i>"victory lap;"</i> sell the idea that this bill is a done deal and that doubters should get on board while they still have a chance to be on the right side of history. This is a <b><i>pathos</i></b> and <i><b>ethos</i></b> argument, not <i>logos</i>; lean on expert testimonies for questions of <i>logic</i>. - Eric</mark> </blockquote> <br> Mister Chair, members of the subcommittee— <i>This is not our first time here.</i> For <b>two straight years</b>, the General Assembly has passed this reform — — <b>In 2024</b>, I gave you a sermon — — and then we passed <i>HB 1244.</i> <b>In 2025</b>, • my sister, • my friend, • and my <i>esteemed colleague</i>, <b>Delegate Karen Keys-Gamarra</b>, took up the torch — — and then we passed <i>HB 2647.</i> Twice, this body has said—<i><b>clearly</b></i>—that we are ready to turn the page on solitary confinement. And after two straight years, nobody can pretend this is new... • You know this bill. • You know this issue. • You know how overdue this change is — — Mister Chair, members of the committee, this is not our first time here, <b>BUT it will be our last</b>—because this year <i>we will make history.</i> And what is so great about this year is that we all have a <i>chance</i>—a <i>chance</i> to be part of making history. If you're still on the fence, I want you to look <i>forward</i> into the future with me. <b>Don't let the past hold you back — —</b> • Because when we look back in 25 years, <b>we will know this legislation was the right thing to do.</b> • Because when we look back in 50 years, <b>we will know this legislation was the right thing to do.</b> • Because when we look back in <b>one-hundred</b> years, <i><b>we will know this legislation was the right thing to do!</b></i> Today—I hope everyone in this room joins us in doing the <i><b>right thing.</b></i> - We know the questions, and we'll answer them if asked. But I encourage us to listen to <i>testimonies</i>, to listen to the voices who are ready for change, so that we may be reminded—again—<i>just how overdue this legislation is.</i> + We know the counterarguments. We've heard the questions. And we're happy to answer them. But I encourage us to listen—to listen to the <i>testimonies</i>—to listen to the voices who are ready for change, so that we may be reminded—again—<i>just how overdue this legislation is.</i> Thank you, Mister Chair and members of the committee. I hope you report this bill favorably to full committee. <hr> == Support and Opposition == === Support === • ACLU People Power Fairfax • Bridging The Gap In Virginia • Charlottesville Chapter National Organization for Women • Coalition for Justice • EJUSA Evangelical Network • Fighting 4 Freedom • Greater Washington (JCRC) • Inmate Support Virginia • Interfaith Action for Human Rights (IAHR) • HALT Solitary • Jewish Community Relations Council of Just Future Project • Justice & Witness Action Network- VA • United Church of Christ Central Atlantic Conference • LatinoJustice PRLDEF • NAACP Loudoun • National Association of Social Workers • National Association of Social Workers, Virginia Chapter • National Religious Campaign Against Torture • No Left Turns • Resource Information Help for the Disadvantaged and Disenfranchised (RIHD) • RISE for Youth • RVA Health Alliance for Social Justice and Equity • Social Action Linking Together (SALT) • Social Workers and Allies Against Solitary Confinement • The Humanization Project • The Sentencing Project • Unitarian Universalist Legislative Ministry of Virginia • Unlock the Box Campaign • Virginia CURE • Virginia Defenders for Freedom, Justice & Equality • Virginia Justice Democrats • Virginia Justice for Life • Virginia Justice Alliance • Virginia Prisons Accountability Committee • Virginia Prisoner Of Conscience • Virginia Prison Justice Network • WJCC Coalition for Community Justice • 40 Strong === Opposition === • (to be updated) === No Recommendation / Neutral === • (to be updated) === No Position Provided === • Department of Corrections <hr> == Fiscal Impact == No fiscal impact statement is posted for HB35. <hr> == Possible Questions == === TL;DR === <b>Q1: “Does this end solitary confinement in Virginia?”</b> TL;DR: No—it ends <i>prolonged</i> solitary confinement and sets clear limits, oversight, and due-process rules for any use. <br> <b>Q2: “Does this make prisons less safe for staff?”</b> TL;DR: No—HB35 keeps exceptions for imminent threats and requires documentation; it’s about targeted use, not “never.” <br> <b>Q3: “What changes day-to-day?”</b> TL;DR: Frequent reviews, rapid medical/mental health checks, real programming/out-of-cell time, and written accountability when isolation is used. <br> <b>Q4: “Can DOC just use ‘lockdowns’ instead?”</b> TL;DR: The bill defines lockdown and regulates it, and the requested amendment strengthens this further by applying the same time limits to lockdown explicitly. <br> === Q1: “What does the bill aim to accomplish?” === <b>Answer you can use:</b> HB35 ends prolonged solitary confinement by setting clear time limits and requiring real oversight—regular reviews, rapid medical and mental health evaluations, documentation, and in-person due process when isolation continues. <br> === Q2: “How often is placement reviewed?” === <b>Answer you can use:</b> Placement is reviewed frequently, including a required 48-hour review cycle with written documentation explaining why less restrictive settings were not used. <br> === Q3: “What health protections are required?” === <b>Answer you can use:</b> HB35 requires medical and mental health evaluations by certified professionals within one working day of placement in restorative housing or isolated confinement (with limited exceptions). <br> === Q4: “Does this stop people from getting programming or recreation?” === <b>Answer you can use:</b> No—the bill requires at least four hours of out-of-cell programming or congregate activity daily, plus at least one hour of congregate recreation unless exceptional safety circumstances apply. <br> === Q5: “What stops indefinite ‘lockdowns’?” === <b>Answer you can use:</b> Lockdowns that interrupt programming must have a specific documented security purpose, must end as soon as the purpose is served, are time-limited, require approvals to extend or repeat, and must be documented and published. <hr> == Additional Information == <b>1. Definitions are the enforcement backbone</b> • The bill defines isolated confinement and lockdown by hours-per-day and loss of programming, so policy can’t be evaded by unit names. <b>Policy implication:</b> Regulates conditions, not labels. <br> <b>2. The “less restrictive first” rule targets protective-custody misuse</b> • For “own protection” placements, the facility must use less restrictive options first, including transfers or special-purpose housing for similarly threatened individuals, unless infeasible. <b>Policy implication:</b> Safety without defaulting to isolation. <br> <b>3. Reviews + documentation create accountability</b> • Requires regular reviews, documentation in the institutional file, notice up the chain, and formal in-person reviews with appeal rights. <b>Policy implication:</b> Isolation becomes a documented exception, not a routine. <br> <b>4. Lockdown limits matter because lockdown can function like solitary</b> • The bill regulates lockdowns that interrupt programming and requires publication of documentation. <b>Policy implication:</b> Prevents “unit-wide solitary” from becoming the workaround. [[Category:2026 Session]]
2026-01-22 07:03:18
Edited by: 74.110.183.75
Edited by: 74.110.183.75
= HB35 Restorative housing and isolated confinement; restrictions on use. = == Status == [https://house.vga.virginia.gov/subcommittees/H15002/agendas/5187 Public Safety | Subcommittee #2 — agenda] <hr> == Overview == === Summary as Introduced === <b>Restorative housing and isolated confinement; restrictions on use.</b> Prohibits the use of isolated confinement, defined in the bill, in state correctional facilities, subject to certain exceptions. The bill requires that before placing an incarcerated person in restorative housing or isolated confinement for his own protection, the facility administrator shall place an incarcerated person in a less-restrictive setting, including by transferring such person to another institution or to a special-purpose housing unit for incarcerated persons who face similar threats. The bill requires that if an incarcerated person is placed in restorative housing or isolated confinement, such placement shall be reviewed every 48 hours and the facility administrator shall ensure that the incarcerated person receives a medical and mental health evaluation from certified medical and mental health professionals within one working day of placement in restorative housing or any form of isolated confinement. The bill also requires the facility administrator to notify the regional administrator in writing that an incarcerated person was placed in restorative housing or isolated confinement within 24 hours of such placement. Finally, the bill requires that formal reviews of an incarcerated person's placement in any form of isolated confinement shall be held in such person's presence, inform him of any reasons administrative officials believe isolated confinement remains necessary, and give the incarcerated person an opportunity to respond to those reasons, and a formal ruling shall be provided to the incarcerated individual within 24 hours. <hr> === Patrons === ==== House Patrons ==== • Joshua G. Cole (chief patron) • Patrick A. Hope • Sam Rasoul • Holly Seibold ==== Senate Patrons ==== • Bagby <hr> == Language == The language of [https://lis.virginia.gov/bill-details/20261/HB35/text/HB35 HB35] can be viewed here. <hr> == Proposed Amendment == === Amendment Offered for Consideration (requested for subcommittee) === ==== Add “Lockdown” throughout relevant provisions ==== Amend the bill to explicitly include “lockdown” alongside “solitary confinement/isolated confinement” and “restorative housing” in all relevant sections, to prevent facilities from using unit-wide lockdown practices as a functional substitute for individual isolated confinement. ==== Strengthen the time-limit clause (close the cumulative-days gap) ==== Replace the current time-limit phrasing with: “No individual shall be held in solitary confinement, lockdown, or restorative housing for more than 15 consecutive days, nor 15 days in any 60-day period.” <b>Purpose of the amendment:</b> The introduced text already uses “15 consecutive days…in any 60-day period,” but stakeholders have raised concerns that “consecutive” language can be worked around by cycling people in and out (or shifting to lockdown practices) without ever hitting a “consecutive” threshold. The amendment makes the limit explicitly <i>both</i> consecutive and cumulative. <hr> == Opening Statement == === House Subcommittee Statement === <blockquote> ====Notes on delivery: ==== <mark> <b>bold</b>—emphasize, increase volume; </mark> <mark> <i>italicized</i>—stressed, extended pronunciation, sing-songy; </mark> <mark> <i><b>bold italicized</i></b>—climactic, stressed and emphatic; </mark> <mark> • bulleted—drum-like repetition, think of MLK's "I Have a Dream," "I have a dream that..." repeated for emphasis; </mark> <mark> — a half pause, slight build-up; </mark> <mark> — — a full pause, major build-up. <mark> <mark><b>VIBE:</b> think <i>"victory lap;"</i> sell the idea that this bill is a done deal and that doubters should get on board while they still have a chance to be on the right side of history. This is a <b><i>pathos</i></b> and <i><b>ethos</i></b> argument, not <i>logos</i>; lean on expert testimonies for questions of <i>logic</i>. - Eric</mark> </blockquote> <br> Mister Chair, members of the subcommittee— <i>This is not our first time here.</i> For <b>two straight years</b>, the General Assembly has passed this reform — — - <b>• In 2024</b>, I gave you a sermon — — and then we passed <i>HB 1244.</i> + <b>In 2024</b>, I gave you a sermon — — and then we passed <i>HB 1244.</i> - <b>• In 2025</b>, • my sister, • my friend, • and my <i>esteemed colleague</i>, <b>Delegate Karen Keys-Gamarra</b>, took up the torch — — and then we passed <i>HB 2647.</i> + <b>In 2025</b>, • my sister, • my friend, • and my <i>esteemed colleague</i>, <b>Delegate Karen Keys-Gamarra</b>, took up the torch — — and then we passed <i>HB 2647.</i> Twice, this body has said—<i><b>clearly</b></i>—that we are ready to turn the page on solitary confinement. And after two straight years, nobody can pretend this is new... • You know this bill. • You know this issue. • You know how overdue this change is — — Mister Chair, members of the committee, this is not our first time here, <b>BUT it will be our last</b>—because this year <i>we will make history.</i> And what is so great about this year is that we all have a <i>chance</i>—a <i>chance</i> to be part of making history. If you're still on the fence, I want you to look <i>forward</i> into the future with me. <b>Don't let the past hold you back — —</b> • Because when we look back in 25 years, <b>we will know this legislation was the right thing to do.</b> • Because when we look back in 50 years, <b>we will know this legislation was the right thing to do.</b> • Because when we look back in <b>one-hundred</b> years, <i><b>we will know this legislation was the right thing to do!</b></i> Today—I hope everyone in this room joins us in doing the <i><b>right thing.</b></i> We know the questions, and we'll answer them if asked. But I encourage us to listen to <i>testimonies</i>, to listen to the voices who are ready for change, so that we may be reminded—again—<i>just how overdue this legislation is.</i> Thank you, Mister Chair and members of the committee. I hope you report this bill favorably to full committee. <hr> == Support and Opposition == === Support === • ACLU People Power Fairfax • Bridging The Gap In Virginia • Charlottesville Chapter National Organization for Women • Coalition for Justice • EJUSA Evangelical Network • Fighting 4 Freedom • Greater Washington (JCRC) • Inmate Support Virginia • Interfaith Action for Human Rights (IAHR) • HALT Solitary • Jewish Community Relations Council of Just Future Project • Justice & Witness Action Network- VA • United Church of Christ Central Atlantic Conference • LatinoJustice PRLDEF • NAACP Loudoun • National Association of Social Workers • National Association of Social Workers, Virginia Chapter • National Religious Campaign Against Torture • No Left Turns • Resource Information Help for the Disadvantaged and Disenfranchised (RIHD) • RISE for Youth • RVA Health Alliance for Social Justice and Equity • Social Action Linking Together (SALT) • Social Workers and Allies Against Solitary Confinement • The Humanization Project • The Sentencing Project • Unitarian Universalist Legislative Ministry of Virginia • Unlock the Box Campaign • Virginia CURE • Virginia Defenders for Freedom, Justice & Equality • Virginia Justice Democrats • Virginia Justice for Life • Virginia Justice Alliance • Virginia Prisons Accountability Committee • Virginia Prisoner Of Conscience • Virginia Prison Justice Network • WJCC Coalition for Community Justice • 40 Strong === Opposition === • (to be updated) === No Recommendation / Neutral === • (to be updated) === No Position Provided === • Department of Corrections <hr> == Fiscal Impact == No fiscal impact statement is posted for HB35. <hr> == Possible Questions == === TL;DR === <b>Q1: “Does this end solitary confinement in Virginia?”</b> TL;DR: No—it ends <i>prolonged</i> solitary confinement and sets clear limits, oversight, and due-process rules for any use. <br> <b>Q2: “Does this make prisons less safe for staff?”</b> TL;DR: No—HB35 keeps exceptions for imminent threats and requires documentation; it’s about targeted use, not “never.” <br> <b>Q3: “What changes day-to-day?”</b> TL;DR: Frequent reviews, rapid medical/mental health checks, real programming/out-of-cell time, and written accountability when isolation is used. <br> <b>Q4: “Can DOC just use ‘lockdowns’ instead?”</b> TL;DR: The bill defines lockdown and regulates it, and the requested amendment strengthens this further by applying the same time limits to lockdown explicitly. <br> === Q1: “What does the bill aim to accomplish?” === <b>Answer you can use:</b> HB35 ends prolonged solitary confinement by setting clear time limits and requiring real oversight—regular reviews, rapid medical and mental health evaluations, documentation, and in-person due process when isolation continues. <br> === Q2: “How often is placement reviewed?” === <b>Answer you can use:</b> Placement is reviewed frequently, including a required 48-hour review cycle with written documentation explaining why less restrictive settings were not used. <br> === Q3: “What health protections are required?” === <b>Answer you can use:</b> HB35 requires medical and mental health evaluations by certified professionals within one working day of placement in restorative housing or isolated confinement (with limited exceptions). <br> === Q4: “Does this stop people from getting programming or recreation?” === <b>Answer you can use:</b> No—the bill requires at least four hours of out-of-cell programming or congregate activity daily, plus at least one hour of congregate recreation unless exceptional safety circumstances apply. <br> === Q5: “What stops indefinite ‘lockdowns’?” === <b>Answer you can use:</b> Lockdowns that interrupt programming must have a specific documented security purpose, must end as soon as the purpose is served, are time-limited, require approvals to extend or repeat, and must be documented and published. <hr> == Additional Information == <b>1. Definitions are the enforcement backbone</b> • The bill defines isolated confinement and lockdown by hours-per-day and loss of programming, so policy can’t be evaded by unit names. <b>Policy implication:</b> Regulates conditions, not labels. <br> <b>2. The “less restrictive first” rule targets protective-custody misuse</b> • For “own protection” placements, the facility must use less restrictive options first, including transfers or special-purpose housing for similarly threatened individuals, unless infeasible. <b>Policy implication:</b> Safety without defaulting to isolation. <br> <b>3. Reviews + documentation create accountability</b> • Requires regular reviews, documentation in the institutional file, notice up the chain, and formal in-person reviews with appeal rights. <b>Policy implication:</b> Isolation becomes a documented exception, not a routine. <br> <b>4. Lockdown limits matter because lockdown can function like solitary</b> • The bill regulates lockdowns that interrupt programming and requires publication of documentation. <b>Policy implication:</b> Prevents “unit-wide solitary” from becoming the workaround. [[Category:2026 Session]]
2026-01-22 06:59:32
Edited by: 74.110.183.75
Edited by: 74.110.183.75
= HB35 Restorative housing and isolated confinement; restrictions on use. = == Status == [https://house.vga.virginia.gov/subcommittees/H15002/agendas/5187 Public Safety | Subcommittee #2 — agenda] <hr> == Overview == === Summary as Introduced === <b>Restorative housing and isolated confinement; restrictions on use.</b> Prohibits the use of isolated confinement, defined in the bill, in state correctional facilities, subject to certain exceptions. The bill requires that before placing an incarcerated person in restorative housing or isolated confinement for his own protection, the facility administrator shall place an incarcerated person in a less-restrictive setting, including by transferring such person to another institution or to a special-purpose housing unit for incarcerated persons who face similar threats. The bill requires that if an incarcerated person is placed in restorative housing or isolated confinement, such placement shall be reviewed every 48 hours and the facility administrator shall ensure that the incarcerated person receives a medical and mental health evaluation from certified medical and mental health professionals within one working day of placement in restorative housing or any form of isolated confinement. The bill also requires the facility administrator to notify the regional administrator in writing that an incarcerated person was placed in restorative housing or isolated confinement within 24 hours of such placement. Finally, the bill requires that formal reviews of an incarcerated person's placement in any form of isolated confinement shall be held in such person's presence, inform him of any reasons administrative officials believe isolated confinement remains necessary, and give the incarcerated person an opportunity to respond to those reasons, and a formal ruling shall be provided to the incarcerated individual within 24 hours. <hr> === Patrons === ==== House Patrons ==== • Joshua G. Cole (chief patron) • Patrick A. Hope • Sam Rasoul • Holly Seibold ==== Senate Patrons ==== • Bagby <hr> == Language == The language of [https://lis.virginia.gov/bill-details/20261/HB35/text/HB35 HB35] can be viewed here. <hr> == Proposed Amendment == === Amendment Offered for Consideration (requested for subcommittee) === ==== Add “Lockdown” throughout relevant provisions ==== Amend the bill to explicitly include “lockdown” alongside “solitary confinement/isolated confinement” and “restorative housing” in all relevant sections, to prevent facilities from using unit-wide lockdown practices as a functional substitute for individual isolated confinement. ==== Strengthen the time-limit clause (close the cumulative-days gap) ==== Replace the current time-limit phrasing with: “No individual shall be held in solitary confinement, lockdown, or restorative housing for more than 15 consecutive days, nor 15 days in any 60-day period.” <b>Purpose of the amendment:</b> The introduced text already uses “15 consecutive days…in any 60-day period,” but stakeholders have raised concerns that “consecutive” language can be worked around by cycling people in and out (or shifting to lockdown practices) without ever hitting a “consecutive” threshold. The amendment makes the limit explicitly <i>both</i> consecutive and cumulative. <hr> == Opening Statement == === House Subcommittee Statement === <blockquote> ====Notes on delivery: ==== <mark> <b>bold</b>—emphasize, increase volume; </mark> <mark> <i>italicized</i>—stressed, extended pronunciation, sing-songy; </mark> <mark> <i><b>bold italicized</i></b>—climactic, stressed and emphatic; </mark> <mark> • bulleted—drum-like repetition, think of MLK's "I Have a Dream," "I have a dream that..." repeated for emphasis; </mark> <mark> — a half pause, slight build-up; </mark> <mark> — — a full pause, major build-up. <mark> <mark><b>VIBE:</b> think <i>"victory lap;"</i> sell the idea that this bill is a done deal and that doubters should get on board while they still have a chance to be on the right side of history. This is a <b><i>pathos</i></b> and <i><b>ethos</i></b> argument, not <i>logos</i>; lean on expert testimonies for questions of <i>logic</i>. - Eric</mark> </blockquote> <br> Mister Chair, members of the subcommittee— <i>This is not our first time here.</i> - For <b>two straight years</b>, the General Assembly has passed this reform. + For <b>two straight years</b>, the General Assembly has passed this reform — — - <b>In 2024</b>, I gave you a sermon — — and then we passed <i>HB 1244.</i> + <b>• In 2024</b>, I gave you a sermon — — and then we passed <i>HB 1244.</i> - <b>In 2025</b>, • my sister, • my friend, • and my <i>esteemed colleague</i>, <b>Delegate Karen Keys-Gamarra</b>, took up the torch — — and then we passed <i>HB 2647.</i> + <b>• In 2025</b>, • my sister, • my friend, • and my <i>esteemed colleague</i>, <b>Delegate Karen Keys-Gamarra</b>, took up the torch — — and then we passed <i>HB 2647.</i> Twice, this body has said—<i><b>clearly</b></i>—that we are ready to turn the page on solitary confinement. And after two straight years, nobody can pretend this is new... • You know this bill. • You know this issue. • You know how overdue this change is — — Mister Chair, members of the committee, this is not our first time here, <b>BUT it will be our last</b>—because this year <i>we will make history.</i> And what is so great about this year is that we all have a <i>chance</i>—a <i>chance</i> to be part of making history. If you're still on the fence, I want you to look <i>forward</i> into the future with me. <b>Don't let the past hold you back — —</b> • Because when we look back in 25 years, <b>we will know this legislation was the right thing to do.</b> • Because when we look back in 50 years, <b>we will know this legislation was the right thing to do.</b> • Because when we look back in <b>one-hundred</b> years, <i><b>we will know this legislation was the right thing to do!</b></i> Today—I hope everyone in this room joins us in doing the <i><b>right thing.</b></i> We know the questions, and we'll answer them if asked. But I encourage us to listen to <i>testimonies</i>, to listen to the voices who are ready for change, so that we may be reminded—again—<i>just how overdue this legislation is.</i> Thank you, Mister Chair and members of the committee. I hope you report this bill favorably to full committee. <hr> == Support and Opposition == === Support === • ACLU People Power Fairfax • Bridging The Gap In Virginia • Charlottesville Chapter National Organization for Women • Coalition for Justice • EJUSA Evangelical Network • Fighting 4 Freedom • Greater Washington (JCRC) • Inmate Support Virginia • Interfaith Action for Human Rights (IAHR) • HALT Solitary • Jewish Community Relations Council of Just Future Project • Justice & Witness Action Network- VA • United Church of Christ Central Atlantic Conference • LatinoJustice PRLDEF • NAACP Loudoun • National Association of Social Workers • National Association of Social Workers, Virginia Chapter • National Religious Campaign Against Torture • No Left Turns • Resource Information Help for the Disadvantaged and Disenfranchised (RIHD) • RISE for Youth • RVA Health Alliance for Social Justice and Equity • Social Action Linking Together (SALT) • Social Workers and Allies Against Solitary Confinement • The Humanization Project • The Sentencing Project • Unitarian Universalist Legislative Ministry of Virginia • Unlock the Box Campaign • Virginia CURE • Virginia Defenders for Freedom, Justice & Equality • Virginia Justice Democrats • Virginia Justice for Life • Virginia Justice Alliance • Virginia Prisons Accountability Committee • Virginia Prisoner Of Conscience • Virginia Prison Justice Network • WJCC Coalition for Community Justice • 40 Strong === Opposition === • (to be updated) === No Recommendation / Neutral === • (to be updated) === No Position Provided === • Department of Corrections <hr> == Fiscal Impact == No fiscal impact statement is posted for HB35. <hr> == Possible Questions == === TL;DR === <b>Q1: “Does this end solitary confinement in Virginia?”</b> TL;DR: No—it ends <i>prolonged</i> solitary confinement and sets clear limits, oversight, and due-process rules for any use. <br> <b>Q2: “Does this make prisons less safe for staff?”</b> TL;DR: No—HB35 keeps exceptions for imminent threats and requires documentation; it’s about targeted use, not “never.” <br> <b>Q3: “What changes day-to-day?”</b> TL;DR: Frequent reviews, rapid medical/mental health checks, real programming/out-of-cell time, and written accountability when isolation is used. <br> <b>Q4: “Can DOC just use ‘lockdowns’ instead?”</b> TL;DR: The bill defines lockdown and regulates it, and the requested amendment strengthens this further by applying the same time limits to lockdown explicitly. <br> === Q1: “What does the bill aim to accomplish?” === <b>Answer you can use:</b> HB35 ends prolonged solitary confinement by setting clear time limits and requiring real oversight—regular reviews, rapid medical and mental health evaluations, documentation, and in-person due process when isolation continues. <br> === Q2: “How often is placement reviewed?” === <b>Answer you can use:</b> Placement is reviewed frequently, including a required 48-hour review cycle with written documentation explaining why less restrictive settings were not used. <br> === Q3: “What health protections are required?” === <b>Answer you can use:</b> HB35 requires medical and mental health evaluations by certified professionals within one working day of placement in restorative housing or isolated confinement (with limited exceptions). <br> === Q4: “Does this stop people from getting programming or recreation?” === <b>Answer you can use:</b> No—the bill requires at least four hours of out-of-cell programming or congregate activity daily, plus at least one hour of congregate recreation unless exceptional safety circumstances apply. <br> === Q5: “What stops indefinite ‘lockdowns’?” === <b>Answer you can use:</b> Lockdowns that interrupt programming must have a specific documented security purpose, must end as soon as the purpose is served, are time-limited, require approvals to extend or repeat, and must be documented and published. <hr> == Additional Information == <b>1. Definitions are the enforcement backbone</b> • The bill defines isolated confinement and lockdown by hours-per-day and loss of programming, so policy can’t be evaded by unit names. <b>Policy implication:</b> Regulates conditions, not labels. <br> <b>2. The “less restrictive first” rule targets protective-custody misuse</b> • For “own protection” placements, the facility must use less restrictive options first, including transfers or special-purpose housing for similarly threatened individuals, unless infeasible. <b>Policy implication:</b> Safety without defaulting to isolation. <br> <b>3. Reviews + documentation create accountability</b> • Requires regular reviews, documentation in the institutional file, notice up the chain, and formal in-person reviews with appeal rights. <b>Policy implication:</b> Isolation becomes a documented exception, not a routine. <br> <b>4. Lockdown limits matter because lockdown can function like solitary</b> • The bill regulates lockdowns that interrupt programming and requires publication of documentation. <b>Policy implication:</b> Prevents “unit-wide solitary” from becoming the workaround. [[Category:2026 Session]]
2026-01-22 06:58:41
Edited by: 74.110.183.75
Edited by: 74.110.183.75
= HB35 Restorative housing and isolated confinement; restrictions on use. = == Status == [https://house.vga.virginia.gov/subcommittees/H15002/agendas/5187 Public Safety | Subcommittee #2 — agenda] <hr> == Overview == === Summary as Introduced === <b>Restorative housing and isolated confinement; restrictions on use.</b> Prohibits the use of isolated confinement, defined in the bill, in state correctional facilities, subject to certain exceptions. The bill requires that before placing an incarcerated person in restorative housing or isolated confinement for his own protection, the facility administrator shall place an incarcerated person in a less-restrictive setting, including by transferring such person to another institution or to a special-purpose housing unit for incarcerated persons who face similar threats. The bill requires that if an incarcerated person is placed in restorative housing or isolated confinement, such placement shall be reviewed every 48 hours and the facility administrator shall ensure that the incarcerated person receives a medical and mental health evaluation from certified medical and mental health professionals within one working day of placement in restorative housing or any form of isolated confinement. The bill also requires the facility administrator to notify the regional administrator in writing that an incarcerated person was placed in restorative housing or isolated confinement within 24 hours of such placement. Finally, the bill requires that formal reviews of an incarcerated person's placement in any form of isolated confinement shall be held in such person's presence, inform him of any reasons administrative officials believe isolated confinement remains necessary, and give the incarcerated person an opportunity to respond to those reasons, and a formal ruling shall be provided to the incarcerated individual within 24 hours. <hr> === Patrons === ==== House Patrons ==== • Joshua G. Cole (chief patron) • Patrick A. Hope • Sam Rasoul • Holly Seibold ==== Senate Patrons ==== • Bagby <hr> == Language == The language of [https://lis.virginia.gov/bill-details/20261/HB35/text/HB35 HB35] can be viewed here. <hr> == Proposed Amendment == === Amendment Offered for Consideration (requested for subcommittee) === ==== Add “Lockdown” throughout relevant provisions ==== Amend the bill to explicitly include “lockdown” alongside “solitary confinement/isolated confinement” and “restorative housing” in all relevant sections, to prevent facilities from using unit-wide lockdown practices as a functional substitute for individual isolated confinement. ==== Strengthen the time-limit clause (close the cumulative-days gap) ==== Replace the current time-limit phrasing with: “No individual shall be held in solitary confinement, lockdown, or restorative housing for more than 15 consecutive days, nor 15 days in any 60-day period.” <b>Purpose of the amendment:</b> The introduced text already uses “15 consecutive days…in any 60-day period,” but stakeholders have raised concerns that “consecutive” language can be worked around by cycling people in and out (or shifting to lockdown practices) without ever hitting a “consecutive” threshold. The amendment makes the limit explicitly <i>both</i> consecutive and cumulative. <hr> == Opening Statement == === House Subcommittee Statement === <blockquote> ====Notes on delivery: ==== <mark> <b>bold</b>—emphasize, increase volume; </mark> <mark> <i>italicized</i>—stressed, extended pronunciation, sing-songy; </mark> <mark> <i><b>bold italicized</i></b>—climactic, stressed and emphatic; </mark> <mark> • bulleted—drum-like repetition, think of MLK's "I Have a Dream," "I have a dream that..." repeated for emphasis; </mark> <mark> — a half pause, slight build-up; </mark> <mark> — — a full pause, major build-up. <mark> - <mark>VIBE: think "victory lap;" sell the idea that this bill is a done deal and that doubters should get on board while they still have a chance to be on the right side of history. This is a <b><i>pathos</i></b> and <i><b>ethos</i></b> argument, not <i>logos</i>; lean on expert testimonies for questions of <i>logic</i>. - Eric</mark> + <mark><b>VIBE:</b> think <i>"victory lap;"</i> sell the idea that this bill is a done deal and that doubters should get on board while they still have a chance to be on the right side of history. This is a <b><i>pathos</i></b> and <i><b>ethos</i></b> argument, not <i>logos</i>; lean on expert testimonies for questions of <i>logic</i>. - Eric</mark> </blockquote> <br> Mister Chair, members of the subcommittee— <i>This is not our first time here.</i> For <b>two straight years</b>, the General Assembly has passed this reform. <b>In 2024</b>, I gave you a sermon — — and then we passed <i>HB 1244.</i> <b>In 2025</b>, • my sister, • my friend, • and my <i>esteemed colleague</i>, <b>Delegate Karen Keys-Gamarra</b>, took up the torch — — and then we passed <i>HB 2647.</i> Twice, this body has said—<i><b>clearly</b></i>—that we are ready to turn the page on solitary confinement. And after two straight years, nobody can pretend this is new... • You know this bill. • You know this issue. • You know how overdue this change is — — Mister Chair, members of the committee, this is not our first time here, <b>BUT it will be our last</b>—because this year <i>we will make history.</i> And what is so great about this year is that we all have a <i>chance</i>—a <i>chance</i> to be part of making history. If you're still on the fence, I want you to look <i>forward</i> into the future with me. <b>Don't let the past hold you back — —</b> • Because when we look back in 25 years, <b>we will know this legislation was the right thing to do.</b> • Because when we look back in 50 years, <b>we will know this legislation was the right thing to do.</b> • Because when we look back in <b>one-hundred</b> years, <i><b>we will know this legislation was the right thing to do!</b></i> Today—I hope everyone in this room joins us in doing the <i><b>right thing.</b></i> We know the questions, and we'll answer them if asked. But I encourage us to listen to <i>testimonies</i>, to listen to the voices who are ready for change, so that we may be reminded—again—<i>just how overdue this legislation is.</i> Thank you, Mister Chair and members of the committee. I hope you report this bill favorably to full committee. <hr> == Support and Opposition == === Support === • ACLU People Power Fairfax • Bridging The Gap In Virginia • Charlottesville Chapter National Organization for Women • Coalition for Justice • EJUSA Evangelical Network • Fighting 4 Freedom • Greater Washington (JCRC) • Inmate Support Virginia • Interfaith Action for Human Rights (IAHR) • HALT Solitary • Jewish Community Relations Council of Just Future Project • Justice & Witness Action Network- VA • United Church of Christ Central Atlantic Conference • LatinoJustice PRLDEF • NAACP Loudoun • National Association of Social Workers • National Association of Social Workers, Virginia Chapter • National Religious Campaign Against Torture • No Left Turns • Resource Information Help for the Disadvantaged and Disenfranchised (RIHD) • RISE for Youth • RVA Health Alliance for Social Justice and Equity • Social Action Linking Together (SALT) • Social Workers and Allies Against Solitary Confinement • The Humanization Project • The Sentencing Project • Unitarian Universalist Legislative Ministry of Virginia • Unlock the Box Campaign • Virginia CURE • Virginia Defenders for Freedom, Justice & Equality • Virginia Justice Democrats • Virginia Justice for Life • Virginia Justice Alliance • Virginia Prisons Accountability Committee • Virginia Prisoner Of Conscience • Virginia Prison Justice Network • WJCC Coalition for Community Justice • 40 Strong === Opposition === • (to be updated) === No Recommendation / Neutral === • (to be updated) === No Position Provided === • Department of Corrections <hr> == Fiscal Impact == No fiscal impact statement is posted for HB35. <hr> == Possible Questions == === TL;DR === <b>Q1: “Does this end solitary confinement in Virginia?”</b> TL;DR: No—it ends <i>prolonged</i> solitary confinement and sets clear limits, oversight, and due-process rules for any use. <br> <b>Q2: “Does this make prisons less safe for staff?”</b> TL;DR: No—HB35 keeps exceptions for imminent threats and requires documentation; it’s about targeted use, not “never.” <br> <b>Q3: “What changes day-to-day?”</b> TL;DR: Frequent reviews, rapid medical/mental health checks, real programming/out-of-cell time, and written accountability when isolation is used. <br> <b>Q4: “Can DOC just use ‘lockdowns’ instead?”</b> TL;DR: The bill defines lockdown and regulates it, and the requested amendment strengthens this further by applying the same time limits to lockdown explicitly. <br> === Q1: “What does the bill aim to accomplish?” === <b>Answer you can use:</b> HB35 ends prolonged solitary confinement by setting clear time limits and requiring real oversight—regular reviews, rapid medical and mental health evaluations, documentation, and in-person due process when isolation continues. <br> === Q2: “How often is placement reviewed?” === <b>Answer you can use:</b> Placement is reviewed frequently, including a required 48-hour review cycle with written documentation explaining why less restrictive settings were not used. <br> === Q3: “What health protections are required?” === <b>Answer you can use:</b> HB35 requires medical and mental health evaluations by certified professionals within one working day of placement in restorative housing or isolated confinement (with limited exceptions). <br> === Q4: “Does this stop people from getting programming or recreation?” === <b>Answer you can use:</b> No—the bill requires at least four hours of out-of-cell programming or congregate activity daily, plus at least one hour of congregate recreation unless exceptional safety circumstances apply. <br> === Q5: “What stops indefinite ‘lockdowns’?” === <b>Answer you can use:</b> Lockdowns that interrupt programming must have a specific documented security purpose, must end as soon as the purpose is served, are time-limited, require approvals to extend or repeat, and must be documented and published. <hr> == Additional Information == <b>1. Definitions are the enforcement backbone</b> • The bill defines isolated confinement and lockdown by hours-per-day and loss of programming, so policy can’t be evaded by unit names. <b>Policy implication:</b> Regulates conditions, not labels. <br> <b>2. The “less restrictive first” rule targets protective-custody misuse</b> • For “own protection” placements, the facility must use less restrictive options first, including transfers or special-purpose housing for similarly threatened individuals, unless infeasible. <b>Policy implication:</b> Safety without defaulting to isolation. <br> <b>3. Reviews + documentation create accountability</b> • Requires regular reviews, documentation in the institutional file, notice up the chain, and formal in-person reviews with appeal rights. <b>Policy implication:</b> Isolation becomes a documented exception, not a routine. <br> <b>4. Lockdown limits matter because lockdown can function like solitary</b> • The bill regulates lockdowns that interrupt programming and requires publication of documentation. <b>Policy implication:</b> Prevents “unit-wide solitary” from becoming the workaround. [[Category:2026 Session]]
2026-01-22 06:57:31
Edited by: 74.110.183.75
Edited by: 74.110.183.75
= HB35 Restorative housing and isolated confinement; restrictions on use. = == Status == [https://house.vga.virginia.gov/subcommittees/H15002/agendas/5187 Public Safety | Subcommittee #2 — agenda] <hr> == Overview == === Summary as Introduced === <b>Restorative housing and isolated confinement; restrictions on use.</b> Prohibits the use of isolated confinement, defined in the bill, in state correctional facilities, subject to certain exceptions. The bill requires that before placing an incarcerated person in restorative housing or isolated confinement for his own protection, the facility administrator shall place an incarcerated person in a less-restrictive setting, including by transferring such person to another institution or to a special-purpose housing unit for incarcerated persons who face similar threats. The bill requires that if an incarcerated person is placed in restorative housing or isolated confinement, such placement shall be reviewed every 48 hours and the facility administrator shall ensure that the incarcerated person receives a medical and mental health evaluation from certified medical and mental health professionals within one working day of placement in restorative housing or any form of isolated confinement. The bill also requires the facility administrator to notify the regional administrator in writing that an incarcerated person was placed in restorative housing or isolated confinement within 24 hours of such placement. Finally, the bill requires that formal reviews of an incarcerated person's placement in any form of isolated confinement shall be held in such person's presence, inform him of any reasons administrative officials believe isolated confinement remains necessary, and give the incarcerated person an opportunity to respond to those reasons, and a formal ruling shall be provided to the incarcerated individual within 24 hours. <hr> === Patrons === ==== House Patrons ==== • Joshua G. Cole (chief patron) • Patrick A. Hope • Sam Rasoul • Holly Seibold ==== Senate Patrons ==== • Bagby <hr> == Language == The language of [https://lis.virginia.gov/bill-details/20261/HB35/text/HB35 HB35] can be viewed here. <hr> == Proposed Amendment == === Amendment Offered for Consideration (requested for subcommittee) === ==== Add “Lockdown” throughout relevant provisions ==== Amend the bill to explicitly include “lockdown” alongside “solitary confinement/isolated confinement” and “restorative housing” in all relevant sections, to prevent facilities from using unit-wide lockdown practices as a functional substitute for individual isolated confinement. ==== Strengthen the time-limit clause (close the cumulative-days gap) ==== Replace the current time-limit phrasing with: “No individual shall be held in solitary confinement, lockdown, or restorative housing for more than 15 consecutive days, nor 15 days in any 60-day period.” <b>Purpose of the amendment:</b> The introduced text already uses “15 consecutive days…in any 60-day period,” but stakeholders have raised concerns that “consecutive” language can be worked around by cycling people in and out (or shifting to lockdown practices) without ever hitting a “consecutive” threshold. The amendment makes the limit explicitly <i>both</i> consecutive and cumulative. <hr> == Opening Statement == === House Subcommittee Statement === <blockquote> ====Notes on delivery: ==== <mark> <b>bold</b>—emphasize, increase volume; </mark> <mark> <i>italicized</i>—stressed, extended pronunciation, sing-songy; </mark> <mark> <i><b>bold italicized</i></b>—climactic, stressed and emphatic; </mark> <mark> • bulleted—drum-like repetition, think of MLK's "I Have a Dream," "I have a dream that..." repeated for emphasis; </mark> <mark> — a half pause, slight build-up; </mark> <mark> — — a full pause, major build-up. <mark> - <mark>VIBE: think "victory lap;" sell the idea that this bill is a done deal and that doubters should get on board while they still have a chance to be on the right side of history. This is a <b><i>pathos</i></b> and <i><b>ethos</i></b> argument, not <i>logos</i>; lean on expert testimonies for <i>logos</i>- Eric</mark> + <mark>VIBE: think "victory lap;" sell the idea that this bill is a done deal and that doubters should get on board while they still have a chance to be on the right side of history. This is a <b><i>pathos</i></b> and <i><b>ethos</i></b> argument, not <i>logos</i>; lean on expert testimonies for questions of <i>logic</i>. - Eric</mark> </blockquote> <br> Mister Chair, members of the subcommittee— <i>This is not our first time here.</i> For <b>two straight years</b>, the General Assembly has passed this reform. <b>In 2024</b>, I gave you a sermon — — and then we passed <i>HB 1244.</i> <b>In 2025</b>, • my sister, • my friend, • and my <i>esteemed colleague</i>, <b>Delegate Karen Keys-Gamarra</b>, took up the torch — — and then we passed <i>HB 2647.</i> Twice, this body has said—<i><b>clearly</b></i>—that we are ready to turn the page on solitary confinement. And after two straight years, nobody can pretend this is new... • You know this bill. • You know this issue. • You know how overdue this change is — — Mister Chair, members of the committee, this is not our first time here, <b>BUT it will be our last</b>—because this year <i>we will make history.</i> And what is so great about this year is that we all have a <i>chance</i>—a <i>chance</i> to be part of making history. If you're still on the fence, I want you to look <i>forward</i> into the future with me. <b>Don't let the past hold you back — —</b> • Because when we look back in 25 years, <b>we will know this legislation was the right thing to do.</b> • Because when we look back in 50 years, <b>we will know this legislation was the right thing to do.</b> • Because when we look back in <b>one-hundred</b> years, <i><b>we will know this legislation was the right thing to do!</b></i> Today—I hope everyone in this room joins us in doing the <i><b>right thing.</b></i> We know the questions, and we'll answer them if asked. But I encourage us to listen to <i>testimonies</i>, to listen to the voices who are ready for change, so that we may be reminded—again—<i>just how overdue this legislation is.</i> Thank you, Mister Chair and members of the committee. I hope you report this bill favorably to full committee. <hr> == Support and Opposition == === Support === • ACLU People Power Fairfax • Bridging The Gap In Virginia • Charlottesville Chapter National Organization for Women • Coalition for Justice • EJUSA Evangelical Network • Fighting 4 Freedom • Greater Washington (JCRC) • Inmate Support Virginia • Interfaith Action for Human Rights (IAHR) • HALT Solitary • Jewish Community Relations Council of Just Future Project • Justice & Witness Action Network- VA • United Church of Christ Central Atlantic Conference • LatinoJustice PRLDEF • NAACP Loudoun • National Association of Social Workers • National Association of Social Workers, Virginia Chapter • National Religious Campaign Against Torture • No Left Turns • Resource Information Help for the Disadvantaged and Disenfranchised (RIHD) • RISE for Youth • RVA Health Alliance for Social Justice and Equity • Social Action Linking Together (SALT) • Social Workers and Allies Against Solitary Confinement • The Humanization Project • The Sentencing Project • Unitarian Universalist Legislative Ministry of Virginia • Unlock the Box Campaign • Virginia CURE • Virginia Defenders for Freedom, Justice & Equality • Virginia Justice Democrats • Virginia Justice for Life • Virginia Justice Alliance • Virginia Prisons Accountability Committee • Virginia Prisoner Of Conscience • Virginia Prison Justice Network • WJCC Coalition for Community Justice • 40 Strong === Opposition === • (to be updated) === No Recommendation / Neutral === • (to be updated) === No Position Provided === • Department of Corrections <hr> == Fiscal Impact == No fiscal impact statement is posted for HB35. <hr> == Possible Questions == === TL;DR === <b>Q1: “Does this end solitary confinement in Virginia?”</b> TL;DR: No—it ends <i>prolonged</i> solitary confinement and sets clear limits, oversight, and due-process rules for any use. <br> <b>Q2: “Does this make prisons less safe for staff?”</b> TL;DR: No—HB35 keeps exceptions for imminent threats and requires documentation; it’s about targeted use, not “never.” <br> <b>Q3: “What changes day-to-day?”</b> TL;DR: Frequent reviews, rapid medical/mental health checks, real programming/out-of-cell time, and written accountability when isolation is used. <br> <b>Q4: “Can DOC just use ‘lockdowns’ instead?”</b> TL;DR: The bill defines lockdown and regulates it, and the requested amendment strengthens this further by applying the same time limits to lockdown explicitly. <br> === Q1: “What does the bill aim to accomplish?” === <b>Answer you can use:</b> HB35 ends prolonged solitary confinement by setting clear time limits and requiring real oversight—regular reviews, rapid medical and mental health evaluations, documentation, and in-person due process when isolation continues. <br> === Q2: “How often is placement reviewed?” === <b>Answer you can use:</b> Placement is reviewed frequently, including a required 48-hour review cycle with written documentation explaining why less restrictive settings were not used. <br> === Q3: “What health protections are required?” === <b>Answer you can use:</b> HB35 requires medical and mental health evaluations by certified professionals within one working day of placement in restorative housing or isolated confinement (with limited exceptions). <br> === Q4: “Does this stop people from getting programming or recreation?” === <b>Answer you can use:</b> No—the bill requires at least four hours of out-of-cell programming or congregate activity daily, plus at least one hour of congregate recreation unless exceptional safety circumstances apply. <br> === Q5: “What stops indefinite ‘lockdowns’?” === <b>Answer you can use:</b> Lockdowns that interrupt programming must have a specific documented security purpose, must end as soon as the purpose is served, are time-limited, require approvals to extend or repeat, and must be documented and published. <hr> == Additional Information == <b>1. Definitions are the enforcement backbone</b> • The bill defines isolated confinement and lockdown by hours-per-day and loss of programming, so policy can’t be evaded by unit names. <b>Policy implication:</b> Regulates conditions, not labels. <br> <b>2. The “less restrictive first” rule targets protective-custody misuse</b> • For “own protection” placements, the facility must use less restrictive options first, including transfers or special-purpose housing for similarly threatened individuals, unless infeasible. <b>Policy implication:</b> Safety without defaulting to isolation. <br> <b>3. Reviews + documentation create accountability</b> • Requires regular reviews, documentation in the institutional file, notice up the chain, and formal in-person reviews with appeal rights. <b>Policy implication:</b> Isolation becomes a documented exception, not a routine. <br> <b>4. Lockdown limits matter because lockdown can function like solitary</b> • The bill regulates lockdowns that interrupt programming and requires publication of documentation. <b>Policy implication:</b> Prevents “unit-wide solitary” from becoming the workaround. [[Category:2026 Session]]
2026-01-22 06:56:58
Edited by: 74.110.183.75
Edited by: 74.110.183.75
= HB35 Restorative housing and isolated confinement; restrictions on use. = == Status == [https://house.vga.virginia.gov/subcommittees/H15002/agendas/5187 Public Safety | Subcommittee #2 — agenda] <hr> == Overview == === Summary as Introduced === <b>Restorative housing and isolated confinement; restrictions on use.</b> Prohibits the use of isolated confinement, defined in the bill, in state correctional facilities, subject to certain exceptions. The bill requires that before placing an incarcerated person in restorative housing or isolated confinement for his own protection, the facility administrator shall place an incarcerated person in a less-restrictive setting, including by transferring such person to another institution or to a special-purpose housing unit for incarcerated persons who face similar threats. The bill requires that if an incarcerated person is placed in restorative housing or isolated confinement, such placement shall be reviewed every 48 hours and the facility administrator shall ensure that the incarcerated person receives a medical and mental health evaluation from certified medical and mental health professionals within one working day of placement in restorative housing or any form of isolated confinement. The bill also requires the facility administrator to notify the regional administrator in writing that an incarcerated person was placed in restorative housing or isolated confinement within 24 hours of such placement. Finally, the bill requires that formal reviews of an incarcerated person's placement in any form of isolated confinement shall be held in such person's presence, inform him of any reasons administrative officials believe isolated confinement remains necessary, and give the incarcerated person an opportunity to respond to those reasons, and a formal ruling shall be provided to the incarcerated individual within 24 hours. <hr> === Patrons === ==== House Patrons ==== • Joshua G. Cole (chief patron) • Patrick A. Hope • Sam Rasoul • Holly Seibold ==== Senate Patrons ==== • Bagby <hr> == Language == The language of [https://lis.virginia.gov/bill-details/20261/HB35/text/HB35 HB35] can be viewed here. <hr> == Proposed Amendment == === Amendment Offered for Consideration (requested for subcommittee) === ==== Add “Lockdown” throughout relevant provisions ==== Amend the bill to explicitly include “lockdown” alongside “solitary confinement/isolated confinement” and “restorative housing” in all relevant sections, to prevent facilities from using unit-wide lockdown practices as a functional substitute for individual isolated confinement. ==== Strengthen the time-limit clause (close the cumulative-days gap) ==== Replace the current time-limit phrasing with: “No individual shall be held in solitary confinement, lockdown, or restorative housing for more than 15 consecutive days, nor 15 days in any 60-day period.” <b>Purpose of the amendment:</b> The introduced text already uses “15 consecutive days…in any 60-day period,” but stakeholders have raised concerns that “consecutive” language can be worked around by cycling people in and out (or shifting to lockdown practices) without ever hitting a “consecutive” threshold. The amendment makes the limit explicitly <i>both</i> consecutive and cumulative. <hr> == Opening Statement == === House Subcommittee Statement === <blockquote> ====Notes on delivery: ==== <mark> <b>bold</b>—emphasize, increase volume; </mark> <mark> <i>italicized</i>—stressed, extended pronunciation, sing-songy; </mark> <mark> <i><b>bold italicized</i></b>—climactic, stressed and emphatic; </mark> <mark> • bulleted—drum-like repetition, think of MLK's "I Have a Dream," "I have a dream that..." repeated for emphasis; </mark> <mark> — a half pause, slight build-up; </mark> <mark> — — a full pause, major build-up. <mark> - <mark>VIBE: think "victory lap;" sell the idea that this bill is a done deal and that doubters should get on board while they still have a chance to be on the right side of history. - Eric</mark> + <mark>VIBE: think "victory lap;" sell the idea that this bill is a done deal and that doubters should get on board while they still have a chance to be on the right side of history. This is a <b><i>pathos</i></b> and <i><b>ethos</i></b> argument, not <i>logos</i>; lean on expert testimonies for <i>logos</i>- Eric</mark> </blockquote> <br> Mister Chair, members of the subcommittee— <i>This is not our first time here.</i> For <b>two straight years</b>, the General Assembly has passed this reform. <b>In 2024</b>, I gave you a sermon — — and then we passed <i>HB 1244.</i> <b>In 2025</b>, • my sister, • my friend, • and my <i>esteemed colleague</i>, <b>Delegate Karen Keys-Gamarra</b>, took up the torch — — and then we passed <i>HB 2647.</i> Twice, this body has said—<i><b>clearly</b></i>—that we are ready to turn the page on solitary confinement. And after two straight years, nobody can pretend this is new... • You know this bill. • You know this issue. • You know how overdue this change is — — Mister Chair, members of the committee, this is not our first time here, <b>BUT it will be our last</b>—because this year <i>we will make history.</i> And what is so great about this year is that we all have a <i>chance</i>—a <i>chance</i> to be part of making history. If you're still on the fence, I want you to look <i>forward</i> into the future with me. <b>Don't let the past hold you back — —</b> • Because when we look back in 25 years, <b>we will know this legislation was the right thing to do.</b> • Because when we look back in 50 years, <b>we will know this legislation was the right thing to do.</b> • Because when we look back in <b>one-hundred</b> years, <i><b>we will know this legislation was the right thing to do!</b></i> Today—I hope everyone in this room joins us in doing the <i><b>right thing.</b></i> We know the questions, and we'll answer them if asked. But I encourage us to listen to <i>testimonies</i>, to listen to the voices who are ready for change, so that we may be reminded—again—<i>just how overdue this legislation is.</i> Thank you, Mister Chair and members of the committee. I hope you report this bill favorably to full committee. <hr> == Support and Opposition == === Support === • ACLU People Power Fairfax • Bridging The Gap In Virginia • Charlottesville Chapter National Organization for Women • Coalition for Justice • EJUSA Evangelical Network • Fighting 4 Freedom • Greater Washington (JCRC) • Inmate Support Virginia • Interfaith Action for Human Rights (IAHR) • HALT Solitary • Jewish Community Relations Council of Just Future Project • Justice & Witness Action Network- VA • United Church of Christ Central Atlantic Conference • LatinoJustice PRLDEF • NAACP Loudoun • National Association of Social Workers • National Association of Social Workers, Virginia Chapter • National Religious Campaign Against Torture • No Left Turns • Resource Information Help for the Disadvantaged and Disenfranchised (RIHD) • RISE for Youth • RVA Health Alliance for Social Justice and Equity • Social Action Linking Together (SALT) • Social Workers and Allies Against Solitary Confinement • The Humanization Project • The Sentencing Project • Unitarian Universalist Legislative Ministry of Virginia • Unlock the Box Campaign • Virginia CURE • Virginia Defenders for Freedom, Justice & Equality • Virginia Justice Democrats • Virginia Justice for Life • Virginia Justice Alliance • Virginia Prisons Accountability Committee • Virginia Prisoner Of Conscience • Virginia Prison Justice Network • WJCC Coalition for Community Justice • 40 Strong === Opposition === • (to be updated) === No Recommendation / Neutral === • (to be updated) === No Position Provided === • Department of Corrections <hr> == Fiscal Impact == No fiscal impact statement is posted for HB35. <hr> == Possible Questions == === TL;DR === <b>Q1: “Does this end solitary confinement in Virginia?”</b> TL;DR: No—it ends <i>prolonged</i> solitary confinement and sets clear limits, oversight, and due-process rules for any use. <br> <b>Q2: “Does this make prisons less safe for staff?”</b> TL;DR: No—HB35 keeps exceptions for imminent threats and requires documentation; it’s about targeted use, not “never.” <br> <b>Q3: “What changes day-to-day?”</b> TL;DR: Frequent reviews, rapid medical/mental health checks, real programming/out-of-cell time, and written accountability when isolation is used. <br> <b>Q4: “Can DOC just use ‘lockdowns’ instead?”</b> TL;DR: The bill defines lockdown and regulates it, and the requested amendment strengthens this further by applying the same time limits to lockdown explicitly. <br> === Q1: “What does the bill aim to accomplish?” === <b>Answer you can use:</b> HB35 ends prolonged solitary confinement by setting clear time limits and requiring real oversight—regular reviews, rapid medical and mental health evaluations, documentation, and in-person due process when isolation continues. <br> === Q2: “How often is placement reviewed?” === <b>Answer you can use:</b> Placement is reviewed frequently, including a required 48-hour review cycle with written documentation explaining why less restrictive settings were not used. <br> === Q3: “What health protections are required?” === <b>Answer you can use:</b> HB35 requires medical and mental health evaluations by certified professionals within one working day of placement in restorative housing or isolated confinement (with limited exceptions). <br> === Q4: “Does this stop people from getting programming or recreation?” === <b>Answer you can use:</b> No—the bill requires at least four hours of out-of-cell programming or congregate activity daily, plus at least one hour of congregate recreation unless exceptional safety circumstances apply. <br> === Q5: “What stops indefinite ‘lockdowns’?” === <b>Answer you can use:</b> Lockdowns that interrupt programming must have a specific documented security purpose, must end as soon as the purpose is served, are time-limited, require approvals to extend or repeat, and must be documented and published. <hr> == Additional Information == <b>1. Definitions are the enforcement backbone</b> • The bill defines isolated confinement and lockdown by hours-per-day and loss of programming, so policy can’t be evaded by unit names. <b>Policy implication:</b> Regulates conditions, not labels. <br> <b>2. The “less restrictive first” rule targets protective-custody misuse</b> • For “own protection” placements, the facility must use less restrictive options first, including transfers or special-purpose housing for similarly threatened individuals, unless infeasible. <b>Policy implication:</b> Safety without defaulting to isolation. <br> <b>3. Reviews + documentation create accountability</b> • Requires regular reviews, documentation in the institutional file, notice up the chain, and formal in-person reviews with appeal rights. <b>Policy implication:</b> Isolation becomes a documented exception, not a routine. <br> <b>4. Lockdown limits matter because lockdown can function like solitary</b> • The bill regulates lockdowns that interrupt programming and requires publication of documentation. <b>Policy implication:</b> Prevents “unit-wide solitary” from becoming the workaround. [[Category:2026 Session]]
2026-01-22 06:56:34
Edited by: 74.110.183.75
Edited by: 74.110.183.75
= HB35 Restorative housing and isolated confinement; restrictions on use. = == Status == [https://house.vga.virginia.gov/subcommittees/H15002/agendas/5187 Public Safety | Subcommittee #2 — agenda] <hr> == Overview == === Summary as Introduced === <b>Restorative housing and isolated confinement; restrictions on use.</b> Prohibits the use of isolated confinement, defined in the bill, in state correctional facilities, subject to certain exceptions. The bill requires that before placing an incarcerated person in restorative housing or isolated confinement for his own protection, the facility administrator shall place an incarcerated person in a less-restrictive setting, including by transferring such person to another institution or to a special-purpose housing unit for incarcerated persons who face similar threats. The bill requires that if an incarcerated person is placed in restorative housing or isolated confinement, such placement shall be reviewed every 48 hours and the facility administrator shall ensure that the incarcerated person receives a medical and mental health evaluation from certified medical and mental health professionals within one working day of placement in restorative housing or any form of isolated confinement. The bill also requires the facility administrator to notify the regional administrator in writing that an incarcerated person was placed in restorative housing or isolated confinement within 24 hours of such placement. Finally, the bill requires that formal reviews of an incarcerated person's placement in any form of isolated confinement shall be held in such person's presence, inform him of any reasons administrative officials believe isolated confinement remains necessary, and give the incarcerated person an opportunity to respond to those reasons, and a formal ruling shall be provided to the incarcerated individual within 24 hours. <hr> === Patrons === ==== House Patrons ==== • Joshua G. Cole (chief patron) • Patrick A. Hope • Sam Rasoul • Holly Seibold ==== Senate Patrons ==== • Bagby <hr> == Language == The language of [https://lis.virginia.gov/bill-details/20261/HB35/text/HB35 HB35] can be viewed here. <hr> == Proposed Amendment == === Amendment Offered for Consideration (requested for subcommittee) === ==== Add “Lockdown” throughout relevant provisions ==== Amend the bill to explicitly include “lockdown” alongside “solitary confinement/isolated confinement” and “restorative housing” in all relevant sections, to prevent facilities from using unit-wide lockdown practices as a functional substitute for individual isolated confinement. ==== Strengthen the time-limit clause (close the cumulative-days gap) ==== Replace the current time-limit phrasing with: “No individual shall be held in solitary confinement, lockdown, or restorative housing for more than 15 consecutive days, nor 15 days in any 60-day period.” <b>Purpose of the amendment:</b> The introduced text already uses “15 consecutive days…in any 60-day period,” but stakeholders have raised concerns that “consecutive” language can be worked around by cycling people in and out (or shifting to lockdown practices) without ever hitting a “consecutive” threshold. The amendment makes the limit explicitly <i>both</i> consecutive and cumulative. <hr> == Opening Statement == === House Subcommittee Statement === <blockquote> ====Notes on delivery: ==== <mark> <b>bold</b>—emphasize, increase volume; </mark> <mark> <i>italicized</i>—stressed, extended pronunciation, sing-songy; </mark> <mark> <i><b>bold italicized</i></b>—climactic, stressed and emphatic; </mark> <mark> • bulleted—drum-like repetition, think of MLK's "I Have a Dream," "I have a dream that..." repeated for emphasis; </mark> <mark> — a half pause, slight build-up; </mark> <mark> — — a full pause, major build-up. <mark> - </blockquote> + - + <mark>VIBE: think "victory lap;" sell the idea that this bill is a done deal and that doubters should get on board while they still have a chance to be on the right side of history. - Eric</mark> - <br> + </blockquote> - Mister Chair, members of the subcommittee— + <br> - <i>This is not our first time here.</i> + Mister Chair, members of the subcommittee— - For <b>two straight years</b>, the General Assembly has passed this reform. + <i>This is not our first time here.</i> - <b>In 2024</b>, I gave you a sermon — — and then we passed <i>HB 1244.</i> + For <b>two straight years</b>, the General Assembly has passed this reform. - <b>In 2025</b>, • my sister, • my friend, • and my <i>esteemed colleague</i>, <b>Delegate Karen Keys-Gamarra</b>, took up the torch — — and then we passed <i>HB 2647.</i> + <b>In 2024</b>, I gave you a sermon — — and then we passed <i>HB 1244.</i> - Twice, this body has said—<i><b>clearly</b></i>—that we are ready to turn the page on solitary confinement. + <b>In 2025</b>, • my sister, • my friend, • and my <i>esteemed colleague</i>, <b>Delegate Karen Keys-Gamarra</b>, took up the torch — — and then we passed <i>HB 2647.</i> - And after two straight years, nobody can pretend this is new... + Twice, this body has said—<i><b>clearly</b></i>—that we are ready to turn the page on solitary confinement. - • You know this bill. + And after two straight years, nobody can pretend this is new... - • You know this issue. + - • You know how overdue this change is — — + • You know this bill. - + • You know this issue. - Mister Chair, members of the committee, this is not our first time here, <b>BUT it will be our last</b>—because this year <i>we will make history.</i> + • You know how overdue this change is — — - And what is so great about this year is that we all have a <i>chance</i>—a <i>chance</i> to be part of making history. + Mister Chair, members of the committee, this is not our first time here, <b>BUT it will be our last</b>—because this year <i>we will make history.</i> - If you're still on the fence, I want you to look <i>forward</i> into the future with me. <b>Don't let the past hold you back — —</b> + And what is so great about this year is that we all have a <i>chance</i>—a <i>chance</i> to be part of making history. - • Because when we look back in 25 years, <b>we will know this legislation was the right thing to do.</b> + If you're still on the fence, I want you to look <i>forward</i> into the future with me. <b>Don't let the past hold you back — —</b> - • Because when we look back in 50 years, <b>we will know this legislation was the right thing to do.</b> + • Because when we look back in 25 years, <b>we will know this legislation was the right thing to do.</b> - • Because when we look back in <b>one-hundred</b> years, <i><b>we will know this legislation was the right thing to do!</b></i> + • Because when we look back in 50 years, <b>we will know this legislation was the right thing to do.</b> - Today—I hope everyone in this room joins us in doing the <i><b>right thing.</b></i> + • Because when we look back in <b>one-hundred</b> years, <i><b>we will know this legislation was the right thing to do!</b></i> - We know the questions, and we'll answer them if asked. But I encourage us to listen to <i>testimonies</i>, to listen to the voices who are ready for change, so that we may be reminded—again—<i>just how overdue this legislation is.</i> + Today—I hope everyone in this room joins us in doing the <i><b>right thing.</b></i> - Thank you, Mister Chair and members of the committee. I hope you report this bill favorably to full committee. + We know the questions, and we'll answer them if asked. But I encourage us to listen to <i>testimonies</i>, to listen to the voices who are ready for change, so that we may be reminded—again—<i>just how overdue this legislation is.</i> - <hr> + Thank you, Mister Chair and members of the committee. I hope you report this bill favorably to full committee. - == Support and Opposition == + <hr> - === Support === + == Support and Opposition == - • ACLU People Power Fairfax + - • Bridging The Gap In Virginia + === Support === - • Charlottesville Chapter National Organization for Women + • ACLU People Power Fairfax - • Coalition for Justice + • Bridging The Gap In Virginia - • EJUSA Evangelical Network + • Charlottesville Chapter National Organization for Women - • Fighting 4 Freedom + • Coalition for Justice - • Greater Washington (JCRC) + • EJUSA Evangelical Network - • Inmate Support Virginia + • Fighting 4 Freedom - • Interfaith Action for Human Rights (IAHR) + • Greater Washington (JCRC) - • HALT Solitary + • Inmate Support Virginia - • Jewish Community Relations Council of Just Future Project + • Interfaith Action for Human Rights (IAHR) - • Justice & Witness Action Network- VA + • HALT Solitary - • United Church of Christ Central Atlantic Conference + • Jewish Community Relations Council of Just Future Project - • LatinoJustice PRLDEF + • Justice & Witness Action Network- VA - • NAACP Loudoun + • United Church of Christ Central Atlantic Conference - • National Association of Social Workers + • LatinoJustice PRLDEF - • National Association of Social Workers, Virginia Chapter + • NAACP Loudoun - • National Religious Campaign Against Torture + • National Association of Social Workers - • No Left Turns + • National Association of Social Workers, Virginia Chapter - • Resource Information Help for the Disadvantaged and Disenfranchised (RIHD) + • National Religious Campaign Against Torture - • RISE for Youth + • No Left Turns - • RVA Health Alliance for Social Justice and Equity + • Resource Information Help for the Disadvantaged and Disenfranchised (RIHD) - • Social Action Linking Together (SALT) + • RISE for Youth - • Social Workers and Allies Against Solitary Confinement + • RVA Health Alliance for Social Justice and Equity - • The Humanization Project + • Social Action Linking Together (SALT) - • The Sentencing Project + • Social Workers and Allies Against Solitary Confinement - • Unitarian Universalist Legislative Ministry of Virginia + • The Humanization Project - • Unlock the Box Campaign + • The Sentencing Project - • Virginia CURE + • Unitarian Universalist Legislative Ministry of Virginia - • Virginia Defenders for Freedom, Justice & Equality + • Unlock the Box Campaign - • Virginia Justice Democrats + • Virginia CURE - • Virginia Justice for Life + • Virginia Defenders for Freedom, Justice & Equality - • Virginia Justice Alliance + • Virginia Justice Democrats - • Virginia Prisons Accountability Committee + • Virginia Justice for Life - • Virginia Prisoner Of Conscience + • Virginia Justice Alliance - • Virginia Prison Justice Network + • Virginia Prisons Accountability Committee - • WJCC Coalition for Community Justice + • Virginia Prisoner Of Conscience - • 40 Strong + • Virginia Prison Justice Network - + • WJCC Coalition for Community Justice - === Opposition === + • 40 Strong - • (to be updated) + - + === Opposition === - === No Recommendation / Neutral === + • (to be updated) - • (to be updated) + - + === No Recommendation / Neutral === - === No Position Provided === + • (to be updated) - • Department of Corrections + - + === No Position Provided === - <hr> + • Department of Corrections - == Fiscal Impact == + <hr> - No fiscal impact statement is posted for HB35. + - + == Fiscal Impact == - <hr> + No fiscal impact statement is posted for HB35. - == Possible Questions == + <hr> - === TL;DR === + == Possible Questions == - <b>Q1: “Does this end solitary confinement in Virginia?”</b> TL;DR: No—it ends <i>prolonged</i> solitary confinement and sets clear limits, oversight, and due-process rules for any use. <br> + - <b>Q2: “Does this make prisons less safe for staff?”</b> TL;DR: No—HB35 keeps exceptions for imminent threats and requires documentation; it’s about targeted use, not “never.” + === TL;DR === - + <b>Q1: “Does this end solitary confinement in Virginia?”</b> TL;DR: No—it ends <i>prolonged</i> solitary confinement and sets clear limits, oversight, and due-process rules for any use. <br> - <br> + <b>Q2: “Does this make prisons less safe for staff?”</b> TL;DR: No—HB35 keeps exceptions for imminent threats and requires documentation; it’s about targeted use, not “never.” - <b>Q3: “What changes day-to-day?”</b> TL;DR: Frequent reviews, rapid medical/mental health checks, real programming/out-of-cell time, and written accountability when isolation is used. + - + <br> - <br> + <b>Q3: “What changes day-to-day?”</b> TL;DR: Frequent reviews, rapid medical/mental health checks, real programming/out-of-cell time, and written accountability when isolation is used. - <b>Q4: “Can DOC just use ‘lockdowns’ instead?”</b> TL;DR: The bill defines lockdown and regulates it, and the requested amendment strengthens this further by applying the same time limits to lockdown explicitly. + - + <br> - <br> + <b>Q4: “Can DOC just use ‘lockdowns’ instead?”</b> TL;DR: The bill defines lockdown and regulates it, and the requested amendment strengthens this further by applying the same time limits to lockdown explicitly. - === Q1: “What does the bill aim to accomplish?” === + <br> - <b>Answer you can use:</b> HB35 ends prolonged solitary confinement by setting clear time limits and requiring real oversight—regular reviews, rapid medical and mental health evaluations, documentation, and in-person due process when isolation continues. + - + === Q1: “What does the bill aim to accomplish?” === - <br> + <b>Answer you can use:</b> HB35 ends prolonged solitary confinement by setting clear time limits and requiring real oversight—regular reviews, rapid medical and mental health evaluations, documentation, and in-person due process when isolation continues. - === Q2: “How often is placement reviewed?” === + <br> - <b>Answer you can use:</b> Placement is reviewed frequently, including a required 48-hour review cycle with written documentation explaining why less restrictive settings were not used. + - + === Q2: “How often is placement reviewed?” === - <br> + <b>Answer you can use:</b> Placement is reviewed frequently, including a required 48-hour review cycle with written documentation explaining why less restrictive settings were not used. - === Q3: “What health protections are required?” === + <br> - <b>Answer you can use:</b> HB35 requires medical and mental health evaluations by certified professionals within one working day of placement in restorative housing or isolated confinement (with limited exceptions). + - + === Q3: “What health protections are required?” === - <br> + <b>Answer you can use:</b> HB35 requires medical and mental health evaluations by certified professionals within one working day of placement in restorative housing or isolated confinement (with limited exceptions). - === Q4: “Does this stop people from getting programming or recreation?” === + <br> - <b>Answer you can use:</b> No—the bill requires at least four hours of out-of-cell programming or congregate activity daily, plus at least one hour of congregate recreation unless exceptional safety circumstances apply. + - + === Q4: “Does this stop people from getting programming or recreation?” === - <br> + <b>Answer you can use:</b> No—the bill requires at least four hours of out-of-cell programming or congregate activity daily, plus at least one hour of congregate recreation unless exceptional safety circumstances apply. - === Q5: “What stops indefinite ‘lockdowns’?” === + <br> - <b>Answer you can use:</b> Lockdowns that interrupt programming must have a specific documented security purpose, must end as soon as the purpose is served, are time-limited, require approvals to extend or repeat, and must be documented and published. + - + === Q5: “What stops indefinite ‘lockdowns’?” === - <hr> + <b>Answer you can use:</b> Lockdowns that interrupt programming must have a specific documented security purpose, must end as soon as the purpose is served, are time-limited, require approvals to extend or repeat, and must be documented and published. - == Additional Information == + <hr> - <b>1. Definitions are the enforcement backbone</b> + - • The bill defines isolated confinement and lockdown by hours-per-day and loss of programming, so policy can’t be evaded by unit names. + == Additional Information == - + <b>1. Definitions are the enforcement backbone</b> - + • The bill defines isolated confinement and lockdown by hours-per-day and loss of programming, so policy can’t be evaded by unit names. - <b>Policy implication:</b> Regulates conditions, not labels. + - <br> + <b>Policy implication:</b> Regulates conditions, not labels. - <b>2. The “less restrictive first” rule targets protective-custody misuse</b> + <br> - • For “own protection” placements, the facility must use less restrictive options first, including transfers or special-purpose housing for similarly threatened individuals, unless infeasible. + - + <b>2. The “less restrictive first” rule targets protective-custody misuse</b> - <b>Policy implication:</b> Safety without defaulting to isolation. + • For “own protection” placements, the facility must use less restrictive options first, including transfers or special-purpose housing for similarly threatened individuals, unless infeasible. - <br> + <b>Policy implication:</b> Safety without defaulting to isolation. - <b>3. Reviews + documentation create accountability</b> + <br> - • Requires regular reviews, documentation in the institutional file, notice up the chain, and formal in-person reviews with appeal rights. + - + <b>3. Reviews + documentation create accountability</b> - <b>Policy implication:</b> Isolation becomes a documented exception, not a routine. + • Requires regular reviews, documentation in the institutional file, notice up the chain, and formal in-person reviews with appeal rights. - <br> + <b>Policy implication:</b> Isolation becomes a documented exception, not a routine. - <b>4. Lockdown limits matter because lockdown can function like solitary</b> + <br> - • The bill regulates lockdowns that interrupt programming and requires publication of documentation. + - + <b>4. Lockdown limits matter because lockdown can function like solitary</b> - + • The bill regulates lockdowns that interrupt programming and requires publication of documentation. - <b>Policy implication:</b> Prevents “unit-wide solitary” from becoming the workaround. + - [[Category:2026 Session]] + <b>Policy implication:</b> Prevents “unit-wide solitary” from becoming the workaround. + + [[Category:2026 Session]]
2026-01-22 06:54:37
Edited by: 74.110.183.75
Edited by: 74.110.183.75
= HB35 Restorative housing and isolated confinement; restrictions on use. = == Status == [https://house.vga.virginia.gov/subcommittees/H15002/agendas/5187 Public Safety | Subcommittee #2 — agenda] <hr> == Overview == === Summary as Introduced === <b>Restorative housing and isolated confinement; restrictions on use.</b> Prohibits the use of isolated confinement, defined in the bill, in state correctional facilities, subject to certain exceptions. The bill requires that before placing an incarcerated person in restorative housing or isolated confinement for his own protection, the facility administrator shall place an incarcerated person in a less-restrictive setting, including by transferring such person to another institution or to a special-purpose housing unit for incarcerated persons who face similar threats. The bill requires that if an incarcerated person is placed in restorative housing or isolated confinement, such placement shall be reviewed every 48 hours and the facility administrator shall ensure that the incarcerated person receives a medical and mental health evaluation from certified medical and mental health professionals within one working day of placement in restorative housing or any form of isolated confinement. The bill also requires the facility administrator to notify the regional administrator in writing that an incarcerated person was placed in restorative housing or isolated confinement within 24 hours of such placement. Finally, the bill requires that formal reviews of an incarcerated person's placement in any form of isolated confinement shall be held in such person's presence, inform him of any reasons administrative officials believe isolated confinement remains necessary, and give the incarcerated person an opportunity to respond to those reasons, and a formal ruling shall be provided to the incarcerated individual within 24 hours. <hr> === Patrons === ==== House Patrons ==== • Joshua G. Cole (chief patron) • Patrick A. Hope • Sam Rasoul • Holly Seibold ==== Senate Patrons ==== • Bagby <hr> == Language == The language of [https://lis.virginia.gov/bill-details/20261/HB35/text/HB35 HB35] can be viewed here. <hr> == Proposed Amendment == === Amendment Offered for Consideration (requested for subcommittee) === ==== Add “Lockdown” throughout relevant provisions ==== Amend the bill to explicitly include “lockdown” alongside “solitary confinement/isolated confinement” and “restorative housing” in all relevant sections, to prevent facilities from using unit-wide lockdown practices as a functional substitute for individual isolated confinement. ==== Strengthen the time-limit clause (close the cumulative-days gap) ==== Replace the current time-limit phrasing with: “No individual shall be held in solitary confinement, lockdown, or restorative housing for more than 15 consecutive days, nor 15 days in any 60-day period.” <b>Purpose of the amendment:</b> The introduced text already uses “15 consecutive days…in any 60-day period,” but stakeholders have raised concerns that “consecutive” language can be worked around by cycling people in and out (or shifting to lockdown practices) without ever hitting a “consecutive” threshold. The amendment makes the limit explicitly <i>both</i> consecutive and cumulative. <hr> == Opening Statement == === House Subcommittee Statement === <blockquote> ====Notes on delivery: ==== <mark> <b>bold</b>—emphasize, increase volume; </mark> <mark> <i>italicized</i>—stressed, extended pronunciation, sing-songy; </mark> <mark> <i><b>bold italicized</i></b>—climactic, stressed and emphatic; </mark> <mark> • bulleted—drum-like repetition, think of MLK's "I Have a Dream," "I have a dream that..." repeated for emphasis; </mark> <mark> — a half pause, slight build-up; </mark> <mark> — — a full pause, major build-up. <mark> </blockquote> <br> Mister Chair, members of the subcommittee— <i>This is not our first time here.</i> For <b>two straight years</b>, the General Assembly has passed this reform. <b>In 2024</b>, I gave you a sermon — — and then we passed <i>HB 1244.</i> - <b>In 2025</b>, • my sister, • my friend, • and my esteemed colleague, <b>Delegate Karen Keys-Gamarra</b>, took up the torch — — and then we passed <i>HB 2647.</i> + <b>In 2025</b>, • my sister, • my friend, • and my <i>esteemed colleague</i>, <b>Delegate Karen Keys-Gamarra</b>, took up the torch — — and then we passed <i>HB 2647.</i> Twice, this body has said—<i><b>clearly</b></i>—that we are ready to turn the page on solitary confinement. And after two straight years, nobody can pretend this is new... • You know this bill. • You know this issue. • You know how overdue this change is — — Mister Chair, members of the committee, this is not our first time here, <b>BUT it will be our last</b>—because this year <i>we will make history.</i> And what is so great about this year is that we all have a <i>chance</i>—a <i>chance</i> to be part of making history. If you're still on the fence, I want you to look <i>forward</i> into the future with me. <b>Don't let the past hold you back — —</b> • Because when we look back in 25 years, <b>we will know this legislation was the right thing to do.</b> • Because when we look back in 50 years, <b>we will know this legislation was the right thing to do.</b> • Because when we look back in <b>one-hundred</b> years, <i><b>we will know this legislation was the right thing to do!</b></i> Today—I hope everyone in this room joins us in doing the <i><b>right thing.</b></i> We know the questions, and we'll answer them if asked. But I encourage us to listen to <i>testimonies</i>, to listen to the voices who are ready for change, so that we may be reminded—again—<i>just how overdue this legislation is.</i> Thank you, Mister Chair and members of the committee. I hope you report this bill favorably to full committee. <hr> == Support and Opposition == === Support === • ACLU People Power Fairfax • Bridging The Gap In Virginia • Charlottesville Chapter National Organization for Women • Coalition for Justice • EJUSA Evangelical Network • Fighting 4 Freedom • Greater Washington (JCRC) • Inmate Support Virginia • Interfaith Action for Human Rights (IAHR) • HALT Solitary • Jewish Community Relations Council of Just Future Project • Justice & Witness Action Network- VA • United Church of Christ Central Atlantic Conference • LatinoJustice PRLDEF • NAACP Loudoun • National Association of Social Workers • National Association of Social Workers, Virginia Chapter • National Religious Campaign Against Torture • No Left Turns • Resource Information Help for the Disadvantaged and Disenfranchised (RIHD) • RISE for Youth • RVA Health Alliance for Social Justice and Equity • Social Action Linking Together (SALT) • Social Workers and Allies Against Solitary Confinement • The Humanization Project • The Sentencing Project • Unitarian Universalist Legislative Ministry of Virginia • Unlock the Box Campaign • Virginia CURE • Virginia Defenders for Freedom, Justice & Equality • Virginia Justice Democrats • Virginia Justice for Life • Virginia Justice Alliance • Virginia Prisons Accountability Committee • Virginia Prisoner Of Conscience • Virginia Prison Justice Network • WJCC Coalition for Community Justice • 40 Strong === Opposition === • (to be updated) === No Recommendation / Neutral === • (to be updated) === No Position Provided === • Department of Corrections <hr> == Fiscal Impact == No fiscal impact statement is posted for HB35. <hr> == Possible Questions == === TL;DR === <b>Q1: “Does this end solitary confinement in Virginia?”</b> TL;DR: No—it ends <i>prolonged</i> solitary confinement and sets clear limits, oversight, and due-process rules for any use. <br> <b>Q2: “Does this make prisons less safe for staff?”</b> TL;DR: No—HB35 keeps exceptions for imminent threats and requires documentation; it’s about targeted use, not “never.” <br> <b>Q3: “What changes day-to-day?”</b> TL;DR: Frequent reviews, rapid medical/mental health checks, real programming/out-of-cell time, and written accountability when isolation is used. <br> <b>Q4: “Can DOC just use ‘lockdowns’ instead?”</b> TL;DR: The bill defines lockdown and regulates it, and the requested amendment strengthens this further by applying the same time limits to lockdown explicitly. <br> === Q1: “What does the bill aim to accomplish?” === <b>Answer you can use:</b> HB35 ends prolonged solitary confinement by setting clear time limits and requiring real oversight—regular reviews, rapid medical and mental health evaluations, documentation, and in-person due process when isolation continues. <br> === Q2: “How often is placement reviewed?” === <b>Answer you can use:</b> Placement is reviewed frequently, including a required 48-hour review cycle with written documentation explaining why less restrictive settings were not used. <br> === Q3: “What health protections are required?” === <b>Answer you can use:</b> HB35 requires medical and mental health evaluations by certified professionals within one working day of placement in restorative housing or isolated confinement (with limited exceptions). <br> === Q4: “Does this stop people from getting programming or recreation?” === <b>Answer you can use:</b> No—the bill requires at least four hours of out-of-cell programming or congregate activity daily, plus at least one hour of congregate recreation unless exceptional safety circumstances apply. <br> === Q5: “What stops indefinite ‘lockdowns’?” === <b>Answer you can use:</b> Lockdowns that interrupt programming must have a specific documented security purpose, must end as soon as the purpose is served, are time-limited, require approvals to extend or repeat, and must be documented and published. <hr> == Additional Information == <b>1. Definitions are the enforcement backbone</b> • The bill defines isolated confinement and lockdown by hours-per-day and loss of programming, so policy can’t be evaded by unit names. <b>Policy implication:</b> Regulates conditions, not labels. <br> <b>2. The “less restrictive first” rule targets protective-custody misuse</b> • For “own protection” placements, the facility must use less restrictive options first, including transfers or special-purpose housing for similarly threatened individuals, unless infeasible. <b>Policy implication:</b> Safety without defaulting to isolation. <br> <b>3. Reviews + documentation create accountability</b> • Requires regular reviews, documentation in the institutional file, notice up the chain, and formal in-person reviews with appeal rights. <b>Policy implication:</b> Isolation becomes a documented exception, not a routine. <br> <b>4. Lockdown limits matter because lockdown can function like solitary</b> • The bill regulates lockdowns that interrupt programming and requires publication of documentation. <b>Policy implication:</b> Prevents “unit-wide solitary” from becoming the workaround. [[Category:2026 Session]]
2026-01-22 06:53:05
Edited by: 74.110.183.75
Edited by: 74.110.183.75
= HB35 Restorative housing and isolated confinement; restrictions on use. = == Status == [https://house.vga.virginia.gov/subcommittees/H15002/agendas/5187 Public Safety | Subcommittee #2 — agenda] <hr> == Overview == === Summary as Introduced === <b>Restorative housing and isolated confinement; restrictions on use.</b> Prohibits the use of isolated confinement, defined in the bill, in state correctional facilities, subject to certain exceptions. The bill requires that before placing an incarcerated person in restorative housing or isolated confinement for his own protection, the facility administrator shall place an incarcerated person in a less-restrictive setting, including by transferring such person to another institution or to a special-purpose housing unit for incarcerated persons who face similar threats. The bill requires that if an incarcerated person is placed in restorative housing or isolated confinement, such placement shall be reviewed every 48 hours and the facility administrator shall ensure that the incarcerated person receives a medical and mental health evaluation from certified medical and mental health professionals within one working day of placement in restorative housing or any form of isolated confinement. The bill also requires the facility administrator to notify the regional administrator in writing that an incarcerated person was placed in restorative housing or isolated confinement within 24 hours of such placement. Finally, the bill requires that formal reviews of an incarcerated person's placement in any form of isolated confinement shall be held in such person's presence, inform him of any reasons administrative officials believe isolated confinement remains necessary, and give the incarcerated person an opportunity to respond to those reasons, and a formal ruling shall be provided to the incarcerated individual within 24 hours. <hr> === Patrons === ==== House Patrons ==== • Joshua G. Cole (chief patron) • Patrick A. Hope • Sam Rasoul • Holly Seibold ==== Senate Patrons ==== • Bagby <hr> == Language == The language of [https://lis.virginia.gov/bill-details/20261/HB35/text/HB35 HB35] can be viewed here. <hr> == Proposed Amendment == === Amendment Offered for Consideration (requested for subcommittee) === ==== Add “Lockdown” throughout relevant provisions ==== Amend the bill to explicitly include “lockdown” alongside “solitary confinement/isolated confinement” and “restorative housing” in all relevant sections, to prevent facilities from using unit-wide lockdown practices as a functional substitute for individual isolated confinement. ==== Strengthen the time-limit clause (close the cumulative-days gap) ==== Replace the current time-limit phrasing with: “No individual shall be held in solitary confinement, lockdown, or restorative housing for more than 15 consecutive days, nor 15 days in any 60-day period.” <b>Purpose of the amendment:</b> The introduced text already uses “15 consecutive days…in any 60-day period,” but stakeholders have raised concerns that “consecutive” language can be worked around by cycling people in and out (or shifting to lockdown practices) without ever hitting a “consecutive” threshold. The amendment makes the limit explicitly <i>both</i> consecutive and cumulative. <hr> == Opening Statement == === House Subcommittee Statement === <blockquote> ====Notes on delivery: ==== <mark> <b>bold</b>—emphasize, increase volume; </mark> <mark> <i>italicized</i>—stressed, extended pronunciation, sing-songy; </mark> <mark> <i><b>bold italicized</i></b>—climactic, stressed and emphatic; </mark> <mark> • bulleted—drum-like repetition, think of MLK's "I Have a Dream," "I have a dream that..." repeated for emphasis; </mark> <mark> — a half pause, slight build-up; </mark> - <mark> —— a full pause, major build-up. <mark> + <mark> — — a full pause, major build-up. <mark> </blockquote> <br> Mister Chair, members of the subcommittee— <i>This is not our first time here.</i> For <b>two straight years</b>, the General Assembly has passed this reform. - <b>In 2024</b>, I gave you a sermon—— and then we passed <i>HB 1244.</i> + <b>In 2024</b>, I gave you a sermon — — and then we passed <i>HB 1244.</i> - <b>In 2025</b>, • my sister, • my friend, • and my esteemed colleague, <b>Delegate Karen Keys-Gamarra</b>, took up the torch—— and then we passed <i>HB 2647.</i> + <b>In 2025</b>, • my sister, • my friend, • and my esteemed colleague, <b>Delegate Karen Keys-Gamarra</b>, took up the torch — — and then we passed <i>HB 2647.</i> Twice, this body has said—<i><b>clearly</b></i>—that we are ready to turn the page on solitary confinement. And after two straight years, nobody can pretend this is new... • You know this bill. • You know this issue. - • You know how overdue this change is—— + • You know how overdue this change is — — Mister Chair, members of the committee, this is not our first time here, <b>BUT it will be our last</b>—because this year <i>we will make history.</i> And what is so great about this year is that we all have a <i>chance</i>—a <i>chance</i> to be part of making history. - If you're still on the fence, I want you to look <i>forward</i> into the future with me. <b>Don't let the past hold you back...</b> + If you're still on the fence, I want you to look <i>forward</i> into the future with me. <b>Don't let the past hold you back — —</b> • Because when we look back in 25 years, <b>we will know this legislation was the right thing to do.</b> • Because when we look back in 50 years, <b>we will know this legislation was the right thing to do.</b> • Because when we look back in <b>one-hundred</b> years, <i><b>we will know this legislation was the right thing to do!</b></i> Today—I hope everyone in this room joins us in doing the <i><b>right thing.</b></i> We know the questions, and we'll answer them if asked. But I encourage us to listen to <i>testimonies</i>, to listen to the voices who are ready for change, so that we may be reminded—again—<i>just how overdue this legislation is.</i> Thank you, Mister Chair and members of the committee. I hope you report this bill favorably to full committee. <hr> == Support and Opposition == === Support === • ACLU People Power Fairfax • Bridging The Gap In Virginia • Charlottesville Chapter National Organization for Women • Coalition for Justice • EJUSA Evangelical Network • Fighting 4 Freedom • Greater Washington (JCRC) • Inmate Support Virginia • Interfaith Action for Human Rights (IAHR) • HALT Solitary • Jewish Community Relations Council of Just Future Project • Justice & Witness Action Network- VA • United Church of Christ Central Atlantic Conference • LatinoJustice PRLDEF • NAACP Loudoun • National Association of Social Workers • National Association of Social Workers, Virginia Chapter • National Religious Campaign Against Torture • No Left Turns • Resource Information Help for the Disadvantaged and Disenfranchised (RIHD) • RISE for Youth • RVA Health Alliance for Social Justice and Equity • Social Action Linking Together (SALT) • Social Workers and Allies Against Solitary Confinement • The Humanization Project • The Sentencing Project • Unitarian Universalist Legislative Ministry of Virginia • Unlock the Box Campaign • Virginia CURE • Virginia Defenders for Freedom, Justice & Equality • Virginia Justice Democrats • Virginia Justice for Life • Virginia Justice Alliance • Virginia Prisons Accountability Committee • Virginia Prisoner Of Conscience • Virginia Prison Justice Network • WJCC Coalition for Community Justice • 40 Strong === Opposition === • (to be updated) === No Recommendation / Neutral === • (to be updated) === No Position Provided === • Department of Corrections <hr> == Fiscal Impact == No fiscal impact statement is posted for HB35. <hr> == Possible Questions == === TL;DR === <b>Q1: “Does this end solitary confinement in Virginia?”</b> TL;DR: No—it ends <i>prolonged</i> solitary confinement and sets clear limits, oversight, and due-process rules for any use. <br> <b>Q2: “Does this make prisons less safe for staff?”</b> TL;DR: No—HB35 keeps exceptions for imminent threats and requires documentation; it’s about targeted use, not “never.” <br> <b>Q3: “What changes day-to-day?”</b> TL;DR: Frequent reviews, rapid medical/mental health checks, real programming/out-of-cell time, and written accountability when isolation is used. <br> <b>Q4: “Can DOC just use ‘lockdowns’ instead?”</b> TL;DR: The bill defines lockdown and regulates it, and the requested amendment strengthens this further by applying the same time limits to lockdown explicitly. <br> === Q1: “What does the bill aim to accomplish?” === <b>Answer you can use:</b> HB35 ends prolonged solitary confinement by setting clear time limits and requiring real oversight—regular reviews, rapid medical and mental health evaluations, documentation, and in-person due process when isolation continues. <br> === Q2: “How often is placement reviewed?” === <b>Answer you can use:</b> Placement is reviewed frequently, including a required 48-hour review cycle with written documentation explaining why less restrictive settings were not used. <br> === Q3: “What health protections are required?” === <b>Answer you can use:</b> HB35 requires medical and mental health evaluations by certified professionals within one working day of placement in restorative housing or isolated confinement (with limited exceptions). <br> === Q4: “Does this stop people from getting programming or recreation?” === <b>Answer you can use:</b> No—the bill requires at least four hours of out-of-cell programming or congregate activity daily, plus at least one hour of congregate recreation unless exceptional safety circumstances apply. <br> === Q5: “What stops indefinite ‘lockdowns’?” === <b>Answer you can use:</b> Lockdowns that interrupt programming must have a specific documented security purpose, must end as soon as the purpose is served, are time-limited, require approvals to extend or repeat, and must be documented and published. <hr> == Additional Information == <b>1. Definitions are the enforcement backbone</b> • The bill defines isolated confinement and lockdown by hours-per-day and loss of programming, so policy can’t be evaded by unit names. <b>Policy implication:</b> Regulates conditions, not labels. <br> <b>2. The “less restrictive first” rule targets protective-custody misuse</b> • For “own protection” placements, the facility must use less restrictive options first, including transfers or special-purpose housing for similarly threatened individuals, unless infeasible. <b>Policy implication:</b> Safety without defaulting to isolation. <br> <b>3. Reviews + documentation create accountability</b> • Requires regular reviews, documentation in the institutional file, notice up the chain, and formal in-person reviews with appeal rights. <b>Policy implication:</b> Isolation becomes a documented exception, not a routine. <br> <b>4. Lockdown limits matter because lockdown can function like solitary</b> • The bill regulates lockdowns that interrupt programming and requires publication of documentation. <b>Policy implication:</b> Prevents “unit-wide solitary” from becoming the workaround. [[Category:2026 Session]]
2026-01-22 06:51:41
Edited by: 74.110.183.75
Edited by: 74.110.183.75
= HB35 Restorative housing and isolated confinement; restrictions on use. = == Status == [https://house.vga.virginia.gov/subcommittees/H15002/agendas/5187 Public Safety | Subcommittee #2 — agenda] <hr> == Overview == === Summary as Introduced === <b>Restorative housing and isolated confinement; restrictions on use.</b> Prohibits the use of isolated confinement, defined in the bill, in state correctional facilities, subject to certain exceptions. The bill requires that before placing an incarcerated person in restorative housing or isolated confinement for his own protection, the facility administrator shall place an incarcerated person in a less-restrictive setting, including by transferring such person to another institution or to a special-purpose housing unit for incarcerated persons who face similar threats. The bill requires that if an incarcerated person is placed in restorative housing or isolated confinement, such placement shall be reviewed every 48 hours and the facility administrator shall ensure that the incarcerated person receives a medical and mental health evaluation from certified medical and mental health professionals within one working day of placement in restorative housing or any form of isolated confinement. The bill also requires the facility administrator to notify the regional administrator in writing that an incarcerated person was placed in restorative housing or isolated confinement within 24 hours of such placement. Finally, the bill requires that formal reviews of an incarcerated person's placement in any form of isolated confinement shall be held in such person's presence, inform him of any reasons administrative officials believe isolated confinement remains necessary, and give the incarcerated person an opportunity to respond to those reasons, and a formal ruling shall be provided to the incarcerated individual within 24 hours. <hr> === Patrons === ==== House Patrons ==== • Joshua G. Cole (chief patron) • Patrick A. Hope • Sam Rasoul • Holly Seibold ==== Senate Patrons ==== • Bagby <hr> == Language == The language of [https://lis.virginia.gov/bill-details/20261/HB35/text/HB35 HB35] can be viewed here. <hr> == Proposed Amendment == === Amendment Offered for Consideration (requested for subcommittee) === ==== Add “Lockdown” throughout relevant provisions ==== Amend the bill to explicitly include “lockdown” alongside “solitary confinement/isolated confinement” and “restorative housing” in all relevant sections, to prevent facilities from using unit-wide lockdown practices as a functional substitute for individual isolated confinement. ==== Strengthen the time-limit clause (close the cumulative-days gap) ==== Replace the current time-limit phrasing with: “No individual shall be held in solitary confinement, lockdown, or restorative housing for more than 15 consecutive days, nor 15 days in any 60-day period.” <b>Purpose of the amendment:</b> The introduced text already uses “15 consecutive days…in any 60-day period,” but stakeholders have raised concerns that “consecutive” language can be worked around by cycling people in and out (or shifting to lockdown practices) without ever hitting a “consecutive” threshold. The amendment makes the limit explicitly <i>both</i> consecutive and cumulative. <hr> == Opening Statement == === House Subcommittee Statement === <blockquote> ====Notes on delivery: ==== <mark> <b>bold</b>—emphasize, increase volume; </mark> <mark> <i>italicized</i>—stressed, extended pronunciation, sing-songy; </mark> <mark> <i><b>bold italicized</i></b>—climactic, stressed and emphatic; </mark> <mark> • bulleted—drum-like repetition, think of MLK's "I Have a Dream," "I have a dream that..." repeated for emphasis; </mark> <mark> — a half pause, slight build-up; </mark> - <mark> ... a full pause, major build-up. <mark> + <mark> —— a full pause, major build-up. <mark> </blockquote> <br> Mister Chair, members of the subcommittee— <i>This is not our first time here.</i> For <b>two straight years</b>, the General Assembly has passed this reform. - <b>In 2024</b>, I gave you a sermon... and then we passed <i>HB 1244.</i> + <b>In 2024</b>, I gave you a sermon—— and then we passed <i>HB 1244.</i> - <b>In 2025</b>, • my sister, • my friend, • and my esteemed colleague, <b>Delegate Karen Keys-Gamarra</b>, took up the torch... and then we passed <i>HB 2647.</i> + <b>In 2025</b>, • my sister, • my friend, • and my esteemed colleague, <b>Delegate Karen Keys-Gamarra</b>, took up the torch—— and then we passed <i>HB 2647.</i> Twice, this body has said—<i><b>clearly</b></i>—that we are ready to turn the page on solitary confinement. And after two straight years, nobody can pretend this is new... • You know this bill. • You know this issue. - • You know how overdue this change is... + • You know how overdue this change is—— Mister Chair, members of the committee, this is not our first time here, <b>BUT it will be our last</b>—because this year <i>we will make history.</i> And what is so great about this year is that we all have a <i>chance</i>—a <i>chance</i> to be part of making history. If you're still on the fence, I want you to look <i>forward</i> into the future with me. <b>Don't let the past hold you back...</b> • Because when we look back in 25 years, <b>we will know this legislation was the right thing to do.</b> • Because when we look back in 50 years, <b>we will know this legislation was the right thing to do.</b> • Because when we look back in <b>one-hundred</b> years, <i><b>we will know this legislation was the right thing to do!</b></i> Today—I hope everyone in this room joins us in doing the <i><b>right thing.</b></i> We know the questions, and we'll answer them if asked. But I encourage us to listen to <i>testimonies</i>, to listen to the voices who are ready for change, so that we may be reminded—again—<i>just how overdue this legislation is.</i> Thank you, Mister Chair and members of the committee. I hope you report this bill favorably to full committee. <hr> == Support and Opposition == === Support === • ACLU People Power Fairfax • Bridging The Gap In Virginia • Charlottesville Chapter National Organization for Women • Coalition for Justice • EJUSA Evangelical Network • Fighting 4 Freedom • Greater Washington (JCRC) • Inmate Support Virginia • Interfaith Action for Human Rights (IAHR) • HALT Solitary • Jewish Community Relations Council of Just Future Project • Justice & Witness Action Network- VA • United Church of Christ Central Atlantic Conference • LatinoJustice PRLDEF • NAACP Loudoun • National Association of Social Workers • National Association of Social Workers, Virginia Chapter • National Religious Campaign Against Torture • No Left Turns • Resource Information Help for the Disadvantaged and Disenfranchised (RIHD) • RISE for Youth • RVA Health Alliance for Social Justice and Equity • Social Action Linking Together (SALT) • Social Workers and Allies Against Solitary Confinement • The Humanization Project • The Sentencing Project • Unitarian Universalist Legislative Ministry of Virginia • Unlock the Box Campaign • Virginia CURE • Virginia Defenders for Freedom, Justice & Equality • Virginia Justice Democrats • Virginia Justice for Life • Virginia Justice Alliance • Virginia Prisons Accountability Committee • Virginia Prisoner Of Conscience • Virginia Prison Justice Network • WJCC Coalition for Community Justice • 40 Strong === Opposition === • (to be updated) === No Recommendation / Neutral === • (to be updated) === No Position Provided === • Department of Corrections <hr> == Fiscal Impact == No fiscal impact statement is posted for HB35. <hr> == Possible Questions == === TL;DR === <b>Q1: “Does this end solitary confinement in Virginia?”</b> TL;DR: No—it ends <i>prolonged</i> solitary confinement and sets clear limits, oversight, and due-process rules for any use. <br> <b>Q2: “Does this make prisons less safe for staff?”</b> TL;DR: No—HB35 keeps exceptions for imminent threats and requires documentation; it’s about targeted use, not “never.” <br> <b>Q3: “What changes day-to-day?”</b> TL;DR: Frequent reviews, rapid medical/mental health checks, real programming/out-of-cell time, and written accountability when isolation is used. <br> <b>Q4: “Can DOC just use ‘lockdowns’ instead?”</b> TL;DR: The bill defines lockdown and regulates it, and the requested amendment strengthens this further by applying the same time limits to lockdown explicitly. <br> === Q1: “What does the bill aim to accomplish?” === <b>Answer you can use:</b> HB35 ends prolonged solitary confinement by setting clear time limits and requiring real oversight—regular reviews, rapid medical and mental health evaluations, documentation, and in-person due process when isolation continues. <br> === Q2: “How often is placement reviewed?” === <b>Answer you can use:</b> Placement is reviewed frequently, including a required 48-hour review cycle with written documentation explaining why less restrictive settings were not used. <br> === Q3: “What health protections are required?” === <b>Answer you can use:</b> HB35 requires medical and mental health evaluations by certified professionals within one working day of placement in restorative housing or isolated confinement (with limited exceptions). <br> === Q4: “Does this stop people from getting programming or recreation?” === <b>Answer you can use:</b> No—the bill requires at least four hours of out-of-cell programming or congregate activity daily, plus at least one hour of congregate recreation unless exceptional safety circumstances apply. <br> === Q5: “What stops indefinite ‘lockdowns’?” === <b>Answer you can use:</b> Lockdowns that interrupt programming must have a specific documented security purpose, must end as soon as the purpose is served, are time-limited, require approvals to extend or repeat, and must be documented and published. <hr> == Additional Information == <b>1. Definitions are the enforcement backbone</b> • The bill defines isolated confinement and lockdown by hours-per-day and loss of programming, so policy can’t be evaded by unit names. <b>Policy implication:</b> Regulates conditions, not labels. <br> <b>2. The “less restrictive first” rule targets protective-custody misuse</b> • For “own protection” placements, the facility must use less restrictive options first, including transfers or special-purpose housing for similarly threatened individuals, unless infeasible. <b>Policy implication:</b> Safety without defaulting to isolation. <br> <b>3. Reviews + documentation create accountability</b> • Requires regular reviews, documentation in the institutional file, notice up the chain, and formal in-person reviews with appeal rights. <b>Policy implication:</b> Isolation becomes a documented exception, not a routine. <br> <b>4. Lockdown limits matter because lockdown can function like solitary</b> • The bill regulates lockdowns that interrupt programming and requires publication of documentation. <b>Policy implication:</b> Prevents “unit-wide solitary” from becoming the workaround. [[Category:2026 Session]]
2026-01-22 06:50:54
Edited by: 74.110.183.75
Edited by: 74.110.183.75
= HB35 Restorative housing and isolated confinement; restrictions on use. = == Status == [https://house.vga.virginia.gov/subcommittees/H15002/agendas/5187 Public Safety | Subcommittee #2 — agenda] <hr> == Overview == === Summary as Introduced === <b>Restorative housing and isolated confinement; restrictions on use.</b> Prohibits the use of isolated confinement, defined in the bill, in state correctional facilities, subject to certain exceptions. The bill requires that before placing an incarcerated person in restorative housing or isolated confinement for his own protection, the facility administrator shall place an incarcerated person in a less-restrictive setting, including by transferring such person to another institution or to a special-purpose housing unit for incarcerated persons who face similar threats. The bill requires that if an incarcerated person is placed in restorative housing or isolated confinement, such placement shall be reviewed every 48 hours and the facility administrator shall ensure that the incarcerated person receives a medical and mental health evaluation from certified medical and mental health professionals within one working day of placement in restorative housing or any form of isolated confinement. The bill also requires the facility administrator to notify the regional administrator in writing that an incarcerated person was placed in restorative housing or isolated confinement within 24 hours of such placement. Finally, the bill requires that formal reviews of an incarcerated person's placement in any form of isolated confinement shall be held in such person's presence, inform him of any reasons administrative officials believe isolated confinement remains necessary, and give the incarcerated person an opportunity to respond to those reasons, and a formal ruling shall be provided to the incarcerated individual within 24 hours. <hr> === Patrons === ==== House Patrons ==== • Joshua G. Cole (chief patron) • Patrick A. Hope • Sam Rasoul • Holly Seibold ==== Senate Patrons ==== • Bagby <hr> == Language == The language of [https://lis.virginia.gov/bill-details/20261/HB35/text/HB35 HB35] can be viewed here. <hr> == Proposed Amendment == === Amendment Offered for Consideration (requested for subcommittee) === ==== Add “Lockdown” throughout relevant provisions ==== Amend the bill to explicitly include “lockdown” alongside “solitary confinement/isolated confinement” and “restorative housing” in all relevant sections, to prevent facilities from using unit-wide lockdown practices as a functional substitute for individual isolated confinement. ==== Strengthen the time-limit clause (close the cumulative-days gap) ==== Replace the current time-limit phrasing with: “No individual shall be held in solitary confinement, lockdown, or restorative housing for more than 15 consecutive days, nor 15 days in any 60-day period.” <b>Purpose of the amendment:</b> The introduced text already uses “15 consecutive days…in any 60-day period,” but stakeholders have raised concerns that “consecutive” language can be worked around by cycling people in and out (or shifting to lockdown practices) without ever hitting a “consecutive” threshold. The amendment makes the limit explicitly <i>both</i> consecutive and cumulative. <hr> == Opening Statement == === House Subcommittee Statement === <blockquote> ====Notes on delivery: ==== <mark> <b>bold</b>—emphasize, increase volume; </mark> <mark> <i>italicized</i>—stressed, extended pronunciation, sing-songy; </mark> <mark> <i><b>bold italicized</i></b>—climactic, stressed and emphatic; </mark> <mark> • bulleted—drum-like repetition, think of MLK's "I Have a Dream," "I have a dream that..." repeated for emphasis; </mark> <mark> — a half pause, slight build-up; </mark> <mark> ... a full pause, major build-up. <mark> </blockquote> <br> Mister Chair, members of the subcommittee— <i>This is not our first time here.</i> For <b>two straight years</b>, the General Assembly has passed this reform. <b>In 2024</b>, I gave you a sermon... and then we passed <i>HB 1244.</i> <b>In 2025</b>, • my sister, • my friend, • and my esteemed colleague, <b>Delegate Karen Keys-Gamarra</b>, took up the torch... and then we passed <i>HB 2647.</i> Twice, this body has said—<i><b>clearly</b></i>—that we are ready to turn the page on solitary confinement. And after two straight years, nobody can pretend this is new... • You know this bill. • You know this issue. - • You know how overdue this change is. + • You know how overdue this change is... Mister Chair, members of the committee, this is not our first time here, <b>BUT it will be our last</b>—because this year <i>we will make history.</i> And what is so great about this year is that we all have a <i>chance</i>—a <i>chance</i> to be part of making history. If you're still on the fence, I want you to look <i>forward</i> into the future with me. <b>Don't let the past hold you back...</b> • Because when we look back in 25 years, <b>we will know this legislation was the right thing to do.</b> • Because when we look back in 50 years, <b>we will know this legislation was the right thing to do.</b> • Because when we look back in <b>one-hundred</b> years, <i><b>we will know this legislation was the right thing to do!</b></i> Today—I hope everyone in this room joins us in doing the <i><b>right thing.</b></i> We know the questions, and we'll answer them if asked. But I encourage us to listen to <i>testimonies</i>, to listen to the voices who are ready for change, so that we may be reminded—again—<i>just how overdue this legislation is.</i> Thank you, Mister Chair and members of the committee. I hope you report this bill favorably to full committee. <hr> == Support and Opposition == === Support === • ACLU People Power Fairfax • Bridging The Gap In Virginia • Charlottesville Chapter National Organization for Women • Coalition for Justice • EJUSA Evangelical Network • Fighting 4 Freedom • Greater Washington (JCRC) • Inmate Support Virginia • Interfaith Action for Human Rights (IAHR) • HALT Solitary • Jewish Community Relations Council of Just Future Project • Justice & Witness Action Network- VA • United Church of Christ Central Atlantic Conference • LatinoJustice PRLDEF • NAACP Loudoun • National Association of Social Workers • National Association of Social Workers, Virginia Chapter • National Religious Campaign Against Torture • No Left Turns • Resource Information Help for the Disadvantaged and Disenfranchised (RIHD) • RISE for Youth • RVA Health Alliance for Social Justice and Equity • Social Action Linking Together (SALT) • Social Workers and Allies Against Solitary Confinement • The Humanization Project • The Sentencing Project • Unitarian Universalist Legislative Ministry of Virginia • Unlock the Box Campaign • Virginia CURE • Virginia Defenders for Freedom, Justice & Equality • Virginia Justice Democrats • Virginia Justice for Life • Virginia Justice Alliance • Virginia Prisons Accountability Committee • Virginia Prisoner Of Conscience • Virginia Prison Justice Network • WJCC Coalition for Community Justice • 40 Strong === Opposition === • (to be updated) === No Recommendation / Neutral === • (to be updated) === No Position Provided === • Department of Corrections <hr> == Fiscal Impact == No fiscal impact statement is posted for HB35. <hr> == Possible Questions == === TL;DR === <b>Q1: “Does this end solitary confinement in Virginia?”</b> TL;DR: No—it ends <i>prolonged</i> solitary confinement and sets clear limits, oversight, and due-process rules for any use. <br> <b>Q2: “Does this make prisons less safe for staff?”</b> TL;DR: No—HB35 keeps exceptions for imminent threats and requires documentation; it’s about targeted use, not “never.” <br> <b>Q3: “What changes day-to-day?”</b> TL;DR: Frequent reviews, rapid medical/mental health checks, real programming/out-of-cell time, and written accountability when isolation is used. <br> <b>Q4: “Can DOC just use ‘lockdowns’ instead?”</b> TL;DR: The bill defines lockdown and regulates it, and the requested amendment strengthens this further by applying the same time limits to lockdown explicitly. <br> === Q1: “What does the bill aim to accomplish?” === <b>Answer you can use:</b> HB35 ends prolonged solitary confinement by setting clear time limits and requiring real oversight—regular reviews, rapid medical and mental health evaluations, documentation, and in-person due process when isolation continues. <br> === Q2: “How often is placement reviewed?” === <b>Answer you can use:</b> Placement is reviewed frequently, including a required 48-hour review cycle with written documentation explaining why less restrictive settings were not used. <br> === Q3: “What health protections are required?” === <b>Answer you can use:</b> HB35 requires medical and mental health evaluations by certified professionals within one working day of placement in restorative housing or isolated confinement (with limited exceptions). <br> === Q4: “Does this stop people from getting programming or recreation?” === <b>Answer you can use:</b> No—the bill requires at least four hours of out-of-cell programming or congregate activity daily, plus at least one hour of congregate recreation unless exceptional safety circumstances apply. <br> === Q5: “What stops indefinite ‘lockdowns’?” === <b>Answer you can use:</b> Lockdowns that interrupt programming must have a specific documented security purpose, must end as soon as the purpose is served, are time-limited, require approvals to extend or repeat, and must be documented and published. <hr> == Additional Information == <b>1. Definitions are the enforcement backbone</b> • The bill defines isolated confinement and lockdown by hours-per-day and loss of programming, so policy can’t be evaded by unit names. <b>Policy implication:</b> Regulates conditions, not labels. <br> <b>2. The “less restrictive first” rule targets protective-custody misuse</b> • For “own protection” placements, the facility must use less restrictive options first, including transfers or special-purpose housing for similarly threatened individuals, unless infeasible. <b>Policy implication:</b> Safety without defaulting to isolation. <br> <b>3. Reviews + documentation create accountability</b> • Requires regular reviews, documentation in the institutional file, notice up the chain, and formal in-person reviews with appeal rights. <b>Policy implication:</b> Isolation becomes a documented exception, not a routine. <br> <b>4. Lockdown limits matter because lockdown can function like solitary</b> • The bill regulates lockdowns that interrupt programming and requires publication of documentation. <b>Policy implication:</b> Prevents “unit-wide solitary” from becoming the workaround. [[Category:2026 Session]]
2026-01-22 06:49:19
Edited by: 74.110.183.75
Edited by: 74.110.183.75
= HB35 Restorative housing and isolated confinement; restrictions on use. = == Status == [https://house.vga.virginia.gov/subcommittees/H15002/agendas/5187 Public Safety | Subcommittee #2 — agenda] <hr> == Overview == === Summary as Introduced === <b>Restorative housing and isolated confinement; restrictions on use.</b> Prohibits the use of isolated confinement, defined in the bill, in state correctional facilities, subject to certain exceptions. The bill requires that before placing an incarcerated person in restorative housing or isolated confinement for his own protection, the facility administrator shall place an incarcerated person in a less-restrictive setting, including by transferring such person to another institution or to a special-purpose housing unit for incarcerated persons who face similar threats. The bill requires that if an incarcerated person is placed in restorative housing or isolated confinement, such placement shall be reviewed every 48 hours and the facility administrator shall ensure that the incarcerated person receives a medical and mental health evaluation from certified medical and mental health professionals within one working day of placement in restorative housing or any form of isolated confinement. The bill also requires the facility administrator to notify the regional administrator in writing that an incarcerated person was placed in restorative housing or isolated confinement within 24 hours of such placement. Finally, the bill requires that formal reviews of an incarcerated person's placement in any form of isolated confinement shall be held in such person's presence, inform him of any reasons administrative officials believe isolated confinement remains necessary, and give the incarcerated person an opportunity to respond to those reasons, and a formal ruling shall be provided to the incarcerated individual within 24 hours. <hr> === Patrons === ==== House Patrons ==== • Joshua G. Cole (chief patron) • Patrick A. Hope • Sam Rasoul • Holly Seibold ==== Senate Patrons ==== • Bagby <hr> == Language == The language of [https://lis.virginia.gov/bill-details/20261/HB35/text/HB35 HB35] can be viewed here. <hr> == Proposed Amendment == === Amendment Offered for Consideration (requested for subcommittee) === ==== Add “Lockdown” throughout relevant provisions ==== Amend the bill to explicitly include “lockdown” alongside “solitary confinement/isolated confinement” and “restorative housing” in all relevant sections, to prevent facilities from using unit-wide lockdown practices as a functional substitute for individual isolated confinement. ==== Strengthen the time-limit clause (close the cumulative-days gap) ==== Replace the current time-limit phrasing with: “No individual shall be held in solitary confinement, lockdown, or restorative housing for more than 15 consecutive days, nor 15 days in any 60-day period.” <b>Purpose of the amendment:</b> The introduced text already uses “15 consecutive days…in any 60-day period,” but stakeholders have raised concerns that “consecutive” language can be worked around by cycling people in and out (or shifting to lockdown practices) without ever hitting a “consecutive” threshold. The amendment makes the limit explicitly <i>both</i> consecutive and cumulative. <hr> == Opening Statement == === House Subcommittee Statement === <blockquote> ====Notes on delivery: ==== <mark> <b>bold</b>—emphasize, increase volume; </mark> <mark> <i>italicized</i>—stressed, extended pronunciation, sing-songy; </mark> <mark> <i><b>bold italicized</i></b>—climactic, stressed and emphatic; </mark> <mark> • bulleted—drum-like repetition, think of MLK's "I Have a Dream," "I have a dream that..." repeated for emphasis; </mark> <mark> — a half pause, slight build-up; </mark> <mark> ... a full pause, major build-up. <mark> </blockquote> <br> Mister Chair, members of the subcommittee— <i>This is not our first time here.</i> For <b>two straight years</b>, the General Assembly has passed this reform. - <b>In 2024</b>, I gave you a sermon... and then we passed HB 1244. + <b>In 2024</b>, I gave you a sermon... and then we passed <i>HB 1244.</i> - <b>In 2025</b>, • my sister, • my friend, • and my esteemed colleague, <b>Delegate Karen Keys-Gamarra</b>, took up the torch... and then we passed HB 2647. + <b>In 2025</b>, • my sister, • my friend, • and my esteemed colleague, <b>Delegate Karen Keys-Gamarra</b>, took up the torch... and then we passed <i>HB 2647.</i> Twice, this body has said—<i><b>clearly</b></i>—that we are ready to turn the page on solitary confinement. And after two straight years, nobody can pretend this is new... • You know this bill. • You know this issue. • You know how overdue this change is. Mister Chair, members of the committee, this is not our first time here, <b>BUT it will be our last</b>—because this year <i>we will make history.</i> And what is so great about this year is that we all have a <i>chance</i>—a <i>chance</i> to be part of making history. If you're still on the fence, I want you to look <i>forward</i> into the future with me. <b>Don't let the past hold you back...</b> • Because when we look back in 25 years, <b>we will know this legislation was the right thing to do.</b> • Because when we look back in 50 years, <b>we will know this legislation was the right thing to do.</b> • Because when we look back in <b>one-hundred</b> years, <i><b>we will know this legislation was the right thing to do!</b></i> Today—I hope everyone in this room joins us in doing the <i><b>right thing.</b></i> We know the questions, and we'll answer them if asked. But I encourage us to listen to <i>testimonies</i>, to listen to the voices who are ready for change, so that we may be reminded—again—<i>just how overdue this legislation is.</i> Thank you, Mister Chair and members of the committee. I hope you report this bill favorably to full committee. <hr> == Support and Opposition == === Support === • ACLU People Power Fairfax • Bridging The Gap In Virginia • Charlottesville Chapter National Organization for Women • Coalition for Justice • EJUSA Evangelical Network • Fighting 4 Freedom • Greater Washington (JCRC) • Inmate Support Virginia • Interfaith Action for Human Rights (IAHR) • HALT Solitary • Jewish Community Relations Council of Just Future Project • Justice & Witness Action Network- VA • United Church of Christ Central Atlantic Conference • LatinoJustice PRLDEF • NAACP Loudoun • National Association of Social Workers • National Association of Social Workers, Virginia Chapter • National Religious Campaign Against Torture • No Left Turns • Resource Information Help for the Disadvantaged and Disenfranchised (RIHD) • RISE for Youth • RVA Health Alliance for Social Justice and Equity • Social Action Linking Together (SALT) • Social Workers and Allies Against Solitary Confinement • The Humanization Project • The Sentencing Project • Unitarian Universalist Legislative Ministry of Virginia • Unlock the Box Campaign • Virginia CURE • Virginia Defenders for Freedom, Justice & Equality • Virginia Justice Democrats • Virginia Justice for Life • Virginia Justice Alliance • Virginia Prisons Accountability Committee • Virginia Prisoner Of Conscience • Virginia Prison Justice Network • WJCC Coalition for Community Justice • 40 Strong === Opposition === • (to be updated) === No Recommendation / Neutral === • (to be updated) === No Position Provided === • Department of Corrections <hr> == Fiscal Impact == No fiscal impact statement is posted for HB35. <hr> == Possible Questions == === TL;DR === <b>Q1: “Does this end solitary confinement in Virginia?”</b> TL;DR: No—it ends <i>prolonged</i> solitary confinement and sets clear limits, oversight, and due-process rules for any use. <br> <b>Q2: “Does this make prisons less safe for staff?”</b> TL;DR: No—HB35 keeps exceptions for imminent threats and requires documentation; it’s about targeted use, not “never.” <br> <b>Q3: “What changes day-to-day?”</b> TL;DR: Frequent reviews, rapid medical/mental health checks, real programming/out-of-cell time, and written accountability when isolation is used. <br> <b>Q4: “Can DOC just use ‘lockdowns’ instead?”</b> TL;DR: The bill defines lockdown and regulates it, and the requested amendment strengthens this further by applying the same time limits to lockdown explicitly. <br> === Q1: “What does the bill aim to accomplish?” === <b>Answer you can use:</b> HB35 ends prolonged solitary confinement by setting clear time limits and requiring real oversight—regular reviews, rapid medical and mental health evaluations, documentation, and in-person due process when isolation continues. <br> === Q2: “How often is placement reviewed?” === <b>Answer you can use:</b> Placement is reviewed frequently, including a required 48-hour review cycle with written documentation explaining why less restrictive settings were not used. <br> === Q3: “What health protections are required?” === <b>Answer you can use:</b> HB35 requires medical and mental health evaluations by certified professionals within one working day of placement in restorative housing or isolated confinement (with limited exceptions). <br> === Q4: “Does this stop people from getting programming or recreation?” === <b>Answer you can use:</b> No—the bill requires at least four hours of out-of-cell programming or congregate activity daily, plus at least one hour of congregate recreation unless exceptional safety circumstances apply. <br> === Q5: “What stops indefinite ‘lockdowns’?” === <b>Answer you can use:</b> Lockdowns that interrupt programming must have a specific documented security purpose, must end as soon as the purpose is served, are time-limited, require approvals to extend or repeat, and must be documented and published. <hr> == Additional Information == <b>1. Definitions are the enforcement backbone</b> • The bill defines isolated confinement and lockdown by hours-per-day and loss of programming, so policy can’t be evaded by unit names. <b>Policy implication:</b> Regulates conditions, not labels. <br> <b>2. The “less restrictive first” rule targets protective-custody misuse</b> • For “own protection” placements, the facility must use less restrictive options first, including transfers or special-purpose housing for similarly threatened individuals, unless infeasible. <b>Policy implication:</b> Safety without defaulting to isolation. <br> <b>3. Reviews + documentation create accountability</b> • Requires regular reviews, documentation in the institutional file, notice up the chain, and formal in-person reviews with appeal rights. <b>Policy implication:</b> Isolation becomes a documented exception, not a routine. <br> <b>4. Lockdown limits matter because lockdown can function like solitary</b> • The bill regulates lockdowns that interrupt programming and requires publication of documentation. <b>Policy implication:</b> Prevents “unit-wide solitary” from becoming the workaround. [[Category:2026 Session]]
2026-01-22 06:47:53
Edited by: 74.110.183.75
Edited by: 74.110.183.75
= HB35 Restorative housing and isolated confinement; restrictions on use. = == Status == [https://house.vga.virginia.gov/subcommittees/H15002/agendas/5187 Public Safety | Subcommittee #2 — agenda] <hr> == Overview == === Summary as Introduced === <b>Restorative housing and isolated confinement; restrictions on use.</b> Prohibits the use of isolated confinement, defined in the bill, in state correctional facilities, subject to certain exceptions. The bill requires that before placing an incarcerated person in restorative housing or isolated confinement for his own protection, the facility administrator shall place an incarcerated person in a less-restrictive setting, including by transferring such person to another institution or to a special-purpose housing unit for incarcerated persons who face similar threats. The bill requires that if an incarcerated person is placed in restorative housing or isolated confinement, such placement shall be reviewed every 48 hours and the facility administrator shall ensure that the incarcerated person receives a medical and mental health evaluation from certified medical and mental health professionals within one working day of placement in restorative housing or any form of isolated confinement. The bill also requires the facility administrator to notify the regional administrator in writing that an incarcerated person was placed in restorative housing or isolated confinement within 24 hours of such placement. Finally, the bill requires that formal reviews of an incarcerated person's placement in any form of isolated confinement shall be held in such person's presence, inform him of any reasons administrative officials believe isolated confinement remains necessary, and give the incarcerated person an opportunity to respond to those reasons, and a formal ruling shall be provided to the incarcerated individual within 24 hours. <hr> === Patrons === ==== House Patrons ==== • Joshua G. Cole (chief patron) • Patrick A. Hope • Sam Rasoul • Holly Seibold ==== Senate Patrons ==== • Bagby <hr> == Language == The language of [https://lis.virginia.gov/bill-details/20261/HB35/text/HB35 HB35] can be viewed here. <hr> == Proposed Amendment == === Amendment Offered for Consideration (requested for subcommittee) === ==== Add “Lockdown” throughout relevant provisions ==== Amend the bill to explicitly include “lockdown” alongside “solitary confinement/isolated confinement” and “restorative housing” in all relevant sections, to prevent facilities from using unit-wide lockdown practices as a functional substitute for individual isolated confinement. ==== Strengthen the time-limit clause (close the cumulative-days gap) ==== Replace the current time-limit phrasing with: “No individual shall be held in solitary confinement, lockdown, or restorative housing for more than 15 consecutive days, nor 15 days in any 60-day period.” <b>Purpose of the amendment:</b> The introduced text already uses “15 consecutive days…in any 60-day period,” but stakeholders have raised concerns that “consecutive” language can be worked around by cycling people in and out (or shifting to lockdown practices) without ever hitting a “consecutive” threshold. The amendment makes the limit explicitly <i>both</i> consecutive and cumulative. <hr> == Opening Statement == === House Subcommittee Statement === <blockquote> ====Notes on delivery: ==== <mark> <b>bold</b>—emphasize, increase volume; </mark> <mark> <i>italicized</i>—stressed, extended pronunciation, sing-songy; </mark> <mark> <i><b>bold italicized</i></b>—climactic, stressed and emphatic; </mark> <mark> • bulleted—drum-like repetition, think of MLK's "I Have a Dream," "I have a dream that..." repeated for emphasis; </mark> - <mark> — a half pause, musically one measure; </mark> + <mark> — a half pause, slight build-up; </mark> - <mark> ... a full pause, musically two measures. <mark> + <mark> ... a full pause, major build-up. <mark> </blockquote> <br> Mister Chair, members of the subcommittee— <i>This is not our first time here.</i> For <b>two straight years</b>, the General Assembly has passed this reform. <b>In 2024</b>, I gave you a sermon... and then we passed HB 1244. <b>In 2025</b>, • my sister, • my friend, • and my esteemed colleague, <b>Delegate Karen Keys-Gamarra</b>, took up the torch... and then we passed HB 2647. Twice, this body has said—<i><b>clearly</b></i>—that we are ready to turn the page on solitary confinement. And after two straight years, nobody can pretend this is new... • You know this bill. • You know this issue. • You know how overdue this change is. Mister Chair, members of the committee, this is not our first time here, <b>BUT it will be our last</b>—because this year <i>we will make history.</i> And what is so great about this year is that we all have a <i>chance</i>—a <i>chance</i> to be part of making history. If you're still on the fence, I want you to look <i>forward</i> into the future with me. <b>Don't let the past hold you back...</b> • Because when we look back in 25 years, <b>we will know this legislation was the right thing to do.</b> • Because when we look back in 50 years, <b>we will know this legislation was the right thing to do.</b> • Because when we look back in <b>one-hundred</b> years, <i><b>we will know this legislation was the right thing to do!</b></i> Today—I hope everyone in this room joins us in doing the <i><b>right thing.</b></i> We know the questions, and we'll answer them if asked. But I encourage us to listen to <i>testimonies</i>, to listen to the voices who are ready for change, so that we may be reminded—again—<i>just how overdue this legislation is.</i> Thank you, Mister Chair and members of the committee. I hope you report this bill favorably to full committee. <hr> == Support and Opposition == === Support === • ACLU People Power Fairfax • Bridging The Gap In Virginia • Charlottesville Chapter National Organization for Women • Coalition for Justice • EJUSA Evangelical Network • Fighting 4 Freedom • Greater Washington (JCRC) • Inmate Support Virginia • Interfaith Action for Human Rights (IAHR) • HALT Solitary • Jewish Community Relations Council of Just Future Project • Justice & Witness Action Network- VA • United Church of Christ Central Atlantic Conference • LatinoJustice PRLDEF • NAACP Loudoun • National Association of Social Workers • National Association of Social Workers, Virginia Chapter • National Religious Campaign Against Torture • No Left Turns • Resource Information Help for the Disadvantaged and Disenfranchised (RIHD) • RISE for Youth • RVA Health Alliance for Social Justice and Equity • Social Action Linking Together (SALT) • Social Workers and Allies Against Solitary Confinement • The Humanization Project • The Sentencing Project • Unitarian Universalist Legislative Ministry of Virginia • Unlock the Box Campaign • Virginia CURE • Virginia Defenders for Freedom, Justice & Equality • Virginia Justice Democrats • Virginia Justice for Life • Virginia Justice Alliance • Virginia Prisons Accountability Committee • Virginia Prisoner Of Conscience • Virginia Prison Justice Network • WJCC Coalition for Community Justice • 40 Strong === Opposition === • (to be updated) === No Recommendation / Neutral === • (to be updated) === No Position Provided === • Department of Corrections <hr> == Fiscal Impact == No fiscal impact statement is posted for HB35. <hr> == Possible Questions == === TL;DR === <b>Q1: “Does this end solitary confinement in Virginia?”</b> TL;DR: No—it ends <i>prolonged</i> solitary confinement and sets clear limits, oversight, and due-process rules for any use. <br> <b>Q2: “Does this make prisons less safe for staff?”</b> TL;DR: No—HB35 keeps exceptions for imminent threats and requires documentation; it’s about targeted use, not “never.” <br> <b>Q3: “What changes day-to-day?”</b> TL;DR: Frequent reviews, rapid medical/mental health checks, real programming/out-of-cell time, and written accountability when isolation is used. <br> <b>Q4: “Can DOC just use ‘lockdowns’ instead?”</b> TL;DR: The bill defines lockdown and regulates it, and the requested amendment strengthens this further by applying the same time limits to lockdown explicitly. <br> === Q1: “What does the bill aim to accomplish?” === <b>Answer you can use:</b> HB35 ends prolonged solitary confinement by setting clear time limits and requiring real oversight—regular reviews, rapid medical and mental health evaluations, documentation, and in-person due process when isolation continues. <br> === Q2: “How often is placement reviewed?” === <b>Answer you can use:</b> Placement is reviewed frequently, including a required 48-hour review cycle with written documentation explaining why less restrictive settings were not used. <br> === Q3: “What health protections are required?” === <b>Answer you can use:</b> HB35 requires medical and mental health evaluations by certified professionals within one working day of placement in restorative housing or isolated confinement (with limited exceptions). <br> === Q4: “Does this stop people from getting programming or recreation?” === <b>Answer you can use:</b> No—the bill requires at least four hours of out-of-cell programming or congregate activity daily, plus at least one hour of congregate recreation unless exceptional safety circumstances apply. <br> === Q5: “What stops indefinite ‘lockdowns’?” === <b>Answer you can use:</b> Lockdowns that interrupt programming must have a specific documented security purpose, must end as soon as the purpose is served, are time-limited, require approvals to extend or repeat, and must be documented and published. <hr> == Additional Information == <b>1. Definitions are the enforcement backbone</b> • The bill defines isolated confinement and lockdown by hours-per-day and loss of programming, so policy can’t be evaded by unit names. <b>Policy implication:</b> Regulates conditions, not labels. <br> <b>2. The “less restrictive first” rule targets protective-custody misuse</b> • For “own protection” placements, the facility must use less restrictive options first, including transfers or special-purpose housing for similarly threatened individuals, unless infeasible. <b>Policy implication:</b> Safety without defaulting to isolation. <br> <b>3. Reviews + documentation create accountability</b> • Requires regular reviews, documentation in the institutional file, notice up the chain, and formal in-person reviews with appeal rights. <b>Policy implication:</b> Isolation becomes a documented exception, not a routine. <br> <b>4. Lockdown limits matter because lockdown can function like solitary</b> • The bill regulates lockdowns that interrupt programming and requires publication of documentation. <b>Policy implication:</b> Prevents “unit-wide solitary” from becoming the workaround. [[Category:2026 Session]]
2026-01-22 06:47:15
Edited by: 74.110.183.75
Edited by: 74.110.183.75
= HB35 Restorative housing and isolated confinement; restrictions on use. = == Status == [https://house.vga.virginia.gov/subcommittees/H15002/agendas/5187 Public Safety | Subcommittee #2 — agenda] <hr> == Overview == === Summary as Introduced === <b>Restorative housing and isolated confinement; restrictions on use.</b> Prohibits the use of isolated confinement, defined in the bill, in state correctional facilities, subject to certain exceptions. The bill requires that before placing an incarcerated person in restorative housing or isolated confinement for his own protection, the facility administrator shall place an incarcerated person in a less-restrictive setting, including by transferring such person to another institution or to a special-purpose housing unit for incarcerated persons who face similar threats. The bill requires that if an incarcerated person is placed in restorative housing or isolated confinement, such placement shall be reviewed every 48 hours and the facility administrator shall ensure that the incarcerated person receives a medical and mental health evaluation from certified medical and mental health professionals within one working day of placement in restorative housing or any form of isolated confinement. The bill also requires the facility administrator to notify the regional administrator in writing that an incarcerated person was placed in restorative housing or isolated confinement within 24 hours of such placement. Finally, the bill requires that formal reviews of an incarcerated person's placement in any form of isolated confinement shall be held in such person's presence, inform him of any reasons administrative officials believe isolated confinement remains necessary, and give the incarcerated person an opportunity to respond to those reasons, and a formal ruling shall be provided to the incarcerated individual within 24 hours. <hr> === Patrons === ==== House Patrons ==== • Joshua G. Cole (chief patron) • Patrick A. Hope • Sam Rasoul • Holly Seibold ==== Senate Patrons ==== • Bagby <hr> == Language == The language of [https://lis.virginia.gov/bill-details/20261/HB35/text/HB35 HB35] can be viewed here. <hr> == Proposed Amendment == === Amendment Offered for Consideration (requested for subcommittee) === ==== Add “Lockdown” throughout relevant provisions ==== Amend the bill to explicitly include “lockdown” alongside “solitary confinement/isolated confinement” and “restorative housing” in all relevant sections, to prevent facilities from using unit-wide lockdown practices as a functional substitute for individual isolated confinement. ==== Strengthen the time-limit clause (close the cumulative-days gap) ==== Replace the current time-limit phrasing with: “No individual shall be held in solitary confinement, lockdown, or restorative housing for more than 15 consecutive days, nor 15 days in any 60-day period.” <b>Purpose of the amendment:</b> The introduced text already uses “15 consecutive days…in any 60-day period,” but stakeholders have raised concerns that “consecutive” language can be worked around by cycling people in and out (or shifting to lockdown practices) without ever hitting a “consecutive” threshold. The amendment makes the limit explicitly <i>both</i> consecutive and cumulative. <hr> == Opening Statement == === House Subcommittee Statement === <blockquote> ====Notes on delivery: ==== <mark> <b>bold</b>—emphasize, increase volume; </mark> <mark> <i>italicized</i>—stressed, extended pronunciation, sing-songy; </mark> <mark> <i><b>bold italicized</i></b>—climactic, stressed and emphatic; </mark> - <mark> • bulleted—drum-like repetition, think of MLK's "I Have a Dream," "I have a dream that..." repeated for emphasis. </mark> + <mark> • bulleted—drum-like repetition, think of MLK's "I Have a Dream," "I have a dream that..." repeated for emphasis; </mark> - </blockquote> + <mark> — a half pause, musically one measure; </mark> - + <mark> ... a full pause, musically two measures. <mark> - <br> + </blockquote> - Mister Chair, members of the subcommittee— + <br> - <i>This is not our first time here.</i> + Mister Chair, members of the subcommittee— - For <b>two straight years</b>, the General Assembly has passed this reform. + <i>This is not our first time here.</i> - <b>In 2024</b>, I gave you a sermon... and then we passed HB 1244. + For <b>two straight years</b>, the General Assembly has passed this reform. - <b>In 2025</b>, • my sister, • my friend, • and my esteemed colleague, <b>Delegate Karen Keys-Gamarra</b>, took up the torch... and then we passed HB 2647. + <b>In 2024</b>, I gave you a sermon... and then we passed HB 1244. - Twice, this body has said—<i><b>clearly</b></i>—that we are ready to turn the page on solitary confinement. + <b>In 2025</b>, • my sister, • my friend, • and my esteemed colleague, <b>Delegate Karen Keys-Gamarra</b>, took up the torch... and then we passed HB 2647. - And after two straight years, nobody can pretend this is new... + Twice, this body has said—<i><b>clearly</b></i>—that we are ready to turn the page on solitary confinement. - • You know this bill. + And after two straight years, nobody can pretend this is new... - • You know this issue. + - • You know how overdue this change is. + • You know this bill. - + • You know this issue. - Mister Chair, members of the committee, this is not our first time here, <b>BUT it will be our last</b>—because this year <i>we will make history.</i> + • You know how overdue this change is. - And what is so great about this year is that we all have a <i>chance</i>—a <i>chance</i> to be part of making history. + Mister Chair, members of the committee, this is not our first time here, <b>BUT it will be our last</b>—because this year <i>we will make history.</i> - If you're still on the fence, I want you to look <i>forward</i> into the future with me. <b>Don't let the past hold you back...</b> + And what is so great about this year is that we all have a <i>chance</i>—a <i>chance</i> to be part of making history. - • Because when we look back in 25 years, <b>we will know this legislation was the right thing to do.</b> + If you're still on the fence, I want you to look <i>forward</i> into the future with me. <b>Don't let the past hold you back...</b> - • Because when we look back in 50 years, <b>we will know this legislation was the right thing to do.</b> + • Because when we look back in 25 years, <b>we will know this legislation was the right thing to do.</b> - • Because when we look back in <b>one-hundred</b> years, <i><b>we will know this legislation was the right thing to do!</b></i> + • Because when we look back in 50 years, <b>we will know this legislation was the right thing to do.</b> - Today—I hope everyone in this room joins us in doing the <i><b>right thing.</b></i> + • Because when we look back in <b>one-hundred</b> years, <i><b>we will know this legislation was the right thing to do!</b></i> - We know the questions, and we'll answer them if asked. But I encourage us to listen to <i>testimonies</i>, to listen to the voices who are ready for change, so that we may be reminded—again—<i>just how overdue this legislation is.</i> + Today—I hope everyone in this room joins us in doing the <i><b>right thing.</b></i> - Thank you, Mister Chair and members of the committee. I hope you report this bill favorably to full committee. + We know the questions, and we'll answer them if asked. But I encourage us to listen to <i>testimonies</i>, to listen to the voices who are ready for change, so that we may be reminded—again—<i>just how overdue this legislation is.</i> - <hr> + Thank you, Mister Chair and members of the committee. I hope you report this bill favorably to full committee. - == Support and Opposition == + <hr> - === Support === + == Support and Opposition == - • ACLU People Power Fairfax + - • Bridging The Gap In Virginia + === Support === - • Charlottesville Chapter National Organization for Women + • ACLU People Power Fairfax - • Coalition for Justice + • Bridging The Gap In Virginia - • EJUSA Evangelical Network + • Charlottesville Chapter National Organization for Women - • Fighting 4 Freedom + • Coalition for Justice - • Greater Washington (JCRC) + • EJUSA Evangelical Network - • Inmate Support Virginia + • Fighting 4 Freedom - • Interfaith Action for Human Rights (IAHR) + • Greater Washington (JCRC) - • HALT Solitary + • Inmate Support Virginia - • Jewish Community Relations Council of Just Future Project + • Interfaith Action for Human Rights (IAHR) - • Justice & Witness Action Network- VA + • HALT Solitary - • United Church of Christ Central Atlantic Conference + • Jewish Community Relations Council of Just Future Project - • LatinoJustice PRLDEF + • Justice & Witness Action Network- VA - • NAACP Loudoun + • United Church of Christ Central Atlantic Conference - • National Association of Social Workers + • LatinoJustice PRLDEF - • National Association of Social Workers, Virginia Chapter + • NAACP Loudoun - • National Religious Campaign Against Torture + • National Association of Social Workers - • No Left Turns + • National Association of Social Workers, Virginia Chapter - • Resource Information Help for the Disadvantaged and Disenfranchised (RIHD) + • National Religious Campaign Against Torture - • RISE for Youth + • No Left Turns - • RVA Health Alliance for Social Justice and Equity + • Resource Information Help for the Disadvantaged and Disenfranchised (RIHD) - • Social Action Linking Together (SALT) + • RISE for Youth - • Social Workers and Allies Against Solitary Confinement + • RVA Health Alliance for Social Justice and Equity - • The Humanization Project + • Social Action Linking Together (SALT) - • The Sentencing Project + • Social Workers and Allies Against Solitary Confinement - • Unitarian Universalist Legislative Ministry of Virginia + • The Humanization Project - • Unlock the Box Campaign + • The Sentencing Project - • Virginia CURE + • Unitarian Universalist Legislative Ministry of Virginia - • Virginia Defenders for Freedom, Justice & Equality + • Unlock the Box Campaign - • Virginia Justice Democrats + • Virginia CURE - • Virginia Justice for Life + • Virginia Defenders for Freedom, Justice & Equality - • Virginia Justice Alliance + • Virginia Justice Democrats - • Virginia Prisons Accountability Committee + • Virginia Justice for Life - • Virginia Prisoner Of Conscience + • Virginia Justice Alliance - • Virginia Prison Justice Network + • Virginia Prisons Accountability Committee - • WJCC Coalition for Community Justice + • Virginia Prisoner Of Conscience - • 40 Strong + • Virginia Prison Justice Network - + • WJCC Coalition for Community Justice - === Opposition === + • 40 Strong - • (to be updated) + - + === Opposition === - === No Recommendation / Neutral === + • (to be updated) - • (to be updated) + - + === No Recommendation / Neutral === - === No Position Provided === + • (to be updated) - • Department of Corrections + - + === No Position Provided === - <hr> + • Department of Corrections - == Fiscal Impact == + <hr> - No fiscal impact statement is posted for HB35. + - + == Fiscal Impact == - <hr> + No fiscal impact statement is posted for HB35. - == Possible Questions == + <hr> - === TL;DR === + == Possible Questions == - <b>Q1: “Does this end solitary confinement in Virginia?”</b> TL;DR: No—it ends <i>prolonged</i> solitary confinement and sets clear limits, oversight, and due-process rules for any use. <br> + - <b>Q2: “Does this make prisons less safe for staff?”</b> TL;DR: No—HB35 keeps exceptions for imminent threats and requires documentation; it’s about targeted use, not “never.” + === TL;DR === - + <b>Q1: “Does this end solitary confinement in Virginia?”</b> TL;DR: No—it ends <i>prolonged</i> solitary confinement and sets clear limits, oversight, and due-process rules for any use. <br> - <br> + <b>Q2: “Does this make prisons less safe for staff?”</b> TL;DR: No—HB35 keeps exceptions for imminent threats and requires documentation; it’s about targeted use, not “never.” - <b>Q3: “What changes day-to-day?”</b> TL;DR: Frequent reviews, rapid medical/mental health checks, real programming/out-of-cell time, and written accountability when isolation is used. + - + <br> - <br> + <b>Q3: “What changes day-to-day?”</b> TL;DR: Frequent reviews, rapid medical/mental health checks, real programming/out-of-cell time, and written accountability when isolation is used. - <b>Q4: “Can DOC just use ‘lockdowns’ instead?”</b> TL;DR: The bill defines lockdown and regulates it, and the requested amendment strengthens this further by applying the same time limits to lockdown explicitly. + - + <br> - <br> + <b>Q4: “Can DOC just use ‘lockdowns’ instead?”</b> TL;DR: The bill defines lockdown and regulates it, and the requested amendment strengthens this further by applying the same time limits to lockdown explicitly. - === Q1: “What does the bill aim to accomplish?” === + <br> - <b>Answer you can use:</b> HB35 ends prolonged solitary confinement by setting clear time limits and requiring real oversight—regular reviews, rapid medical and mental health evaluations, documentation, and in-person due process when isolation continues. + - + === Q1: “What does the bill aim to accomplish?” === - <br> + <b>Answer you can use:</b> HB35 ends prolonged solitary confinement by setting clear time limits and requiring real oversight—regular reviews, rapid medical and mental health evaluations, documentation, and in-person due process when isolation continues. - === Q2: “How often is placement reviewed?” === + <br> - <b>Answer you can use:</b> Placement is reviewed frequently, including a required 48-hour review cycle with written documentation explaining why less restrictive settings were not used. + - + === Q2: “How often is placement reviewed?” === - <br> + <b>Answer you can use:</b> Placement is reviewed frequently, including a required 48-hour review cycle with written documentation explaining why less restrictive settings were not used. - === Q3: “What health protections are required?” === + <br> - <b>Answer you can use:</b> HB35 requires medical and mental health evaluations by certified professionals within one working day of placement in restorative housing or isolated confinement (with limited exceptions). + - + === Q3: “What health protections are required?” === - <br> + <b>Answer you can use:</b> HB35 requires medical and mental health evaluations by certified professionals within one working day of placement in restorative housing or isolated confinement (with limited exceptions). - === Q4: “Does this stop people from getting programming or recreation?” === + <br> - <b>Answer you can use:</b> No—the bill requires at least four hours of out-of-cell programming or congregate activity daily, plus at least one hour of congregate recreation unless exceptional safety circumstances apply. + - + === Q4: “Does this stop people from getting programming or recreation?” === - <br> + <b>Answer you can use:</b> No—the bill requires at least four hours of out-of-cell programming or congregate activity daily, plus at least one hour of congregate recreation unless exceptional safety circumstances apply. - === Q5: “What stops indefinite ‘lockdowns’?” === + <br> - <b>Answer you can use:</b> Lockdowns that interrupt programming must have a specific documented security purpose, must end as soon as the purpose is served, are time-limited, require approvals to extend or repeat, and must be documented and published. + - + === Q5: “What stops indefinite ‘lockdowns’?” === - <hr> + <b>Answer you can use:</b> Lockdowns that interrupt programming must have a specific documented security purpose, must end as soon as the purpose is served, are time-limited, require approvals to extend or repeat, and must be documented and published. - == Additional Information == + <hr> - <b>1. Definitions are the enforcement backbone</b> + - • The bill defines isolated confinement and lockdown by hours-per-day and loss of programming, so policy can’t be evaded by unit names. + == Additional Information == - + <b>1. Definitions are the enforcement backbone</b> - + • The bill defines isolated confinement and lockdown by hours-per-day and loss of programming, so policy can’t be evaded by unit names. - <b>Policy implication:</b> Regulates conditions, not labels. + - <br> + <b>Policy implication:</b> Regulates conditions, not labels. - <b>2. The “less restrictive first” rule targets protective-custody misuse</b> + <br> - • For “own protection” placements, the facility must use less restrictive options first, including transfers or special-purpose housing for similarly threatened individuals, unless infeasible. + - + <b>2. The “less restrictive first” rule targets protective-custody misuse</b> - <b>Policy implication:</b> Safety without defaulting to isolation. + • For “own protection” placements, the facility must use less restrictive options first, including transfers or special-purpose housing for similarly threatened individuals, unless infeasible. - <br> + <b>Policy implication:</b> Safety without defaulting to isolation. - <b>3. Reviews + documentation create accountability</b> + <br> - • Requires regular reviews, documentation in the institutional file, notice up the chain, and formal in-person reviews with appeal rights. + - + <b>3. Reviews + documentation create accountability</b> - <b>Policy implication:</b> Isolation becomes a documented exception, not a routine. + • Requires regular reviews, documentation in the institutional file, notice up the chain, and formal in-person reviews with appeal rights. - <br> + <b>Policy implication:</b> Isolation becomes a documented exception, not a routine. - <b>4. Lockdown limits matter because lockdown can function like solitary</b> + <br> - • The bill regulates lockdowns that interrupt programming and requires publication of documentation. + - + <b>4. Lockdown limits matter because lockdown can function like solitary</b> - + • The bill regulates lockdowns that interrupt programming and requires publication of documentation. - <b>Policy implication:</b> Prevents “unit-wide solitary” from becoming the workaround. + - [[Category:2026 Session]] + <b>Policy implication:</b> Prevents “unit-wide solitary” from becoming the workaround. + + [[Category:2026 Session]]
2026-01-22 06:46:10
Edited by: 74.110.183.75
Edited by: 74.110.183.75
= HB35 Restorative housing and isolated confinement; restrictions on use. = == Status == [https://house.vga.virginia.gov/subcommittees/H15002/agendas/5187 Public Safety | Subcommittee #2 — agenda] <hr> == Overview == === Summary as Introduced === <b>Restorative housing and isolated confinement; restrictions on use.</b> Prohibits the use of isolated confinement, defined in the bill, in state correctional facilities, subject to certain exceptions. The bill requires that before placing an incarcerated person in restorative housing or isolated confinement for his own protection, the facility administrator shall place an incarcerated person in a less-restrictive setting, including by transferring such person to another institution or to a special-purpose housing unit for incarcerated persons who face similar threats. The bill requires that if an incarcerated person is placed in restorative housing or isolated confinement, such placement shall be reviewed every 48 hours and the facility administrator shall ensure that the incarcerated person receives a medical and mental health evaluation from certified medical and mental health professionals within one working day of placement in restorative housing or any form of isolated confinement. The bill also requires the facility administrator to notify the regional administrator in writing that an incarcerated person was placed in restorative housing or isolated confinement within 24 hours of such placement. Finally, the bill requires that formal reviews of an incarcerated person's placement in any form of isolated confinement shall be held in such person's presence, inform him of any reasons administrative officials believe isolated confinement remains necessary, and give the incarcerated person an opportunity to respond to those reasons, and a formal ruling shall be provided to the incarcerated individual within 24 hours. <hr> === Patrons === ==== House Patrons ==== • Joshua G. Cole (chief patron) • Patrick A. Hope • Sam Rasoul • Holly Seibold ==== Senate Patrons ==== • Bagby <hr> == Language == The language of [https://lis.virginia.gov/bill-details/20261/HB35/text/HB35 HB35] can be viewed here. <hr> == Proposed Amendment == === Amendment Offered for Consideration (requested for subcommittee) === ==== Add “Lockdown” throughout relevant provisions ==== Amend the bill to explicitly include “lockdown” alongside “solitary confinement/isolated confinement” and “restorative housing” in all relevant sections, to prevent facilities from using unit-wide lockdown practices as a functional substitute for individual isolated confinement. ==== Strengthen the time-limit clause (close the cumulative-days gap) ==== Replace the current time-limit phrasing with: “No individual shall be held in solitary confinement, lockdown, or restorative housing for more than 15 consecutive days, nor 15 days in any 60-day period.” <b>Purpose of the amendment:</b> The introduced text already uses “15 consecutive days…in any 60-day period,” but stakeholders have raised concerns that “consecutive” language can be worked around by cycling people in and out (or shifting to lockdown practices) without ever hitting a “consecutive” threshold. The amendment makes the limit explicitly <i>both</i> consecutive and cumulative. <hr> == Opening Statement == === House Subcommittee Statement === <blockquote> ====Notes on delivery: ==== <mark> <b>bold</b>—emphasize, increase volume; </mark> <mark> <i>italicized</i>—stressed, extended pronunciation, sing-songy; </mark> <mark> <i><b>bold italicized</i></b>—climactic, stressed and emphatic; </mark> <mark> • bulleted—drum-like repetition, think of MLK's "I Have a Dream," "I have a dream that..." repeated for emphasis. </mark> </blockquote> <br> Mister Chair, members of the subcommittee— <i>This is not our first time here.</i> For <b>two straight years</b>, the General Assembly has passed this reform. <b>In 2024</b>, I gave you a sermon... and then we passed HB 1244. - <b>In 2025</b>, • my sister, • my friend, • and my esteemed colleague, <b>Delegate Keys-Gamarra</b>, took up the torch... and then we passed HB 2647. + <b>In 2025</b>, • my sister, • my friend, • and my esteemed colleague, <b>Delegate Karen Keys-Gamarra</b>, took up the torch... and then we passed HB 2647. Twice, this body has said—<i><b>clearly</b></i>—that we are ready to turn the page on solitary confinement. And after two straight years, nobody can pretend this is new... • You know this bill. • You know this issue. • You know how overdue this change is. Mister Chair, members of the committee, this is not our first time here, <b>BUT it will be our last</b>—because this year <i>we will make history.</i> And what is so great about this year is that we all have a <i>chance</i>—a <i>chance</i> to be part of making history. If you're still on the fence, I want you to look <i>forward</i> into the future with me. <b>Don't let the past hold you back...</b> • Because when we look back in 25 years, <b>we will know this legislation was the right thing to do.</b> • Because when we look back in 50 years, <b>we will know this legislation was the right thing to do.</b> • Because when we look back in <b>one-hundred</b> years, <i><b>we will know this legislation was the right thing to do!</b></i> Today—I hope everyone in this room joins us in doing the <i><b>right thing.</b></i> We know the questions, and we'll answer them if asked. But I encourage us to listen to <i>testimonies</i>, to listen to the voices who are ready for change, so that we may be reminded—again—<i>just how overdue this legislation is.</i> Thank you, Mister Chair and members of the committee. I hope you report this bill favorably to full committee. <hr> == Support and Opposition == === Support === • ACLU People Power Fairfax • Bridging The Gap In Virginia • Charlottesville Chapter National Organization for Women • Coalition for Justice • EJUSA Evangelical Network • Fighting 4 Freedom • Greater Washington (JCRC) • Inmate Support Virginia • Interfaith Action for Human Rights (IAHR) • HALT Solitary • Jewish Community Relations Council of Just Future Project • Justice & Witness Action Network- VA • United Church of Christ Central Atlantic Conference • LatinoJustice PRLDEF • NAACP Loudoun • National Association of Social Workers • National Association of Social Workers, Virginia Chapter • National Religious Campaign Against Torture • No Left Turns • Resource Information Help for the Disadvantaged and Disenfranchised (RIHD) • RISE for Youth • RVA Health Alliance for Social Justice and Equity • Social Action Linking Together (SALT) • Social Workers and Allies Against Solitary Confinement • The Humanization Project • The Sentencing Project • Unitarian Universalist Legislative Ministry of Virginia • Unlock the Box Campaign • Virginia CURE • Virginia Defenders for Freedom, Justice & Equality • Virginia Justice Democrats • Virginia Justice for Life • Virginia Justice Alliance • Virginia Prisons Accountability Committee • Virginia Prisoner Of Conscience • Virginia Prison Justice Network • WJCC Coalition for Community Justice • 40 Strong === Opposition === • (to be updated) === No Recommendation / Neutral === • (to be updated) === No Position Provided === • Department of Corrections <hr> == Fiscal Impact == No fiscal impact statement is posted for HB35. <hr> == Possible Questions == === TL;DR === <b>Q1: “Does this end solitary confinement in Virginia?”</b> TL;DR: No—it ends <i>prolonged</i> solitary confinement and sets clear limits, oversight, and due-process rules for any use. <br> <b>Q2: “Does this make prisons less safe for staff?”</b> TL;DR: No—HB35 keeps exceptions for imminent threats and requires documentation; it’s about targeted use, not “never.” <br> <b>Q3: “What changes day-to-day?”</b> TL;DR: Frequent reviews, rapid medical/mental health checks, real programming/out-of-cell time, and written accountability when isolation is used. <br> <b>Q4: “Can DOC just use ‘lockdowns’ instead?”</b> TL;DR: The bill defines lockdown and regulates it, and the requested amendment strengthens this further by applying the same time limits to lockdown explicitly. <br> === Q1: “What does the bill aim to accomplish?” === <b>Answer you can use:</b> HB35 ends prolonged solitary confinement by setting clear time limits and requiring real oversight—regular reviews, rapid medical and mental health evaluations, documentation, and in-person due process when isolation continues. <br> === Q2: “How often is placement reviewed?” === <b>Answer you can use:</b> Placement is reviewed frequently, including a required 48-hour review cycle with written documentation explaining why less restrictive settings were not used. <br> === Q3: “What health protections are required?” === <b>Answer you can use:</b> HB35 requires medical and mental health evaluations by certified professionals within one working day of placement in restorative housing or isolated confinement (with limited exceptions). <br> === Q4: “Does this stop people from getting programming or recreation?” === <b>Answer you can use:</b> No—the bill requires at least four hours of out-of-cell programming or congregate activity daily, plus at least one hour of congregate recreation unless exceptional safety circumstances apply. <br> === Q5: “What stops indefinite ‘lockdowns’?” === <b>Answer you can use:</b> Lockdowns that interrupt programming must have a specific documented security purpose, must end as soon as the purpose is served, are time-limited, require approvals to extend or repeat, and must be documented and published. <hr> == Additional Information == <b>1. Definitions are the enforcement backbone</b> • The bill defines isolated confinement and lockdown by hours-per-day and loss of programming, so policy can’t be evaded by unit names. <b>Policy implication:</b> Regulates conditions, not labels. <br> <b>2. The “less restrictive first” rule targets protective-custody misuse</b> • For “own protection” placements, the facility must use less restrictive options first, including transfers or special-purpose housing for similarly threatened individuals, unless infeasible. <b>Policy implication:</b> Safety without defaulting to isolation. <br> <b>3. Reviews + documentation create accountability</b> • Requires regular reviews, documentation in the institutional file, notice up the chain, and formal in-person reviews with appeal rights. <b>Policy implication:</b> Isolation becomes a documented exception, not a routine. <br> <b>4. Lockdown limits matter because lockdown can function like solitary</b> • The bill regulates lockdowns that interrupt programming and requires publication of documentation. <b>Policy implication:</b> Prevents “unit-wide solitary” from becoming the workaround. [[Category:2026 Session]]
2026-01-22 06:44:12
Edited by: 74.110.183.75
Edited by: 74.110.183.75
= HB35 Restorative housing and isolated confinement; restrictions on use. = == Status == [https://house.vga.virginia.gov/subcommittees/H15002/agendas/5187 Public Safety | Subcommittee #2 — agenda] <hr> == Overview == === Summary as Introduced === <b>Restorative housing and isolated confinement; restrictions on use.</b> Prohibits the use of isolated confinement, defined in the bill, in state correctional facilities, subject to certain exceptions. The bill requires that before placing an incarcerated person in restorative housing or isolated confinement for his own protection, the facility administrator shall place an incarcerated person in a less-restrictive setting, including by transferring such person to another institution or to a special-purpose housing unit for incarcerated persons who face similar threats. The bill requires that if an incarcerated person is placed in restorative housing or isolated confinement, such placement shall be reviewed every 48 hours and the facility administrator shall ensure that the incarcerated person receives a medical and mental health evaluation from certified medical and mental health professionals within one working day of placement in restorative housing or any form of isolated confinement. The bill also requires the facility administrator to notify the regional administrator in writing that an incarcerated person was placed in restorative housing or isolated confinement within 24 hours of such placement. Finally, the bill requires that formal reviews of an incarcerated person's placement in any form of isolated confinement shall be held in such person's presence, inform him of any reasons administrative officials believe isolated confinement remains necessary, and give the incarcerated person an opportunity to respond to those reasons, and a formal ruling shall be provided to the incarcerated individual within 24 hours. <hr> === Patrons === ==== House Patrons ==== • Joshua G. Cole (chief patron) • Patrick A. Hope • Sam Rasoul • Holly Seibold ==== Senate Patrons ==== • Bagby <hr> == Language == The language of [https://lis.virginia.gov/bill-details/20261/HB35/text/HB35 HB35] can be viewed here. <hr> == Proposed Amendment == === Amendment Offered for Consideration (requested for subcommittee) === ==== Add “Lockdown” throughout relevant provisions ==== Amend the bill to explicitly include “lockdown” alongside “solitary confinement/isolated confinement” and “restorative housing” in all relevant sections, to prevent facilities from using unit-wide lockdown practices as a functional substitute for individual isolated confinement. ==== Strengthen the time-limit clause (close the cumulative-days gap) ==== Replace the current time-limit phrasing with: “No individual shall be held in solitary confinement, lockdown, or restorative housing for more than 15 consecutive days, nor 15 days in any 60-day period.” <b>Purpose of the amendment:</b> The introduced text already uses “15 consecutive days…in any 60-day period,” but stakeholders have raised concerns that “consecutive” language can be worked around by cycling people in and out (or shifting to lockdown practices) without ever hitting a “consecutive” threshold. The amendment makes the limit explicitly <i>both</i> consecutive and cumulative. <hr> == Opening Statement == === House Subcommittee Statement === <blockquote> ====Notes on delivery: ==== <mark> <b>bold</b>—emphasize, increase volume; </mark> <mark> <i>italicized</i>—stressed, extended pronunciation, sing-songy; </mark> <mark> <i><b>bold italicized</i></b>—climactic, stressed and emphatic; </mark> <mark> • bulleted—drum-like repetition, think of MLK's "I Have a Dream," "I have a dream that..." repeated for emphasis. </mark> </blockquote> <br> Mister Chair, members of the subcommittee— <i>This is not our first time here.</i> For <b>two straight years</b>, the General Assembly has passed this reform. <b>In 2024</b>, I gave you a sermon... and then we passed HB 1244. - <b>In 2025</b>, my sister, my friend, and my colleague, <b>Delegate Keys-Gamarra</b>, took up the torch... and then we passed HB 2647. + <b>In 2025</b>, • my sister, • my friend, • and my esteemed colleague, <b>Delegate Keys-Gamarra</b>, took up the torch... and then we passed HB 2647. Twice, this body has said—<i><b>clearly</b></i>—that we are ready to turn the page on solitary confinement. And after two straight years, nobody can pretend this is new... • You know this bill. • You know this issue. • You know how overdue this change is. Mister Chair, members of the committee, this is not our first time here, <b>BUT it will be our last</b>—because this year <i>we will make history.</i> And what is so great about this year is that we all have a <i>chance</i>—a <i>chance</i> to be part of making history. If you're still on the fence, I want you to look <i>forward</i> into the future with me. <b>Don't let the past hold you back...</b> • Because when we look back in 25 years, <b>we will know this legislation was the right thing to do.</b> • Because when we look back in 50 years, <b>we will know this legislation was the right thing to do.</b> • Because when we look back in <b>one-hundred</b> years, <i><b>we will know this legislation was the right thing to do!</b></i> Today—I hope everyone in this room joins us in doing the <i><b>right thing.</b></i> We know the questions, and we'll answer them if asked. But I encourage us to listen to <i>testimonies</i>, to listen to the voices who are ready for change, so that we may be reminded—again—<i>just how overdue this legislation is.</i> Thank you, Mister Chair and members of the committee. I hope you report this bill favorably to full committee. <hr> == Support and Opposition == === Support === • ACLU People Power Fairfax • Bridging The Gap In Virginia • Charlottesville Chapter National Organization for Women • Coalition for Justice • EJUSA Evangelical Network • Fighting 4 Freedom • Greater Washington (JCRC) • Inmate Support Virginia • Interfaith Action for Human Rights (IAHR) • HALT Solitary • Jewish Community Relations Council of Just Future Project • Justice & Witness Action Network- VA • United Church of Christ Central Atlantic Conference • LatinoJustice PRLDEF • NAACP Loudoun • National Association of Social Workers • National Association of Social Workers, Virginia Chapter • National Religious Campaign Against Torture • No Left Turns • Resource Information Help for the Disadvantaged and Disenfranchised (RIHD) • RISE for Youth • RVA Health Alliance for Social Justice and Equity • Social Action Linking Together (SALT) • Social Workers and Allies Against Solitary Confinement • The Humanization Project • The Sentencing Project • Unitarian Universalist Legislative Ministry of Virginia • Unlock the Box Campaign • Virginia CURE • Virginia Defenders for Freedom, Justice & Equality • Virginia Justice Democrats • Virginia Justice for Life • Virginia Justice Alliance • Virginia Prisons Accountability Committee • Virginia Prisoner Of Conscience • Virginia Prison Justice Network • WJCC Coalition for Community Justice • 40 Strong === Opposition === • (to be updated) === No Recommendation / Neutral === • (to be updated) === No Position Provided === • Department of Corrections <hr> == Fiscal Impact == No fiscal impact statement is posted for HB35. <hr> == Possible Questions == === TL;DR === <b>Q1: “Does this end solitary confinement in Virginia?”</b> TL;DR: No—it ends <i>prolonged</i> solitary confinement and sets clear limits, oversight, and due-process rules for any use. <br> <b>Q2: “Does this make prisons less safe for staff?”</b> TL;DR: No—HB35 keeps exceptions for imminent threats and requires documentation; it’s about targeted use, not “never.” <br> <b>Q3: “What changes day-to-day?”</b> TL;DR: Frequent reviews, rapid medical/mental health checks, real programming/out-of-cell time, and written accountability when isolation is used. <br> <b>Q4: “Can DOC just use ‘lockdowns’ instead?”</b> TL;DR: The bill defines lockdown and regulates it, and the requested amendment strengthens this further by applying the same time limits to lockdown explicitly. <br> === Q1: “What does the bill aim to accomplish?” === <b>Answer you can use:</b> HB35 ends prolonged solitary confinement by setting clear time limits and requiring real oversight—regular reviews, rapid medical and mental health evaluations, documentation, and in-person due process when isolation continues. <br> === Q2: “How often is placement reviewed?” === <b>Answer you can use:</b> Placement is reviewed frequently, including a required 48-hour review cycle with written documentation explaining why less restrictive settings were not used. <br> === Q3: “What health protections are required?” === <b>Answer you can use:</b> HB35 requires medical and mental health evaluations by certified professionals within one working day of placement in restorative housing or isolated confinement (with limited exceptions). <br> === Q4: “Does this stop people from getting programming or recreation?” === <b>Answer you can use:</b> No—the bill requires at least four hours of out-of-cell programming or congregate activity daily, plus at least one hour of congregate recreation unless exceptional safety circumstances apply. <br> === Q5: “What stops indefinite ‘lockdowns’?” === <b>Answer you can use:</b> Lockdowns that interrupt programming must have a specific documented security purpose, must end as soon as the purpose is served, are time-limited, require approvals to extend or repeat, and must be documented and published. <hr> == Additional Information == <b>1. Definitions are the enforcement backbone</b> • The bill defines isolated confinement and lockdown by hours-per-day and loss of programming, so policy can’t be evaded by unit names. <b>Policy implication:</b> Regulates conditions, not labels. <br> <b>2. The “less restrictive first” rule targets protective-custody misuse</b> • For “own protection” placements, the facility must use less restrictive options first, including transfers or special-purpose housing for similarly threatened individuals, unless infeasible. <b>Policy implication:</b> Safety without defaulting to isolation. <br> <b>3. Reviews + documentation create accountability</b> • Requires regular reviews, documentation in the institutional file, notice up the chain, and formal in-person reviews with appeal rights. <b>Policy implication:</b> Isolation becomes a documented exception, not a routine. <br> <b>4. Lockdown limits matter because lockdown can function like solitary</b> • The bill regulates lockdowns that interrupt programming and requires publication of documentation. <b>Policy implication:</b> Prevents “unit-wide solitary” from becoming the workaround. [[Category:2026 Session]]
2026-01-22 06:43:38
Edited by: 74.110.183.75
Edited by: 74.110.183.75
= HB35 Restorative housing and isolated confinement; restrictions on use. = == Status == [https://house.vga.virginia.gov/subcommittees/H15002/agendas/5187 Public Safety | Subcommittee #2 — agenda] <hr> == Overview == === Summary as Introduced === <b>Restorative housing and isolated confinement; restrictions on use.</b> Prohibits the use of isolated confinement, defined in the bill, in state correctional facilities, subject to certain exceptions. The bill requires that before placing an incarcerated person in restorative housing or isolated confinement for his own protection, the facility administrator shall place an incarcerated person in a less-restrictive setting, including by transferring such person to another institution or to a special-purpose housing unit for incarcerated persons who face similar threats. The bill requires that if an incarcerated person is placed in restorative housing or isolated confinement, such placement shall be reviewed every 48 hours and the facility administrator shall ensure that the incarcerated person receives a medical and mental health evaluation from certified medical and mental health professionals within one working day of placement in restorative housing or any form of isolated confinement. The bill also requires the facility administrator to notify the regional administrator in writing that an incarcerated person was placed in restorative housing or isolated confinement within 24 hours of such placement. Finally, the bill requires that formal reviews of an incarcerated person's placement in any form of isolated confinement shall be held in such person's presence, inform him of any reasons administrative officials believe isolated confinement remains necessary, and give the incarcerated person an opportunity to respond to those reasons, and a formal ruling shall be provided to the incarcerated individual within 24 hours. <hr> === Patrons === ==== House Patrons ==== • Joshua G. Cole (chief patron) • Patrick A. Hope • Sam Rasoul • Holly Seibold ==== Senate Patrons ==== • Bagby <hr> == Language == The language of [https://lis.virginia.gov/bill-details/20261/HB35/text/HB35 HB35] can be viewed here. <hr> == Proposed Amendment == === Amendment Offered for Consideration (requested for subcommittee) === ==== Add “Lockdown” throughout relevant provisions ==== Amend the bill to explicitly include “lockdown” alongside “solitary confinement/isolated confinement” and “restorative housing” in all relevant sections, to prevent facilities from using unit-wide lockdown practices as a functional substitute for individual isolated confinement. ==== Strengthen the time-limit clause (close the cumulative-days gap) ==== Replace the current time-limit phrasing with: “No individual shall be held in solitary confinement, lockdown, or restorative housing for more than 15 consecutive days, nor 15 days in any 60-day period.” <b>Purpose of the amendment:</b> The introduced text already uses “15 consecutive days…in any 60-day period,” but stakeholders have raised concerns that “consecutive” language can be worked around by cycling people in and out (or shifting to lockdown practices) without ever hitting a “consecutive” threshold. The amendment makes the limit explicitly <i>both</i> consecutive and cumulative. <hr> == Opening Statement == === House Subcommittee Statement === <blockquote> ====Notes on delivery: ==== - <mark><b>bold</b>—emphasize, increase volume;</mark> + <mark> <b>bold</b>—emphasize, increase volume; </mark> - <mark><i>italicized</i>—stressed, extended pronunciation, sing-songy;</mark> + <mark> <i>italicized</i>—stressed, extended pronunciation, sing-songy; </mark> - <mark><i><b>bold italicized</i></b>—climactic, stressed and emphatic;</mark> + <mark> <i><b>bold italicized</i></b>—climactic, stressed and emphatic; </mark> - <mark>• bulleted—drum-like repetition, think of MLK's "I Have a Dream," "I have a dream that..." repeated for emphasis.</mark> + <mark> • bulleted—drum-like repetition, think of MLK's "I Have a Dream," "I have a dream that..." repeated for emphasis. </mark> </blockquote> <br> Mister Chair, members of the subcommittee— <i>This is not our first time here.</i> For <b>two straight years</b>, the General Assembly has passed this reform. <b>In 2024</b>, I gave you a sermon... and then we passed HB 1244. <b>In 2025</b>, my sister, my friend, and my colleague, <b>Delegate Keys-Gamarra</b>, took up the torch... and then we passed HB 2647. Twice, this body has said—<i><b>clearly</b></i>—that we are ready to turn the page on solitary confinement. And after two straight years, nobody can pretend this is new... • You know this bill. • You know this issue. • You know how overdue this change is. Mister Chair, members of the committee, this is not our first time here, <b>BUT it will be our last</b>—because this year <i>we will make history.</i> And what is so great about this year is that we all have a <i>chance</i>—a <i>chance</i> to be part of making history. If you're still on the fence, I want you to look <i>forward</i> into the future with me. <b>Don't let the past hold you back...</b> • Because when we look back in 25 years, <b>we will know this legislation was the right thing to do.</b> • Because when we look back in 50 years, <b>we will know this legislation was the right thing to do.</b> • Because when we look back in <b>one-hundred</b> years, <i><b>we will know this legislation was the right thing to do!</b></i> Today—I hope everyone in this room joins us in doing the <i><b>right thing.</b></i> We know the questions, and we'll answer them if asked. But I encourage us to listen to <i>testimonies</i>, to listen to the voices who are ready for change, so that we may be reminded—again—<i>just how overdue this legislation is.</i> Thank you, Mister Chair and members of the committee. I hope you report this bill favorably to full committee. <hr> == Support and Opposition == === Support === • ACLU People Power Fairfax • Bridging The Gap In Virginia • Charlottesville Chapter National Organization for Women • Coalition for Justice • EJUSA Evangelical Network • Fighting 4 Freedom • Greater Washington (JCRC) • Inmate Support Virginia • Interfaith Action for Human Rights (IAHR) • HALT Solitary • Jewish Community Relations Council of Just Future Project • Justice & Witness Action Network- VA • United Church of Christ Central Atlantic Conference • LatinoJustice PRLDEF • NAACP Loudoun • National Association of Social Workers • National Association of Social Workers, Virginia Chapter • National Religious Campaign Against Torture • No Left Turns • Resource Information Help for the Disadvantaged and Disenfranchised (RIHD) • RISE for Youth • RVA Health Alliance for Social Justice and Equity • Social Action Linking Together (SALT) • Social Workers and Allies Against Solitary Confinement • The Humanization Project • The Sentencing Project • Unitarian Universalist Legislative Ministry of Virginia • Unlock the Box Campaign • Virginia CURE • Virginia Defenders for Freedom, Justice & Equality • Virginia Justice Democrats • Virginia Justice for Life • Virginia Justice Alliance • Virginia Prisons Accountability Committee • Virginia Prisoner Of Conscience • Virginia Prison Justice Network • WJCC Coalition for Community Justice • 40 Strong === Opposition === • (to be updated) === No Recommendation / Neutral === • (to be updated) === No Position Provided === • Department of Corrections <hr> == Fiscal Impact == No fiscal impact statement is posted for HB35. <hr> == Possible Questions == === TL;DR === <b>Q1: “Does this end solitary confinement in Virginia?”</b> TL;DR: No—it ends <i>prolonged</i> solitary confinement and sets clear limits, oversight, and due-process rules for any use. <br> <b>Q2: “Does this make prisons less safe for staff?”</b> TL;DR: No—HB35 keeps exceptions for imminent threats and requires documentation; it’s about targeted use, not “never.” <br> <b>Q3: “What changes day-to-day?”</b> TL;DR: Frequent reviews, rapid medical/mental health checks, real programming/out-of-cell time, and written accountability when isolation is used. <br> <b>Q4: “Can DOC just use ‘lockdowns’ instead?”</b> TL;DR: The bill defines lockdown and regulates it, and the requested amendment strengthens this further by applying the same time limits to lockdown explicitly. <br> === Q1: “What does the bill aim to accomplish?” === <b>Answer you can use:</b> HB35 ends prolonged solitary confinement by setting clear time limits and requiring real oversight—regular reviews, rapid medical and mental health evaluations, documentation, and in-person due process when isolation continues. <br> === Q2: “How often is placement reviewed?” === <b>Answer you can use:</b> Placement is reviewed frequently, including a required 48-hour review cycle with written documentation explaining why less restrictive settings were not used. <br> === Q3: “What health protections are required?” === <b>Answer you can use:</b> HB35 requires medical and mental health evaluations by certified professionals within one working day of placement in restorative housing or isolated confinement (with limited exceptions). <br> === Q4: “Does this stop people from getting programming or recreation?” === <b>Answer you can use:</b> No—the bill requires at least four hours of out-of-cell programming or congregate activity daily, plus at least one hour of congregate recreation unless exceptional safety circumstances apply. <br> === Q5: “What stops indefinite ‘lockdowns’?” === <b>Answer you can use:</b> Lockdowns that interrupt programming must have a specific documented security purpose, must end as soon as the purpose is served, are time-limited, require approvals to extend or repeat, and must be documented and published. <hr> == Additional Information == <b>1. Definitions are the enforcement backbone</b> • The bill defines isolated confinement and lockdown by hours-per-day and loss of programming, so policy can’t be evaded by unit names. <b>Policy implication:</b> Regulates conditions, not labels. <br> <b>2. The “less restrictive first” rule targets protective-custody misuse</b> • For “own protection” placements, the facility must use less restrictive options first, including transfers or special-purpose housing for similarly threatened individuals, unless infeasible. <b>Policy implication:</b> Safety without defaulting to isolation. <br> <b>3. Reviews + documentation create accountability</b> • Requires regular reviews, documentation in the institutional file, notice up the chain, and formal in-person reviews with appeal rights. <b>Policy implication:</b> Isolation becomes a documented exception, not a routine. <br> <b>4. Lockdown limits matter because lockdown can function like solitary</b> • The bill regulates lockdowns that interrupt programming and requires publication of documentation. <b>Policy implication:</b> Prevents “unit-wide solitary” from becoming the workaround. [[Category:2026 Session]]
2026-01-22 06:41:45
Edited by: 74.110.183.75
Edited by: 74.110.183.75
= HB35 Restorative housing and isolated confinement; restrictions on use. = == Status == [https://house.vga.virginia.gov/subcommittees/H15002/agendas/5187 Public Safety | Subcommittee #2 — agenda] <hr> == Overview == === Summary as Introduced === <b>Restorative housing and isolated confinement; restrictions on use.</b> Prohibits the use of isolated confinement, defined in the bill, in state correctional facilities, subject to certain exceptions. The bill requires that before placing an incarcerated person in restorative housing or isolated confinement for his own protection, the facility administrator shall place an incarcerated person in a less-restrictive setting, including by transferring such person to another institution or to a special-purpose housing unit for incarcerated persons who face similar threats. The bill requires that if an incarcerated person is placed in restorative housing or isolated confinement, such placement shall be reviewed every 48 hours and the facility administrator shall ensure that the incarcerated person receives a medical and mental health evaluation from certified medical and mental health professionals within one working day of placement in restorative housing or any form of isolated confinement. The bill also requires the facility administrator to notify the regional administrator in writing that an incarcerated person was placed in restorative housing or isolated confinement within 24 hours of such placement. Finally, the bill requires that formal reviews of an incarcerated person's placement in any form of isolated confinement shall be held in such person's presence, inform him of any reasons administrative officials believe isolated confinement remains necessary, and give the incarcerated person an opportunity to respond to those reasons, and a formal ruling shall be provided to the incarcerated individual within 24 hours. <hr> === Patrons === ==== House Patrons ==== • Joshua G. Cole (chief patron) • Patrick A. Hope • Sam Rasoul • Holly Seibold ==== Senate Patrons ==== • Bagby <hr> == Language == The language of [https://lis.virginia.gov/bill-details/20261/HB35/text/HB35 HB35] can be viewed here. <hr> == Proposed Amendment == === Amendment Offered for Consideration (requested for subcommittee) === ==== Add “Lockdown” throughout relevant provisions ==== Amend the bill to explicitly include “lockdown” alongside “solitary confinement/isolated confinement” and “restorative housing” in all relevant sections, to prevent facilities from using unit-wide lockdown practices as a functional substitute for individual isolated confinement. ==== Strengthen the time-limit clause (close the cumulative-days gap) ==== Replace the current time-limit phrasing with: “No individual shall be held in solitary confinement, lockdown, or restorative housing for more than 15 consecutive days, nor 15 days in any 60-day period.” <b>Purpose of the amendment:</b> The introduced text already uses “15 consecutive days…in any 60-day period,” but stakeholders have raised concerns that “consecutive” language can be worked around by cycling people in and out (or shifting to lockdown practices) without ever hitting a “consecutive” threshold. The amendment makes the limit explicitly <i>both</i> consecutive and cumulative. <hr> == Opening Statement == === House Subcommittee Statement === <blockquote> ====Notes on delivery: ==== <mark><b>bold</b>—emphasize, increase volume;</mark> - <i>italicized</i>—stressed, extended pronunciation, sing-songy; + <mark><i>italicized</i>—stressed, extended pronunciation, sing-songy;</mark> - <i><b>bold italicized</i></b>—climactic, stressed and emphatic; + <mark><i><b>bold italicized</i></b>—climactic, stressed and emphatic;</mark> - • bulleted—drum-like repetition, think of MLK's "I Have a Dream," "I have a dream that..." repeated for emphasis. + <mark>• bulleted—drum-like repetition, think of MLK's "I Have a Dream," "I have a dream that..." repeated for emphasis.</mark> </blockquote> <br> Mister Chair, members of the subcommittee— <i>This is not our first time here.</i> For <b>two straight years</b>, the General Assembly has passed this reform. <b>In 2024</b>, I gave you a sermon... and then we passed HB 1244. <b>In 2025</b>, my sister, my friend, and my colleague, <b>Delegate Keys-Gamarra</b>, took up the torch... and then we passed HB 2647. Twice, this body has said—<i><b>clearly</b></i>—that we are ready to turn the page on solitary confinement. And after two straight years, nobody can pretend this is new... • You know this bill. • You know this issue. • You know how overdue this change is. Mister Chair, members of the committee, this is not our first time here, <b>BUT it will be our last</b>—because this year <i>we will make history.</i> And what is so great about this year is that we all have a <i>chance</i>—a <i>chance</i> to be part of making history. If you're still on the fence, I want you to look <i>forward</i> into the future with me. <b>Don't let the past hold you back...</b> • Because when we look back in 25 years, <b>we will know this legislation was the right thing to do.</b> • Because when we look back in 50 years, <b>we will know this legislation was the right thing to do.</b> • Because when we look back in <b>one-hundred</b> years, <i><b>we will know this legislation was the right thing to do!</b></i> Today—I hope everyone in this room joins us in doing the <i><b>right thing.</b></i> We know the questions, and we'll answer them if asked. But I encourage us to listen to <i>testimonies</i>, to listen to the voices who are ready for change, so that we may be reminded—again—<i>just how overdue this legislation is.</i> Thank you, Mister Chair and members of the committee. I hope you report this bill favorably to full committee. <hr> == Support and Opposition == === Support === • ACLU People Power Fairfax • Bridging The Gap In Virginia • Charlottesville Chapter National Organization for Women • Coalition for Justice • EJUSA Evangelical Network • Fighting 4 Freedom • Greater Washington (JCRC) • Inmate Support Virginia • Interfaith Action for Human Rights (IAHR) • HALT Solitary • Jewish Community Relations Council of Just Future Project • Justice & Witness Action Network- VA • United Church of Christ Central Atlantic Conference • LatinoJustice PRLDEF • NAACP Loudoun • National Association of Social Workers • National Association of Social Workers, Virginia Chapter • National Religious Campaign Against Torture • No Left Turns • Resource Information Help for the Disadvantaged and Disenfranchised (RIHD) • RISE for Youth • RVA Health Alliance for Social Justice and Equity • Social Action Linking Together (SALT) • Social Workers and Allies Against Solitary Confinement • The Humanization Project • The Sentencing Project • Unitarian Universalist Legislative Ministry of Virginia • Unlock the Box Campaign • Virginia CURE • Virginia Defenders for Freedom, Justice & Equality • Virginia Justice Democrats • Virginia Justice for Life • Virginia Justice Alliance • Virginia Prisons Accountability Committee • Virginia Prisoner Of Conscience • Virginia Prison Justice Network • WJCC Coalition for Community Justice • 40 Strong === Opposition === • (to be updated) === No Recommendation / Neutral === • (to be updated) === No Position Provided === • Department of Corrections <hr> == Fiscal Impact == No fiscal impact statement is posted for HB35. <hr> == Possible Questions == === TL;DR === <b>Q1: “Does this end solitary confinement in Virginia?”</b> TL;DR: No—it ends <i>prolonged</i> solitary confinement and sets clear limits, oversight, and due-process rules for any use. <br> <b>Q2: “Does this make prisons less safe for staff?”</b> TL;DR: No—HB35 keeps exceptions for imminent threats and requires documentation; it’s about targeted use, not “never.” <br> <b>Q3: “What changes day-to-day?”</b> TL;DR: Frequent reviews, rapid medical/mental health checks, real programming/out-of-cell time, and written accountability when isolation is used. <br> <b>Q4: “Can DOC just use ‘lockdowns’ instead?”</b> TL;DR: The bill defines lockdown and regulates it, and the requested amendment strengthens this further by applying the same time limits to lockdown explicitly. <br> === Q1: “What does the bill aim to accomplish?” === <b>Answer you can use:</b> HB35 ends prolonged solitary confinement by setting clear time limits and requiring real oversight—regular reviews, rapid medical and mental health evaluations, documentation, and in-person due process when isolation continues. <br> === Q2: “How often is placement reviewed?” === <b>Answer you can use:</b> Placement is reviewed frequently, including a required 48-hour review cycle with written documentation explaining why less restrictive settings were not used. <br> === Q3: “What health protections are required?” === <b>Answer you can use:</b> HB35 requires medical and mental health evaluations by certified professionals within one working day of placement in restorative housing or isolated confinement (with limited exceptions). <br> === Q4: “Does this stop people from getting programming or recreation?” === <b>Answer you can use:</b> No—the bill requires at least four hours of out-of-cell programming or congregate activity daily, plus at least one hour of congregate recreation unless exceptional safety circumstances apply. <br> === Q5: “What stops indefinite ‘lockdowns’?” === <b>Answer you can use:</b> Lockdowns that interrupt programming must have a specific documented security purpose, must end as soon as the purpose is served, are time-limited, require approvals to extend or repeat, and must be documented and published. <hr> == Additional Information == <b>1. Definitions are the enforcement backbone</b> • The bill defines isolated confinement and lockdown by hours-per-day and loss of programming, so policy can’t be evaded by unit names. <b>Policy implication:</b> Regulates conditions, not labels. <br> <b>2. The “less restrictive first” rule targets protective-custody misuse</b> • For “own protection” placements, the facility must use less restrictive options first, including transfers or special-purpose housing for similarly threatened individuals, unless infeasible. <b>Policy implication:</b> Safety without defaulting to isolation. <br> <b>3. Reviews + documentation create accountability</b> • Requires regular reviews, documentation in the institutional file, notice up the chain, and formal in-person reviews with appeal rights. <b>Policy implication:</b> Isolation becomes a documented exception, not a routine. <br> <b>4. Lockdown limits matter because lockdown can function like solitary</b> • The bill regulates lockdowns that interrupt programming and requires publication of documentation. <b>Policy implication:</b> Prevents “unit-wide solitary” from becoming the workaround. [[Category:2026 Session]]
2026-01-22 06:40:52
Edited by: 74.110.183.75
Edited by: 74.110.183.75
= HB35 Restorative housing and isolated confinement; restrictions on use. = == Status == [https://house.vga.virginia.gov/subcommittees/H15002/agendas/5187 Public Safety | Subcommittee #2 — agenda] <hr> == Overview == === Summary as Introduced === <b>Restorative housing and isolated confinement; restrictions on use.</b> Prohibits the use of isolated confinement, defined in the bill, in state correctional facilities, subject to certain exceptions. The bill requires that before placing an incarcerated person in restorative housing or isolated confinement for his own protection, the facility administrator shall place an incarcerated person in a less-restrictive setting, including by transferring such person to another institution or to a special-purpose housing unit for incarcerated persons who face similar threats. The bill requires that if an incarcerated person is placed in restorative housing or isolated confinement, such placement shall be reviewed every 48 hours and the facility administrator shall ensure that the incarcerated person receives a medical and mental health evaluation from certified medical and mental health professionals within one working day of placement in restorative housing or any form of isolated confinement. The bill also requires the facility administrator to notify the regional administrator in writing that an incarcerated person was placed in restorative housing or isolated confinement within 24 hours of such placement. Finally, the bill requires that formal reviews of an incarcerated person's placement in any form of isolated confinement shall be held in such person's presence, inform him of any reasons administrative officials believe isolated confinement remains necessary, and give the incarcerated person an opportunity to respond to those reasons, and a formal ruling shall be provided to the incarcerated individual within 24 hours. <hr> === Patrons === ==== House Patrons ==== • Joshua G. Cole (chief patron) • Patrick A. Hope • Sam Rasoul • Holly Seibold ==== Senate Patrons ==== • Bagby <hr> == Language == The language of [https://lis.virginia.gov/bill-details/20261/HB35/text/HB35 HB35] can be viewed here. <hr> == Proposed Amendment == === Amendment Offered for Consideration (requested for subcommittee) === ==== Add “Lockdown” throughout relevant provisions ==== Amend the bill to explicitly include “lockdown” alongside “solitary confinement/isolated confinement” and “restorative housing” in all relevant sections, to prevent facilities from using unit-wide lockdown practices as a functional substitute for individual isolated confinement. ==== Strengthen the time-limit clause (close the cumulative-days gap) ==== Replace the current time-limit phrasing with: “No individual shall be held in solitary confinement, lockdown, or restorative housing for more than 15 consecutive days, nor 15 days in any 60-day period.” <b>Purpose of the amendment:</b> The introduced text already uses “15 consecutive days…in any 60-day period,” but stakeholders have raised concerns that “consecutive” language can be worked around by cycling people in and out (or shifting to lockdown practices) without ever hitting a “consecutive” threshold. The amendment makes the limit explicitly <i>both</i> consecutive and cumulative. <hr> == Opening Statement == === House Subcommittee Statement === <blockquote> ====Notes on delivery: ==== - <b>bold</b>—emphasize, increase volume; + <mark><b>bold</b>—emphasize, increase volume;</mark> <i>italicized</i>—stressed, extended pronunciation, sing-songy; <i><b>bold italicized</i></b>—climactic, stressed and emphatic; • bulleted—drum-like repetition, think of MLK's "I Have a Dream," "I have a dream that..." repeated for emphasis. </blockquote> <br> Mister Chair, members of the subcommittee— <i>This is not our first time here.</i> For <b>two straight years</b>, the General Assembly has passed this reform. <b>In 2024</b>, I gave you a sermon... and then we passed HB 1244. <b>In 2025</b>, my sister, my friend, and my colleague, <b>Delegate Keys-Gamarra</b>, took up the torch... and then we passed HB 2647. Twice, this body has said—<i><b>clearly</b></i>—that we are ready to turn the page on solitary confinement. And after two straight years, nobody can pretend this is new... • You know this bill. • You know this issue. • You know how overdue this change is. Mister Chair, members of the committee, this is not our first time here, <b>BUT it will be our last</b>—because this year <i>we will make history.</i> And what is so great about this year is that we all have a <i>chance</i>—a <i>chance</i> to be part of making history. If you're still on the fence, I want you to look <i>forward</i> into the future with me. <b>Don't let the past hold you back...</b> • Because when we look back in 25 years, <b>we will know this legislation was the right thing to do.</b> • Because when we look back in 50 years, <b>we will know this legislation was the right thing to do.</b> • Because when we look back in <b>one-hundred</b> years, <i><b>we will know this legislation was the right thing to do!</b></i> Today—I hope everyone in this room joins us in doing the <i><b>right thing.</b></i> We know the questions, and we'll answer them if asked. But I encourage us to listen to <i>testimonies</i>, to listen to the voices who are ready for change, so that we may be reminded—again—<i>just how overdue this legislation is.</i> Thank you, Mister Chair and members of the committee. I hope you report this bill favorably to full committee. <hr> == Support and Opposition == === Support === • ACLU People Power Fairfax • Bridging The Gap In Virginia • Charlottesville Chapter National Organization for Women • Coalition for Justice • EJUSA Evangelical Network • Fighting 4 Freedom • Greater Washington (JCRC) • Inmate Support Virginia • Interfaith Action for Human Rights (IAHR) • HALT Solitary • Jewish Community Relations Council of Just Future Project • Justice & Witness Action Network- VA • United Church of Christ Central Atlantic Conference • LatinoJustice PRLDEF • NAACP Loudoun • National Association of Social Workers • National Association of Social Workers, Virginia Chapter • National Religious Campaign Against Torture • No Left Turns • Resource Information Help for the Disadvantaged and Disenfranchised (RIHD) • RISE for Youth • RVA Health Alliance for Social Justice and Equity • Social Action Linking Together (SALT) • Social Workers and Allies Against Solitary Confinement • The Humanization Project • The Sentencing Project • Unitarian Universalist Legislative Ministry of Virginia • Unlock the Box Campaign • Virginia CURE • Virginia Defenders for Freedom, Justice & Equality • Virginia Justice Democrats • Virginia Justice for Life • Virginia Justice Alliance • Virginia Prisons Accountability Committee • Virginia Prisoner Of Conscience • Virginia Prison Justice Network • WJCC Coalition for Community Justice • 40 Strong === Opposition === • (to be updated) === No Recommendation / Neutral === • (to be updated) === No Position Provided === • Department of Corrections <hr> == Fiscal Impact == No fiscal impact statement is posted for HB35. <hr> == Possible Questions == === TL;DR === <b>Q1: “Does this end solitary confinement in Virginia?”</b> TL;DR: No—it ends <i>prolonged</i> solitary confinement and sets clear limits, oversight, and due-process rules for any use. <br> <b>Q2: “Does this make prisons less safe for staff?”</b> TL;DR: No—HB35 keeps exceptions for imminent threats and requires documentation; it’s about targeted use, not “never.” <br> <b>Q3: “What changes day-to-day?”</b> TL;DR: Frequent reviews, rapid medical/mental health checks, real programming/out-of-cell time, and written accountability when isolation is used. <br> <b>Q4: “Can DOC just use ‘lockdowns’ instead?”</b> TL;DR: The bill defines lockdown and regulates it, and the requested amendment strengthens this further by applying the same time limits to lockdown explicitly. <br> === Q1: “What does the bill aim to accomplish?” === <b>Answer you can use:</b> HB35 ends prolonged solitary confinement by setting clear time limits and requiring real oversight—regular reviews, rapid medical and mental health evaluations, documentation, and in-person due process when isolation continues. <br> === Q2: “How often is placement reviewed?” === <b>Answer you can use:</b> Placement is reviewed frequently, including a required 48-hour review cycle with written documentation explaining why less restrictive settings were not used. <br> === Q3: “What health protections are required?” === <b>Answer you can use:</b> HB35 requires medical and mental health evaluations by certified professionals within one working day of placement in restorative housing or isolated confinement (with limited exceptions). <br> === Q4: “Does this stop people from getting programming or recreation?” === <b>Answer you can use:</b> No—the bill requires at least four hours of out-of-cell programming or congregate activity daily, plus at least one hour of congregate recreation unless exceptional safety circumstances apply. <br> === Q5: “What stops indefinite ‘lockdowns’?” === <b>Answer you can use:</b> Lockdowns that interrupt programming must have a specific documented security purpose, must end as soon as the purpose is served, are time-limited, require approvals to extend or repeat, and must be documented and published. <hr> == Additional Information == <b>1. Definitions are the enforcement backbone</b> • The bill defines isolated confinement and lockdown by hours-per-day and loss of programming, so policy can’t be evaded by unit names. <b>Policy implication:</b> Regulates conditions, not labels. <br> <b>2. The “less restrictive first” rule targets protective-custody misuse</b> • For “own protection” placements, the facility must use less restrictive options first, including transfers or special-purpose housing for similarly threatened individuals, unless infeasible. <b>Policy implication:</b> Safety without defaulting to isolation. <br> <b>3. Reviews + documentation create accountability</b> • Requires regular reviews, documentation in the institutional file, notice up the chain, and formal in-person reviews with appeal rights. <b>Policy implication:</b> Isolation becomes a documented exception, not a routine. <br> <b>4. Lockdown limits matter because lockdown can function like solitary</b> • The bill regulates lockdowns that interrupt programming and requires publication of documentation. <b>Policy implication:</b> Prevents “unit-wide solitary” from becoming the workaround. [[Category:2026 Session]]
2026-01-22 06:40:12
Edited by: 74.110.183.75
Edited by: 74.110.183.75
= HB35 Restorative housing and isolated confinement; restrictions on use. = == Status == [https://house.vga.virginia.gov/subcommittees/H15002/agendas/5187 Public Safety | Subcommittee #2 — agenda] <hr> == Overview == === Summary as Introduced === <b>Restorative housing and isolated confinement; restrictions on use.</b> Prohibits the use of isolated confinement, defined in the bill, in state correctional facilities, subject to certain exceptions. The bill requires that before placing an incarcerated person in restorative housing or isolated confinement for his own protection, the facility administrator shall place an incarcerated person in a less-restrictive setting, including by transferring such person to another institution or to a special-purpose housing unit for incarcerated persons who face similar threats. The bill requires that if an incarcerated person is placed in restorative housing or isolated confinement, such placement shall be reviewed every 48 hours and the facility administrator shall ensure that the incarcerated person receives a medical and mental health evaluation from certified medical and mental health professionals within one working day of placement in restorative housing or any form of isolated confinement. The bill also requires the facility administrator to notify the regional administrator in writing that an incarcerated person was placed in restorative housing or isolated confinement within 24 hours of such placement. Finally, the bill requires that formal reviews of an incarcerated person's placement in any form of isolated confinement shall be held in such person's presence, inform him of any reasons administrative officials believe isolated confinement remains necessary, and give the incarcerated person an opportunity to respond to those reasons, and a formal ruling shall be provided to the incarcerated individual within 24 hours. <hr> === Patrons === ==== House Patrons ==== • Joshua G. Cole (chief patron) • Patrick A. Hope • Sam Rasoul • Holly Seibold ==== Senate Patrons ==== • Bagby <hr> == Language == The language of [https://lis.virginia.gov/bill-details/20261/HB35/text/HB35 HB35] can be viewed here. <hr> == Proposed Amendment == === Amendment Offered for Consideration (requested for subcommittee) === ==== Add “Lockdown” throughout relevant provisions ==== Amend the bill to explicitly include “lockdown” alongside “solitary confinement/isolated confinement” and “restorative housing” in all relevant sections, to prevent facilities from using unit-wide lockdown practices as a functional substitute for individual isolated confinement. ==== Strengthen the time-limit clause (close the cumulative-days gap) ==== Replace the current time-limit phrasing with: “No individual shall be held in solitary confinement, lockdown, or restorative housing for more than 15 consecutive days, nor 15 days in any 60-day period.” <b>Purpose of the amendment:</b> The introduced text already uses “15 consecutive days…in any 60-day period,” but stakeholders have raised concerns that “consecutive” language can be worked around by cycling people in and out (or shifting to lockdown practices) without ever hitting a “consecutive” threshold. The amendment makes the limit explicitly <i>both</i> consecutive and cumulative. <hr> == Opening Statement == === House Subcommittee Statement === <blockquote> ====Notes on delivery: ==== <b>bold</b>—emphasize, increase volume; - <i>italicized</i>—stressed, extended pronunciation, sing-songy, musical; + <i>italicized</i>—stressed, extended pronunciation, sing-songy; <i><b>bold italicized</i></b>—climactic, stressed and emphatic; • bulleted—drum-like repetition, think of MLK's "I Have a Dream," "I have a dream that..." repeated for emphasis. </blockquote> <br> Mister Chair, members of the subcommittee— <i>This is not our first time here.</i> For <b>two straight years</b>, the General Assembly has passed this reform. <b>In 2024</b>, I gave you a sermon... and then we passed HB 1244. <b>In 2025</b>, my sister, my friend, and my colleague, <b>Delegate Keys-Gamarra</b>, took up the torch... and then we passed HB 2647. Twice, this body has said—<i><b>clearly</b></i>—that we are ready to turn the page on solitary confinement. And after two straight years, nobody can pretend this is new... • You know this bill. • You know this issue. • You know how overdue this change is. Mister Chair, members of the committee, this is not our first time here, <b>BUT it will be our last</b>—because this year <i>we will make history.</i> And what is so great about this year is that we all have a <i>chance</i>—a <i>chance</i> to be part of making history. If you're still on the fence, I want you to look <i>forward</i> into the future with me. <b>Don't let the past hold you back...</b> • Because when we look back in 25 years, <b>we will know this legislation was the right thing to do.</b> • Because when we look back in 50 years, <b>we will know this legislation was the right thing to do.</b> • Because when we look back in <b>one-hundred</b> years, <i><b>we will know this legislation was the right thing to do!</b></i> Today—I hope everyone in this room joins us in doing the <i><b>right thing.</b></i> We know the questions, and we'll answer them if asked. But I encourage us to listen to <i>testimonies</i>, to listen to the voices who are ready for change, so that we may be reminded—again—<i>just how overdue this legislation is.</i> Thank you, Mister Chair and members of the committee. I hope you report this bill favorably to full committee. <hr> == Support and Opposition == === Support === • ACLU People Power Fairfax • Bridging The Gap In Virginia • Charlottesville Chapter National Organization for Women • Coalition for Justice • EJUSA Evangelical Network • Fighting 4 Freedom • Greater Washington (JCRC) • Inmate Support Virginia • Interfaith Action for Human Rights (IAHR) • HALT Solitary • Jewish Community Relations Council of Just Future Project • Justice & Witness Action Network- VA • United Church of Christ Central Atlantic Conference • LatinoJustice PRLDEF • NAACP Loudoun • National Association of Social Workers • National Association of Social Workers, Virginia Chapter • National Religious Campaign Against Torture • No Left Turns • Resource Information Help for the Disadvantaged and Disenfranchised (RIHD) • RISE for Youth • RVA Health Alliance for Social Justice and Equity • Social Action Linking Together (SALT) • Social Workers and Allies Against Solitary Confinement • The Humanization Project • The Sentencing Project • Unitarian Universalist Legislative Ministry of Virginia • Unlock the Box Campaign • Virginia CURE • Virginia Defenders for Freedom, Justice & Equality • Virginia Justice Democrats • Virginia Justice for Life • Virginia Justice Alliance • Virginia Prisons Accountability Committee • Virginia Prisoner Of Conscience • Virginia Prison Justice Network • WJCC Coalition for Community Justice • 40 Strong === Opposition === • (to be updated) === No Recommendation / Neutral === • (to be updated) === No Position Provided === • Department of Corrections <hr> == Fiscal Impact == No fiscal impact statement is posted for HB35. <hr> == Possible Questions == === TL;DR === <b>Q1: “Does this end solitary confinement in Virginia?”</b> TL;DR: No—it ends <i>prolonged</i> solitary confinement and sets clear limits, oversight, and due-process rules for any use. <br> <b>Q2: “Does this make prisons less safe for staff?”</b> TL;DR: No—HB35 keeps exceptions for imminent threats and requires documentation; it’s about targeted use, not “never.” <br> <b>Q3: “What changes day-to-day?”</b> TL;DR: Frequent reviews, rapid medical/mental health checks, real programming/out-of-cell time, and written accountability when isolation is used. <br> <b>Q4: “Can DOC just use ‘lockdowns’ instead?”</b> TL;DR: The bill defines lockdown and regulates it, and the requested amendment strengthens this further by applying the same time limits to lockdown explicitly. <br> === Q1: “What does the bill aim to accomplish?” === <b>Answer you can use:</b> HB35 ends prolonged solitary confinement by setting clear time limits and requiring real oversight—regular reviews, rapid medical and mental health evaluations, documentation, and in-person due process when isolation continues. <br> === Q2: “How often is placement reviewed?” === <b>Answer you can use:</b> Placement is reviewed frequently, including a required 48-hour review cycle with written documentation explaining why less restrictive settings were not used. <br> === Q3: “What health protections are required?” === <b>Answer you can use:</b> HB35 requires medical and mental health evaluations by certified professionals within one working day of placement in restorative housing or isolated confinement (with limited exceptions). <br> === Q4: “Does this stop people from getting programming or recreation?” === <b>Answer you can use:</b> No—the bill requires at least four hours of out-of-cell programming or congregate activity daily, plus at least one hour of congregate recreation unless exceptional safety circumstances apply. <br> === Q5: “What stops indefinite ‘lockdowns’?” === <b>Answer you can use:</b> Lockdowns that interrupt programming must have a specific documented security purpose, must end as soon as the purpose is served, are time-limited, require approvals to extend or repeat, and must be documented and published. <hr> == Additional Information == <b>1. Definitions are the enforcement backbone</b> • The bill defines isolated confinement and lockdown by hours-per-day and loss of programming, so policy can’t be evaded by unit names. <b>Policy implication:</b> Regulates conditions, not labels. <br> <b>2. The “less restrictive first” rule targets protective-custody misuse</b> • For “own protection” placements, the facility must use less restrictive options first, including transfers or special-purpose housing for similarly threatened individuals, unless infeasible. <b>Policy implication:</b> Safety without defaulting to isolation. <br> <b>3. Reviews + documentation create accountability</b> • Requires regular reviews, documentation in the institutional file, notice up the chain, and formal in-person reviews with appeal rights. <b>Policy implication:</b> Isolation becomes a documented exception, not a routine. <br> <b>4. Lockdown limits matter because lockdown can function like solitary</b> • The bill regulates lockdowns that interrupt programming and requires publication of documentation. <b>Policy implication:</b> Prevents “unit-wide solitary” from becoming the workaround. [[Category:2026 Session]]
2026-01-22 06:39:34
Edited by: 74.110.183.75
Edited by: 74.110.183.75
= HB35 Restorative housing and isolated confinement; restrictions on use. = == Status == [https://house.vga.virginia.gov/subcommittees/H15002/agendas/5187 Public Safety | Subcommittee #2 — agenda] <hr> == Overview == === Summary as Introduced === <b>Restorative housing and isolated confinement; restrictions on use.</b> Prohibits the use of isolated confinement, defined in the bill, in state correctional facilities, subject to certain exceptions. The bill requires that before placing an incarcerated person in restorative housing or isolated confinement for his own protection, the facility administrator shall place an incarcerated person in a less-restrictive setting, including by transferring such person to another institution or to a special-purpose housing unit for incarcerated persons who face similar threats. The bill requires that if an incarcerated person is placed in restorative housing or isolated confinement, such placement shall be reviewed every 48 hours and the facility administrator shall ensure that the incarcerated person receives a medical and mental health evaluation from certified medical and mental health professionals within one working day of placement in restorative housing or any form of isolated confinement. The bill also requires the facility administrator to notify the regional administrator in writing that an incarcerated person was placed in restorative housing or isolated confinement within 24 hours of such placement. Finally, the bill requires that formal reviews of an incarcerated person's placement in any form of isolated confinement shall be held in such person's presence, inform him of any reasons administrative officials believe isolated confinement remains necessary, and give the incarcerated person an opportunity to respond to those reasons, and a formal ruling shall be provided to the incarcerated individual within 24 hours. <hr> === Patrons === ==== House Patrons ==== • Joshua G. Cole (chief patron) • Patrick A. Hope • Sam Rasoul • Holly Seibold ==== Senate Patrons ==== • Bagby <hr> == Language == The language of [https://lis.virginia.gov/bill-details/20261/HB35/text/HB35 HB35] can be viewed here. <hr> == Proposed Amendment == === Amendment Offered for Consideration (requested for subcommittee) === ==== Add “Lockdown” throughout relevant provisions ==== Amend the bill to explicitly include “lockdown” alongside “solitary confinement/isolated confinement” and “restorative housing” in all relevant sections, to prevent facilities from using unit-wide lockdown practices as a functional substitute for individual isolated confinement. ==== Strengthen the time-limit clause (close the cumulative-days gap) ==== Replace the current time-limit phrasing with: “No individual shall be held in solitary confinement, lockdown, or restorative housing for more than 15 consecutive days, nor 15 days in any 60-day period.” <b>Purpose of the amendment:</b> The introduced text already uses “15 consecutive days…in any 60-day period,” but stakeholders have raised concerns that “consecutive” language can be worked around by cycling people in and out (or shifting to lockdown practices) without ever hitting a “consecutive” threshold. The amendment makes the limit explicitly <i>both</i> consecutive and cumulative. <hr> == Opening Statement == === House Subcommittee Statement === <blockquote> ====Notes on delivery: ==== <b>bold</b>—emphasize, increase volume; - <i>italicized</i>—stressed, extended pronunciation; + <i>italicized</i>—stressed, extended pronunciation, sing-songy, musical; <i><b>bold italicized</i></b>—climactic, stressed and emphatic; • bulleted—drum-like repetition, think of MLK's "I Have a Dream," "I have a dream that..." repeated for emphasis. </blockquote> <br> Mister Chair, members of the subcommittee— <i>This is not our first time here.</i> For <b>two straight years</b>, the General Assembly has passed this reform. <b>In 2024</b>, I gave you a sermon... and then we passed HB 1244. <b>In 2025</b>, my sister, my friend, and my colleague, <b>Delegate Keys-Gamarra</b>, took up the torch... and then we passed HB 2647. Twice, this body has said—<i><b>clearly</b></i>—that we are ready to turn the page on solitary confinement. And after two straight years, nobody can pretend this is new... • You know this bill. • You know this issue. • You know how overdue this change is. Mister Chair, members of the committee, this is not our first time here, <b>BUT it will be our last</b>—because this year <i>we will make history.</i> And what is so great about this year is that we all have a <i>chance</i>—a <i>chance</i> to be part of making history. If you're still on the fence, I want you to look <i>forward</i> into the future with me. <b>Don't let the past hold you back...</b> • Because when we look back in 25 years, <b>we will know this legislation was the right thing to do.</b> • Because when we look back in 50 years, <b>we will know this legislation was the right thing to do.</b> • Because when we look back in <b>one-hundred</b> years, <i><b>we will know this legislation was the right thing to do!</b></i> Today—I hope everyone in this room joins us in doing the <i><b>right thing.</b></i> We know the questions, and we'll answer them if asked. But I encourage us to listen to <i>testimonies</i>, to listen to the voices who are ready for change, so that we may be reminded—again—<i>just how overdue this legislation is.</i> Thank you, Mister Chair and members of the committee. I hope you report this bill favorably to full committee. <hr> == Support and Opposition == === Support === • ACLU People Power Fairfax • Bridging The Gap In Virginia • Charlottesville Chapter National Organization for Women • Coalition for Justice • EJUSA Evangelical Network • Fighting 4 Freedom • Greater Washington (JCRC) • Inmate Support Virginia • Interfaith Action for Human Rights (IAHR) • HALT Solitary • Jewish Community Relations Council of Just Future Project • Justice & Witness Action Network- VA • United Church of Christ Central Atlantic Conference • LatinoJustice PRLDEF • NAACP Loudoun • National Association of Social Workers • National Association of Social Workers, Virginia Chapter • National Religious Campaign Against Torture • No Left Turns • Resource Information Help for the Disadvantaged and Disenfranchised (RIHD) • RISE for Youth • RVA Health Alliance for Social Justice and Equity • Social Action Linking Together (SALT) • Social Workers and Allies Against Solitary Confinement • The Humanization Project • The Sentencing Project • Unitarian Universalist Legislative Ministry of Virginia • Unlock the Box Campaign • Virginia CURE • Virginia Defenders for Freedom, Justice & Equality • Virginia Justice Democrats • Virginia Justice for Life • Virginia Justice Alliance • Virginia Prisons Accountability Committee • Virginia Prisoner Of Conscience • Virginia Prison Justice Network • WJCC Coalition for Community Justice • 40 Strong === Opposition === • (to be updated) === No Recommendation / Neutral === • (to be updated) === No Position Provided === • Department of Corrections <hr> == Fiscal Impact == No fiscal impact statement is posted for HB35. <hr> == Possible Questions == === TL;DR === <b>Q1: “Does this end solitary confinement in Virginia?”</b> TL;DR: No—it ends <i>prolonged</i> solitary confinement and sets clear limits, oversight, and due-process rules for any use. <br> <b>Q2: “Does this make prisons less safe for staff?”</b> TL;DR: No—HB35 keeps exceptions for imminent threats and requires documentation; it’s about targeted use, not “never.” <br> <b>Q3: “What changes day-to-day?”</b> TL;DR: Frequent reviews, rapid medical/mental health checks, real programming/out-of-cell time, and written accountability when isolation is used. <br> <b>Q4: “Can DOC just use ‘lockdowns’ instead?”</b> TL;DR: The bill defines lockdown and regulates it, and the requested amendment strengthens this further by applying the same time limits to lockdown explicitly. <br> === Q1: “What does the bill aim to accomplish?” === <b>Answer you can use:</b> HB35 ends prolonged solitary confinement by setting clear time limits and requiring real oversight—regular reviews, rapid medical and mental health evaluations, documentation, and in-person due process when isolation continues. <br> === Q2: “How often is placement reviewed?” === <b>Answer you can use:</b> Placement is reviewed frequently, including a required 48-hour review cycle with written documentation explaining why less restrictive settings were not used. <br> === Q3: “What health protections are required?” === <b>Answer you can use:</b> HB35 requires medical and mental health evaluations by certified professionals within one working day of placement in restorative housing or isolated confinement (with limited exceptions). <br> === Q4: “Does this stop people from getting programming or recreation?” === <b>Answer you can use:</b> No—the bill requires at least four hours of out-of-cell programming or congregate activity daily, plus at least one hour of congregate recreation unless exceptional safety circumstances apply. <br> === Q5: “What stops indefinite ‘lockdowns’?” === <b>Answer you can use:</b> Lockdowns that interrupt programming must have a specific documented security purpose, must end as soon as the purpose is served, are time-limited, require approvals to extend or repeat, and must be documented and published. <hr> == Additional Information == <b>1. Definitions are the enforcement backbone</b> • The bill defines isolated confinement and lockdown by hours-per-day and loss of programming, so policy can’t be evaded by unit names. <b>Policy implication:</b> Regulates conditions, not labels. <br> <b>2. The “less restrictive first” rule targets protective-custody misuse</b> • For “own protection” placements, the facility must use less restrictive options first, including transfers or special-purpose housing for similarly threatened individuals, unless infeasible. <b>Policy implication:</b> Safety without defaulting to isolation. <br> <b>3. Reviews + documentation create accountability</b> • Requires regular reviews, documentation in the institutional file, notice up the chain, and formal in-person reviews with appeal rights. <b>Policy implication:</b> Isolation becomes a documented exception, not a routine. <br> <b>4. Lockdown limits matter because lockdown can function like solitary</b> • The bill regulates lockdowns that interrupt programming and requires publication of documentation. <b>Policy implication:</b> Prevents “unit-wide solitary” from becoming the workaround. [[Category:2026 Session]]
2026-01-22 06:39:06
Edited by: 74.110.183.75
Edited by: 74.110.183.75
= HB35 Restorative housing and isolated confinement; restrictions on use. = == Status == [https://house.vga.virginia.gov/subcommittees/H15002/agendas/5187 Public Safety | Subcommittee #2 — agenda] <hr> == Overview == === Summary as Introduced === <b>Restorative housing and isolated confinement; restrictions on use.</b> Prohibits the use of isolated confinement, defined in the bill, in state correctional facilities, subject to certain exceptions. The bill requires that before placing an incarcerated person in restorative housing or isolated confinement for his own protection, the facility administrator shall place an incarcerated person in a less-restrictive setting, including by transferring such person to another institution or to a special-purpose housing unit for incarcerated persons who face similar threats. The bill requires that if an incarcerated person is placed in restorative housing or isolated confinement, such placement shall be reviewed every 48 hours and the facility administrator shall ensure that the incarcerated person receives a medical and mental health evaluation from certified medical and mental health professionals within one working day of placement in restorative housing or any form of isolated confinement. The bill also requires the facility administrator to notify the regional administrator in writing that an incarcerated person was placed in restorative housing or isolated confinement within 24 hours of such placement. Finally, the bill requires that formal reviews of an incarcerated person's placement in any form of isolated confinement shall be held in such person's presence, inform him of any reasons administrative officials believe isolated confinement remains necessary, and give the incarcerated person an opportunity to respond to those reasons, and a formal ruling shall be provided to the incarcerated individual within 24 hours. <hr> === Patrons === ==== House Patrons ==== • Joshua G. Cole (chief patron) • Patrick A. Hope • Sam Rasoul • Holly Seibold ==== Senate Patrons ==== • Bagby <hr> == Language == The language of [https://lis.virginia.gov/bill-details/20261/HB35/text/HB35 HB35] can be viewed here. <hr> == Proposed Amendment == === Amendment Offered for Consideration (requested for subcommittee) === ==== Add “Lockdown” throughout relevant provisions ==== Amend the bill to explicitly include “lockdown” alongside “solitary confinement/isolated confinement” and “restorative housing” in all relevant sections, to prevent facilities from using unit-wide lockdown practices as a functional substitute for individual isolated confinement. ==== Strengthen the time-limit clause (close the cumulative-days gap) ==== Replace the current time-limit phrasing with: “No individual shall be held in solitary confinement, lockdown, or restorative housing for more than 15 consecutive days, nor 15 days in any 60-day period.” <b>Purpose of the amendment:</b> The introduced text already uses “15 consecutive days…in any 60-day period,” but stakeholders have raised concerns that “consecutive” language can be worked around by cycling people in and out (or shifting to lockdown practices) without ever hitting a “consecutive” threshold. The amendment makes the limit explicitly <i>both</i> consecutive and cumulative. <hr> == Opening Statement == === House Subcommittee Statement === <blockquote> ====Notes on delivery: ==== <b>bold</b>—emphasize, increase volume; <i>italicized</i>—stressed, extended pronunciation; <i><b>bold italicized</i></b>—climactic, stressed and emphatic; • bulleted—drum-like repetition, think of MLK's "I Have a Dream," "I have a dream that..." repeated for emphasis. </blockquote> <br> Mister Chair, members of the subcommittee— <i>This is not our first time here.</i> For <b>two straight years</b>, the General Assembly has passed this reform. <b>In 2024</b>, I gave you a sermon... and then we passed HB 1244. <b>In 2025</b>, my sister, my friend, and my colleague, <b>Delegate Keys-Gamarra</b>, took up the torch... and then we passed HB 2647. Twice, this body has said—<i><b>clearly</b></i>—that we are ready to turn the page on solitary confinement. And after two straight years, nobody can pretend this is new... • You know this bill. • You know this issue. • You know how overdue this change is. Mister Chair, members of the committee, this is not our first time here, <b>BUT it will be our last</b>—because this year <i>we will make history.</i> And what is so great about this year is that we all have a <i>chance</i>—a <i>chance</i> to be part of making history. If you're still on the fence, I want you to look <i>forward</i> into the future with me. <b>Don't let the past hold you back...</b> • Because when we look back in 25 years, <b>we will know this legislation was the right thing to do.</b> • Because when we look back in 50 years, <b>we will know this legislation was the right thing to do.</b> • Because when we look back in <b>one-hundred</b> years, <i><b>we will know this legislation was the right thing to do!</b></i> Today—I hope everyone in this room joins us in doing the <i><b>right thing.</b></i> - We know the questions, and we'll answer them if asked. But I encourage us to listen to <i>testimonies</i>, to listen to the voices who are ready for change, so that we may be reminded—again—just how overdue this legislation is. + We know the questions, and we'll answer them if asked. But I encourage us to listen to <i>testimonies</i>, to listen to the voices who are ready for change, so that we may be reminded—again—<i>just how overdue this legislation is.</i> Thank you, Mister Chair and members of the committee. I hope you report this bill favorably to full committee. <hr> == Support and Opposition == === Support === • ACLU People Power Fairfax • Bridging The Gap In Virginia • Charlottesville Chapter National Organization for Women • Coalition for Justice • EJUSA Evangelical Network • Fighting 4 Freedom • Greater Washington (JCRC) • Inmate Support Virginia • Interfaith Action for Human Rights (IAHR) • HALT Solitary • Jewish Community Relations Council of Just Future Project • Justice & Witness Action Network- VA • United Church of Christ Central Atlantic Conference • LatinoJustice PRLDEF • NAACP Loudoun • National Association of Social Workers • National Association of Social Workers, Virginia Chapter • National Religious Campaign Against Torture • No Left Turns • Resource Information Help for the Disadvantaged and Disenfranchised (RIHD) • RISE for Youth • RVA Health Alliance for Social Justice and Equity • Social Action Linking Together (SALT) • Social Workers and Allies Against Solitary Confinement • The Humanization Project • The Sentencing Project • Unitarian Universalist Legislative Ministry of Virginia • Unlock the Box Campaign • Virginia CURE • Virginia Defenders for Freedom, Justice & Equality • Virginia Justice Democrats • Virginia Justice for Life • Virginia Justice Alliance • Virginia Prisons Accountability Committee • Virginia Prisoner Of Conscience • Virginia Prison Justice Network • WJCC Coalition for Community Justice • 40 Strong === Opposition === • (to be updated) === No Recommendation / Neutral === • (to be updated) === No Position Provided === • Department of Corrections <hr> == Fiscal Impact == No fiscal impact statement is posted for HB35. <hr> == Possible Questions == === TL;DR === <b>Q1: “Does this end solitary confinement in Virginia?”</b> TL;DR: No—it ends <i>prolonged</i> solitary confinement and sets clear limits, oversight, and due-process rules for any use. <br> <b>Q2: “Does this make prisons less safe for staff?”</b> TL;DR: No—HB35 keeps exceptions for imminent threats and requires documentation; it’s about targeted use, not “never.” <br> <b>Q3: “What changes day-to-day?”</b> TL;DR: Frequent reviews, rapid medical/mental health checks, real programming/out-of-cell time, and written accountability when isolation is used. <br> <b>Q4: “Can DOC just use ‘lockdowns’ instead?”</b> TL;DR: The bill defines lockdown and regulates it, and the requested amendment strengthens this further by applying the same time limits to lockdown explicitly. <br> === Q1: “What does the bill aim to accomplish?” === <b>Answer you can use:</b> HB35 ends prolonged solitary confinement by setting clear time limits and requiring real oversight—regular reviews, rapid medical and mental health evaluations, documentation, and in-person due process when isolation continues. <br> === Q2: “How often is placement reviewed?” === <b>Answer you can use:</b> Placement is reviewed frequently, including a required 48-hour review cycle with written documentation explaining why less restrictive settings were not used. <br> === Q3: “What health protections are required?” === <b>Answer you can use:</b> HB35 requires medical and mental health evaluations by certified professionals within one working day of placement in restorative housing or isolated confinement (with limited exceptions). <br> === Q4: “Does this stop people from getting programming or recreation?” === <b>Answer you can use:</b> No—the bill requires at least four hours of out-of-cell programming or congregate activity daily, plus at least one hour of congregate recreation unless exceptional safety circumstances apply. <br> === Q5: “What stops indefinite ‘lockdowns’?” === <b>Answer you can use:</b> Lockdowns that interrupt programming must have a specific documented security purpose, must end as soon as the purpose is served, are time-limited, require approvals to extend or repeat, and must be documented and published. <hr> == Additional Information == <b>1. Definitions are the enforcement backbone</b> • The bill defines isolated confinement and lockdown by hours-per-day and loss of programming, so policy can’t be evaded by unit names. <b>Policy implication:</b> Regulates conditions, not labels. <br> <b>2. The “less restrictive first” rule targets protective-custody misuse</b> • For “own protection” placements, the facility must use less restrictive options first, including transfers or special-purpose housing for similarly threatened individuals, unless infeasible. <b>Policy implication:</b> Safety without defaulting to isolation. <br> <b>3. Reviews + documentation create accountability</b> • Requires regular reviews, documentation in the institutional file, notice up the chain, and formal in-person reviews with appeal rights. <b>Policy implication:</b> Isolation becomes a documented exception, not a routine. <br> <b>4. Lockdown limits matter because lockdown can function like solitary</b> • The bill regulates lockdowns that interrupt programming and requires publication of documentation. <b>Policy implication:</b> Prevents “unit-wide solitary” from becoming the workaround. [[Category:2026 Session]]
2026-01-22 06:38:39
Edited by: 74.110.183.75
Edited by: 74.110.183.75
= HB35 Restorative housing and isolated confinement; restrictions on use. = == Status == [https://house.vga.virginia.gov/subcommittees/H15002/agendas/5187 Public Safety | Subcommittee #2 — agenda] <hr> == Overview == === Summary as Introduced === <b>Restorative housing and isolated confinement; restrictions on use.</b> Prohibits the use of isolated confinement, defined in the bill, in state correctional facilities, subject to certain exceptions. The bill requires that before placing an incarcerated person in restorative housing or isolated confinement for his own protection, the facility administrator shall place an incarcerated person in a less-restrictive setting, including by transferring such person to another institution or to a special-purpose housing unit for incarcerated persons who face similar threats. The bill requires that if an incarcerated person is placed in restorative housing or isolated confinement, such placement shall be reviewed every 48 hours and the facility administrator shall ensure that the incarcerated person receives a medical and mental health evaluation from certified medical and mental health professionals within one working day of placement in restorative housing or any form of isolated confinement. The bill also requires the facility administrator to notify the regional administrator in writing that an incarcerated person was placed in restorative housing or isolated confinement within 24 hours of such placement. Finally, the bill requires that formal reviews of an incarcerated person's placement in any form of isolated confinement shall be held in such person's presence, inform him of any reasons administrative officials believe isolated confinement remains necessary, and give the incarcerated person an opportunity to respond to those reasons, and a formal ruling shall be provided to the incarcerated individual within 24 hours. <hr> === Patrons === ==== House Patrons ==== • Joshua G. Cole (chief patron) • Patrick A. Hope • Sam Rasoul • Holly Seibold ==== Senate Patrons ==== • Bagby <hr> == Language == The language of [https://lis.virginia.gov/bill-details/20261/HB35/text/HB35 HB35] can be viewed here. <hr> == Proposed Amendment == === Amendment Offered for Consideration (requested for subcommittee) === ==== Add “Lockdown” throughout relevant provisions ==== Amend the bill to explicitly include “lockdown” alongside “solitary confinement/isolated confinement” and “restorative housing” in all relevant sections, to prevent facilities from using unit-wide lockdown practices as a functional substitute for individual isolated confinement. ==== Strengthen the time-limit clause (close the cumulative-days gap) ==== Replace the current time-limit phrasing with: “No individual shall be held in solitary confinement, lockdown, or restorative housing for more than 15 consecutive days, nor 15 days in any 60-day period.” <b>Purpose of the amendment:</b> The introduced text already uses “15 consecutive days…in any 60-day period,” but stakeholders have raised concerns that “consecutive” language can be worked around by cycling people in and out (or shifting to lockdown practices) without ever hitting a “consecutive” threshold. The amendment makes the limit explicitly <i>both</i> consecutive and cumulative. <hr> == Opening Statement == === House Subcommittee Statement === <blockquote> ====Notes on delivery: ==== <b>bold</b>—emphasize, increase volume; <i>italicized</i>—stressed, extended pronunciation; <i><b>bold italicized</i></b>—climactic, stressed and emphatic; • bulleted—drum-like repetition, think of MLK's "I Have a Dream," "I have a dream that..." repeated for emphasis. </blockquote> <br> Mister Chair, members of the subcommittee— <i>This is not our first time here.</i> For <b>two straight years</b>, the General Assembly has passed this reform. <b>In 2024</b>, I gave you a sermon... and then we passed HB 1244. <b>In 2025</b>, my sister, my friend, and my colleague, <b>Delegate Keys-Gamarra</b>, took up the torch... and then we passed HB 2647. Twice, this body has said—<i><b>clearly</b></i>—that we are ready to turn the page on solitary confinement. And after two straight years, nobody can pretend this is new... • You know this bill. • You know this issue. • You know how overdue this change is. Mister Chair, members of the committee, this is not our first time here, <b>BUT it will be our last</b>—because this year <i>we will make history.</i> And what is so great about this year is that we all have a <i>chance</i>—a <i>chance</i> to be part of making history. If you're still on the fence, I want you to look <i>forward</i> into the future with me. <b>Don't let the past hold you back...</b> • Because when we look back in 25 years, <b>we will know this legislation was the right thing to do.</b> • Because when we look back in 50 years, <b>we will know this legislation was the right thing to do.</b> • Because when we look back in <b>one-hundred</b> years, <i><b>we will know this legislation was the right thing to do!</b></i> Today—I hope everyone in this room joins us in doing the <i><b>right thing.</b></i> - We know the questions, and we'll answer them if asked. But I encourage us to listen to <i><b>testimonies</b></i>, to listen to the voices who are ready for change, so that we may be reminded—again—just how overdue this legislation is. + We know the questions, and we'll answer them if asked. But I encourage us to listen to <i>testimonies</i>, to listen to the voices who are ready for change, so that we may be reminded—again—just how overdue this legislation is. Thank you, Mister Chair and members of the committee. I hope you report this bill favorably to full committee. <hr> == Support and Opposition == === Support === • ACLU People Power Fairfax • Bridging The Gap In Virginia • Charlottesville Chapter National Organization for Women • Coalition for Justice • EJUSA Evangelical Network • Fighting 4 Freedom • Greater Washington (JCRC) • Inmate Support Virginia • Interfaith Action for Human Rights (IAHR) • HALT Solitary • Jewish Community Relations Council of Just Future Project • Justice & Witness Action Network- VA • United Church of Christ Central Atlantic Conference • LatinoJustice PRLDEF • NAACP Loudoun • National Association of Social Workers • National Association of Social Workers, Virginia Chapter • National Religious Campaign Against Torture • No Left Turns • Resource Information Help for the Disadvantaged and Disenfranchised (RIHD) • RISE for Youth • RVA Health Alliance for Social Justice and Equity • Social Action Linking Together (SALT) • Social Workers and Allies Against Solitary Confinement • The Humanization Project • The Sentencing Project • Unitarian Universalist Legislative Ministry of Virginia • Unlock the Box Campaign • Virginia CURE • Virginia Defenders for Freedom, Justice & Equality • Virginia Justice Democrats • Virginia Justice for Life • Virginia Justice Alliance • Virginia Prisons Accountability Committee • Virginia Prisoner Of Conscience • Virginia Prison Justice Network • WJCC Coalition for Community Justice • 40 Strong === Opposition === • (to be updated) === No Recommendation / Neutral === • (to be updated) === No Position Provided === • Department of Corrections <hr> == Fiscal Impact == No fiscal impact statement is posted for HB35. <hr> == Possible Questions == === TL;DR === <b>Q1: “Does this end solitary confinement in Virginia?”</b> TL;DR: No—it ends <i>prolonged</i> solitary confinement and sets clear limits, oversight, and due-process rules for any use. <br> <b>Q2: “Does this make prisons less safe for staff?”</b> TL;DR: No—HB35 keeps exceptions for imminent threats and requires documentation; it’s about targeted use, not “never.” <br> <b>Q3: “What changes day-to-day?”</b> TL;DR: Frequent reviews, rapid medical/mental health checks, real programming/out-of-cell time, and written accountability when isolation is used. <br> <b>Q4: “Can DOC just use ‘lockdowns’ instead?”</b> TL;DR: The bill defines lockdown and regulates it, and the requested amendment strengthens this further by applying the same time limits to lockdown explicitly. <br> === Q1: “What does the bill aim to accomplish?” === <b>Answer you can use:</b> HB35 ends prolonged solitary confinement by setting clear time limits and requiring real oversight—regular reviews, rapid medical and mental health evaluations, documentation, and in-person due process when isolation continues. <br> === Q2: “How often is placement reviewed?” === <b>Answer you can use:</b> Placement is reviewed frequently, including a required 48-hour review cycle with written documentation explaining why less restrictive settings were not used. <br> === Q3: “What health protections are required?” === <b>Answer you can use:</b> HB35 requires medical and mental health evaluations by certified professionals within one working day of placement in restorative housing or isolated confinement (with limited exceptions). <br> === Q4: “Does this stop people from getting programming or recreation?” === <b>Answer you can use:</b> No—the bill requires at least four hours of out-of-cell programming or congregate activity daily, plus at least one hour of congregate recreation unless exceptional safety circumstances apply. <br> === Q5: “What stops indefinite ‘lockdowns’?” === <b>Answer you can use:</b> Lockdowns that interrupt programming must have a specific documented security purpose, must end as soon as the purpose is served, are time-limited, require approvals to extend or repeat, and must be documented and published. <hr> == Additional Information == <b>1. Definitions are the enforcement backbone</b> • The bill defines isolated confinement and lockdown by hours-per-day and loss of programming, so policy can’t be evaded by unit names. <b>Policy implication:</b> Regulates conditions, not labels. <br> <b>2. The “less restrictive first” rule targets protective-custody misuse</b> • For “own protection” placements, the facility must use less restrictive options first, including transfers or special-purpose housing for similarly threatened individuals, unless infeasible. <b>Policy implication:</b> Safety without defaulting to isolation. <br> <b>3. Reviews + documentation create accountability</b> • Requires regular reviews, documentation in the institutional file, notice up the chain, and formal in-person reviews with appeal rights. <b>Policy implication:</b> Isolation becomes a documented exception, not a routine. <br> <b>4. Lockdown limits matter because lockdown can function like solitary</b> • The bill regulates lockdowns that interrupt programming and requires publication of documentation. <b>Policy implication:</b> Prevents “unit-wide solitary” from becoming the workaround. [[Category:2026 Session]]
2026-01-22 06:37:20
Edited by: 74.110.183.75
Edited by: 74.110.183.75
= HB35 Restorative housing and isolated confinement; restrictions on use. = == Status == [https://house.vga.virginia.gov/subcommittees/H15002/agendas/5187 Public Safety | Subcommittee #2 — agenda] <hr> == Overview == === Summary as Introduced === <b>Restorative housing and isolated confinement; restrictions on use.</b> Prohibits the use of isolated confinement, defined in the bill, in state correctional facilities, subject to certain exceptions. The bill requires that before placing an incarcerated person in restorative housing or isolated confinement for his own protection, the facility administrator shall place an incarcerated person in a less-restrictive setting, including by transferring such person to another institution or to a special-purpose housing unit for incarcerated persons who face similar threats. The bill requires that if an incarcerated person is placed in restorative housing or isolated confinement, such placement shall be reviewed every 48 hours and the facility administrator shall ensure that the incarcerated person receives a medical and mental health evaluation from certified medical and mental health professionals within one working day of placement in restorative housing or any form of isolated confinement. The bill also requires the facility administrator to notify the regional administrator in writing that an incarcerated person was placed in restorative housing or isolated confinement within 24 hours of such placement. Finally, the bill requires that formal reviews of an incarcerated person's placement in any form of isolated confinement shall be held in such person's presence, inform him of any reasons administrative officials believe isolated confinement remains necessary, and give the incarcerated person an opportunity to respond to those reasons, and a formal ruling shall be provided to the incarcerated individual within 24 hours. <hr> === Patrons === ==== House Patrons ==== • Joshua G. Cole (chief patron) • Patrick A. Hope • Sam Rasoul • Holly Seibold ==== Senate Patrons ==== • Bagby <hr> == Language == The language of [https://lis.virginia.gov/bill-details/20261/HB35/text/HB35 HB35] can be viewed here. <hr> == Proposed Amendment == === Amendment Offered for Consideration (requested for subcommittee) === ==== Add “Lockdown” throughout relevant provisions ==== Amend the bill to explicitly include “lockdown” alongside “solitary confinement/isolated confinement” and “restorative housing” in all relevant sections, to prevent facilities from using unit-wide lockdown practices as a functional substitute for individual isolated confinement. ==== Strengthen the time-limit clause (close the cumulative-days gap) ==== Replace the current time-limit phrasing with: “No individual shall be held in solitary confinement, lockdown, or restorative housing for more than 15 consecutive days, nor 15 days in any 60-day period.” <b>Purpose of the amendment:</b> The introduced text already uses “15 consecutive days…in any 60-day period,” but stakeholders have raised concerns that “consecutive” language can be worked around by cycling people in and out (or shifting to lockdown practices) without ever hitting a “consecutive” threshold. The amendment makes the limit explicitly <i>both</i> consecutive and cumulative. <hr> == Opening Statement == === House Subcommittee Statement === <blockquote> ====Notes on delivery: ==== <b>bold</b>—emphasize, increase volume; <i>italicized</i>—stressed, extended pronunciation; <i><b>bold italicized</i></b>—climactic, stressed and emphatic; • bulleted—drum-like repetition, think of MLK's "I Have a Dream," "I have a dream that..." repeated for emphasis. </blockquote> <br> Mister Chair, members of the subcommittee— <i>This is not our first time here.</i> For <b>two straight years</b>, the General Assembly has passed this reform. <b>In 2024</b>, I gave you a sermon... and then we passed HB 1244. <b>In 2025</b>, my sister, my friend, and my colleague, <b>Delegate Keys-Gamarra</b>, took up the torch... and then we passed HB 2647. Twice, this body has said—<i><b>clearly</b></i>—that we are ready to turn the page on solitary confinement. And after two straight years, nobody can pretend this is new... • You know this bill. • You know this issue. - • And you know how overdue this change is. + • You know how overdue this change is. Mister Chair, members of the committee, this is not our first time here, <b>BUT it will be our last</b>—because this year <i>we will make history.</i> And what is so great about this year is that we all have a <i>chance</i>—a <i>chance</i> to be part of making history. If you're still on the fence, I want you to look <i>forward</i> into the future with me. <b>Don't let the past hold you back...</b> • Because when we look back in 25 years, <b>we will know this legislation was the right thing to do.</b> • Because when we look back in 50 years, <b>we will know this legislation was the right thing to do.</b> • Because when we look back in <b>one-hundred</b> years, <i><b>we will know this legislation was the right thing to do!</b></i> Today—I hope everyone in this room joins us in doing the <i><b>right thing.</b></i> We know the questions, and we'll answer them if asked. But I encourage us to listen to <i><b>testimonies</b></i>, to listen to the voices who are ready for change, so that we may be reminded—again—just how overdue this legislation is. Thank you, Mister Chair and members of the committee. I hope you report this bill favorably to full committee. <hr> == Support and Opposition == === Support === • ACLU People Power Fairfax • Bridging The Gap In Virginia • Charlottesville Chapter National Organization for Women • Coalition for Justice • EJUSA Evangelical Network • Fighting 4 Freedom • Greater Washington (JCRC) • Inmate Support Virginia • Interfaith Action for Human Rights (IAHR) • HALT Solitary • Jewish Community Relations Council of Just Future Project • Justice & Witness Action Network- VA • United Church of Christ Central Atlantic Conference • LatinoJustice PRLDEF • NAACP Loudoun • National Association of Social Workers • National Association of Social Workers, Virginia Chapter • National Religious Campaign Against Torture • No Left Turns • Resource Information Help for the Disadvantaged and Disenfranchised (RIHD) • RISE for Youth • RVA Health Alliance for Social Justice and Equity • Social Action Linking Together (SALT) • Social Workers and Allies Against Solitary Confinement • The Humanization Project • The Sentencing Project • Unitarian Universalist Legislative Ministry of Virginia • Unlock the Box Campaign • Virginia CURE • Virginia Defenders for Freedom, Justice & Equality • Virginia Justice Democrats • Virginia Justice for Life • Virginia Justice Alliance • Virginia Prisons Accountability Committee • Virginia Prisoner Of Conscience • Virginia Prison Justice Network • WJCC Coalition for Community Justice • 40 Strong === Opposition === • (to be updated) === No Recommendation / Neutral === • (to be updated) === No Position Provided === • Department of Corrections <hr> == Fiscal Impact == No fiscal impact statement is posted for HB35. <hr> == Possible Questions == === TL;DR === <b>Q1: “Does this end solitary confinement in Virginia?”</b> TL;DR: No—it ends <i>prolonged</i> solitary confinement and sets clear limits, oversight, and due-process rules for any use. <br> <b>Q2: “Does this make prisons less safe for staff?”</b> TL;DR: No—HB35 keeps exceptions for imminent threats and requires documentation; it’s about targeted use, not “never.” <br> <b>Q3: “What changes day-to-day?”</b> TL;DR: Frequent reviews, rapid medical/mental health checks, real programming/out-of-cell time, and written accountability when isolation is used. <br> <b>Q4: “Can DOC just use ‘lockdowns’ instead?”</b> TL;DR: The bill defines lockdown and regulates it, and the requested amendment strengthens this further by applying the same time limits to lockdown explicitly. <br> === Q1: “What does the bill aim to accomplish?” === <b>Answer you can use:</b> HB35 ends prolonged solitary confinement by setting clear time limits and requiring real oversight—regular reviews, rapid medical and mental health evaluations, documentation, and in-person due process when isolation continues. <br> === Q2: “How often is placement reviewed?” === <b>Answer you can use:</b> Placement is reviewed frequently, including a required 48-hour review cycle with written documentation explaining why less restrictive settings were not used. <br> === Q3: “What health protections are required?” === <b>Answer you can use:</b> HB35 requires medical and mental health evaluations by certified professionals within one working day of placement in restorative housing or isolated confinement (with limited exceptions). <br> === Q4: “Does this stop people from getting programming or recreation?” === <b>Answer you can use:</b> No—the bill requires at least four hours of out-of-cell programming or congregate activity daily, plus at least one hour of congregate recreation unless exceptional safety circumstances apply. <br> === Q5: “What stops indefinite ‘lockdowns’?” === <b>Answer you can use:</b> Lockdowns that interrupt programming must have a specific documented security purpose, must end as soon as the purpose is served, are time-limited, require approvals to extend or repeat, and must be documented and published. <hr> == Additional Information == <b>1. Definitions are the enforcement backbone</b> • The bill defines isolated confinement and lockdown by hours-per-day and loss of programming, so policy can’t be evaded by unit names. <b>Policy implication:</b> Regulates conditions, not labels. <br> <b>2. The “less restrictive first” rule targets protective-custody misuse</b> • For “own protection” placements, the facility must use less restrictive options first, including transfers or special-purpose housing for similarly threatened individuals, unless infeasible. <b>Policy implication:</b> Safety without defaulting to isolation. <br> <b>3. Reviews + documentation create accountability</b> • Requires regular reviews, documentation in the institutional file, notice up the chain, and formal in-person reviews with appeal rights. <b>Policy implication:</b> Isolation becomes a documented exception, not a routine. <br> <b>4. Lockdown limits matter because lockdown can function like solitary</b> • The bill regulates lockdowns that interrupt programming and requires publication of documentation. <b>Policy implication:</b> Prevents “unit-wide solitary” from becoming the workaround. [[Category:2026 Session]]
2026-01-22 06:36:53
Edited by: 74.110.183.75
Edited by: 74.110.183.75
= HB35 Restorative housing and isolated confinement; restrictions on use. = == Status == [https://house.vga.virginia.gov/subcommittees/H15002/agendas/5187 Public Safety | Subcommittee #2 — agenda] <hr> == Overview == === Summary as Introduced === <b>Restorative housing and isolated confinement; restrictions on use.</b> Prohibits the use of isolated confinement, defined in the bill, in state correctional facilities, subject to certain exceptions. The bill requires that before placing an incarcerated person in restorative housing or isolated confinement for his own protection, the facility administrator shall place an incarcerated person in a less-restrictive setting, including by transferring such person to another institution or to a special-purpose housing unit for incarcerated persons who face similar threats. The bill requires that if an incarcerated person is placed in restorative housing or isolated confinement, such placement shall be reviewed every 48 hours and the facility administrator shall ensure that the incarcerated person receives a medical and mental health evaluation from certified medical and mental health professionals within one working day of placement in restorative housing or any form of isolated confinement. The bill also requires the facility administrator to notify the regional administrator in writing that an incarcerated person was placed in restorative housing or isolated confinement within 24 hours of such placement. Finally, the bill requires that formal reviews of an incarcerated person's placement in any form of isolated confinement shall be held in such person's presence, inform him of any reasons administrative officials believe isolated confinement remains necessary, and give the incarcerated person an opportunity to respond to those reasons, and a formal ruling shall be provided to the incarcerated individual within 24 hours. <hr> === Patrons === ==== House Patrons ==== • Joshua G. Cole (chief patron) • Patrick A. Hope • Sam Rasoul • Holly Seibold ==== Senate Patrons ==== • Bagby <hr> == Language == The language of [https://lis.virginia.gov/bill-details/20261/HB35/text/HB35 HB35] can be viewed here. <hr> == Proposed Amendment == === Amendment Offered for Consideration (requested for subcommittee) === ==== Add “Lockdown” throughout relevant provisions ==== Amend the bill to explicitly include “lockdown” alongside “solitary confinement/isolated confinement” and “restorative housing” in all relevant sections, to prevent facilities from using unit-wide lockdown practices as a functional substitute for individual isolated confinement. ==== Strengthen the time-limit clause (close the cumulative-days gap) ==== Replace the current time-limit phrasing with: “No individual shall be held in solitary confinement, lockdown, or restorative housing for more than 15 consecutive days, nor 15 days in any 60-day period.” <b>Purpose of the amendment:</b> The introduced text already uses “15 consecutive days…in any 60-day period,” but stakeholders have raised concerns that “consecutive” language can be worked around by cycling people in and out (or shifting to lockdown practices) without ever hitting a “consecutive” threshold. The amendment makes the limit explicitly <i>both</i> consecutive and cumulative. <hr> == Opening Statement == === House Subcommittee Statement === <blockquote> ====Notes on delivery: ==== <b>bold</b>—emphasize, increase volume; <i>italicized</i>—stressed, extended pronunciation; <i><b>bold italicized</i></b>—climactic, stressed and emphatic; - • bulleted—drum-like repetition. + • bulleted—drum-like repetition, think of MLK's "I Have a Dream," "I have a dream that..." repeated for emphasis. </blockquote> <br> Mister Chair, members of the subcommittee— <i>This is not our first time here.</i> For <b>two straight years</b>, the General Assembly has passed this reform. <b>In 2024</b>, I gave you a sermon... and then we passed HB 1244. <b>In 2025</b>, my sister, my friend, and my colleague, <b>Delegate Keys-Gamarra</b>, took up the torch... and then we passed HB 2647. Twice, this body has said—<i><b>clearly</b></i>—that we are ready to turn the page on solitary confinement. And after two straight years, nobody can pretend this is new... • You know this bill. • You know this issue. • And you know how overdue this change is. Mister Chair, members of the committee, this is not our first time here, <b>BUT it will be our last</b>—because this year <i>we will make history.</i> And what is so great about this year is that we all have a <i>chance</i>—a <i>chance</i> to be part of making history. If you're still on the fence, I want you to look <i>forward</i> into the future with me. <b>Don't let the past hold you back...</b> • Because when we look back in 25 years, <b>we will know this legislation was the right thing to do.</b> • Because when we look back in 50 years, <b>we will know this legislation was the right thing to do.</b> • Because when we look back in <b>one-hundred</b> years, <i><b>we will know this legislation was the right thing to do!</b></i> Today—I hope everyone in this room joins us in doing the <i><b>right thing.</b></i> We know the questions, and we'll answer them if asked. But I encourage us to listen to <i><b>testimonies</b></i>, to listen to the voices who are ready for change, so that we may be reminded—again—just how overdue this legislation is. Thank you, Mister Chair and members of the committee. I hope you report this bill favorably to full committee. <hr> == Support and Opposition == === Support === • ACLU People Power Fairfax • Bridging The Gap In Virginia • Charlottesville Chapter National Organization for Women • Coalition for Justice • EJUSA Evangelical Network • Fighting 4 Freedom • Greater Washington (JCRC) • Inmate Support Virginia • Interfaith Action for Human Rights (IAHR) • HALT Solitary • Jewish Community Relations Council of Just Future Project • Justice & Witness Action Network- VA • United Church of Christ Central Atlantic Conference • LatinoJustice PRLDEF • NAACP Loudoun • National Association of Social Workers • National Association of Social Workers, Virginia Chapter • National Religious Campaign Against Torture • No Left Turns • Resource Information Help for the Disadvantaged and Disenfranchised (RIHD) • RISE for Youth • RVA Health Alliance for Social Justice and Equity • Social Action Linking Together (SALT) • Social Workers and Allies Against Solitary Confinement • The Humanization Project • The Sentencing Project • Unitarian Universalist Legislative Ministry of Virginia • Unlock the Box Campaign • Virginia CURE • Virginia Defenders for Freedom, Justice & Equality • Virginia Justice Democrats • Virginia Justice for Life • Virginia Justice Alliance • Virginia Prisons Accountability Committee • Virginia Prisoner Of Conscience • Virginia Prison Justice Network • WJCC Coalition for Community Justice • 40 Strong === Opposition === • (to be updated) === No Recommendation / Neutral === • (to be updated) === No Position Provided === • Department of Corrections <hr> == Fiscal Impact == No fiscal impact statement is posted for HB35. <hr> == Possible Questions == === TL;DR === <b>Q1: “Does this end solitary confinement in Virginia?”</b> TL;DR: No—it ends <i>prolonged</i> solitary confinement and sets clear limits, oversight, and due-process rules for any use. <br> <b>Q2: “Does this make prisons less safe for staff?”</b> TL;DR: No—HB35 keeps exceptions for imminent threats and requires documentation; it’s about targeted use, not “never.” <br> <b>Q3: “What changes day-to-day?”</b> TL;DR: Frequent reviews, rapid medical/mental health checks, real programming/out-of-cell time, and written accountability when isolation is used. <br> <b>Q4: “Can DOC just use ‘lockdowns’ instead?”</b> TL;DR: The bill defines lockdown and regulates it, and the requested amendment strengthens this further by applying the same time limits to lockdown explicitly. <br> === Q1: “What does the bill aim to accomplish?” === <b>Answer you can use:</b> HB35 ends prolonged solitary confinement by setting clear time limits and requiring real oversight—regular reviews, rapid medical and mental health evaluations, documentation, and in-person due process when isolation continues. <br> === Q2: “How often is placement reviewed?” === <b>Answer you can use:</b> Placement is reviewed frequently, including a required 48-hour review cycle with written documentation explaining why less restrictive settings were not used. <br> === Q3: “What health protections are required?” === <b>Answer you can use:</b> HB35 requires medical and mental health evaluations by certified professionals within one working day of placement in restorative housing or isolated confinement (with limited exceptions). <br> === Q4: “Does this stop people from getting programming or recreation?” === <b>Answer you can use:</b> No—the bill requires at least four hours of out-of-cell programming or congregate activity daily, plus at least one hour of congregate recreation unless exceptional safety circumstances apply. <br> === Q5: “What stops indefinite ‘lockdowns’?” === <b>Answer you can use:</b> Lockdowns that interrupt programming must have a specific documented security purpose, must end as soon as the purpose is served, are time-limited, require approvals to extend or repeat, and must be documented and published. <hr> == Additional Information == <b>1. Definitions are the enforcement backbone</b> • The bill defines isolated confinement and lockdown by hours-per-day and loss of programming, so policy can’t be evaded by unit names. <b>Policy implication:</b> Regulates conditions, not labels. <br> <b>2. The “less restrictive first” rule targets protective-custody misuse</b> • For “own protection” placements, the facility must use less restrictive options first, including transfers or special-purpose housing for similarly threatened individuals, unless infeasible. <b>Policy implication:</b> Safety without defaulting to isolation. <br> <b>3. Reviews + documentation create accountability</b> • Requires regular reviews, documentation in the institutional file, notice up the chain, and formal in-person reviews with appeal rights. <b>Policy implication:</b> Isolation becomes a documented exception, not a routine. <br> <b>4. Lockdown limits matter because lockdown can function like solitary</b> • The bill regulates lockdowns that interrupt programming and requires publication of documentation. <b>Policy implication:</b> Prevents “unit-wide solitary” from becoming the workaround. [[Category:2026 Session]]
2026-01-22 06:36:29
Edited by: 74.110.183.75
Edited by: 74.110.183.75
= HB35 Restorative housing and isolated confinement; restrictions on use. = == Status == [https://house.vga.virginia.gov/subcommittees/H15002/agendas/5187 Public Safety | Subcommittee #2 — agenda] <hr> == Overview == === Summary as Introduced === <b>Restorative housing and isolated confinement; restrictions on use.</b> Prohibits the use of isolated confinement, defined in the bill, in state correctional facilities, subject to certain exceptions. The bill requires that before placing an incarcerated person in restorative housing or isolated confinement for his own protection, the facility administrator shall place an incarcerated person in a less-restrictive setting, including by transferring such person to another institution or to a special-purpose housing unit for incarcerated persons who face similar threats. The bill requires that if an incarcerated person is placed in restorative housing or isolated confinement, such placement shall be reviewed every 48 hours and the facility administrator shall ensure that the incarcerated person receives a medical and mental health evaluation from certified medical and mental health professionals within one working day of placement in restorative housing or any form of isolated confinement. The bill also requires the facility administrator to notify the regional administrator in writing that an incarcerated person was placed in restorative housing or isolated confinement within 24 hours of such placement. Finally, the bill requires that formal reviews of an incarcerated person's placement in any form of isolated confinement shall be held in such person's presence, inform him of any reasons administrative officials believe isolated confinement remains necessary, and give the incarcerated person an opportunity to respond to those reasons, and a formal ruling shall be provided to the incarcerated individual within 24 hours. <hr> === Patrons === ==== House Patrons ==== • Joshua G. Cole (chief patron) • Patrick A. Hope • Sam Rasoul • Holly Seibold ==== Senate Patrons ==== • Bagby <hr> == Language == The language of [https://lis.virginia.gov/bill-details/20261/HB35/text/HB35 HB35] can be viewed here. <hr> == Proposed Amendment == === Amendment Offered for Consideration (requested for subcommittee) === ==== Add “Lockdown” throughout relevant provisions ==== Amend the bill to explicitly include “lockdown” alongside “solitary confinement/isolated confinement” and “restorative housing” in all relevant sections, to prevent facilities from using unit-wide lockdown practices as a functional substitute for individual isolated confinement. ==== Strengthen the time-limit clause (close the cumulative-days gap) ==== Replace the current time-limit phrasing with: “No individual shall be held in solitary confinement, lockdown, or restorative housing for more than 15 consecutive days, nor 15 days in any 60-day period.” <b>Purpose of the amendment:</b> The introduced text already uses “15 consecutive days…in any 60-day period,” but stakeholders have raised concerns that “consecutive” language can be worked around by cycling people in and out (or shifting to lockdown practices) without ever hitting a “consecutive” threshold. The amendment makes the limit explicitly <i>both</i> consecutive and cumulative. <hr> == Opening Statement == === House Subcommittee Statement === <blockquote> - ** Notes on delivery: + ====Notes on delivery: ==== <b>bold</b>—emphasize, increase volume; <i>italicized</i>—stressed, extended pronunciation; <i><b>bold italicized</i></b>—climactic, stressed and emphatic; • bulleted—drum-like repetition. </blockquote> <br> Mister Chair, members of the subcommittee— <i>This is not our first time here.</i> For <b>two straight years</b>, the General Assembly has passed this reform. <b>In 2024</b>, I gave you a sermon... and then we passed HB 1244. <b>In 2025</b>, my sister, my friend, and my colleague, <b>Delegate Keys-Gamarra</b>, took up the torch... and then we passed HB 2647. Twice, this body has said—<i><b>clearly</b></i>—that we are ready to turn the page on solitary confinement. And after two straight years, nobody can pretend this is new... • You know this bill. • You know this issue. • And you know how overdue this change is. Mister Chair, members of the committee, this is not our first time here, <b>BUT it will be our last</b>—because this year <i>we will make history.</i> And what is so great about this year is that we all have a <i>chance</i>—a <i>chance</i> to be part of making history. If you're still on the fence, I want you to look <i>forward</i> into the future with me. <b>Don't let the past hold you back...</b> • Because when we look back in 25 years, <b>we will know this legislation was the right thing to do.</b> • Because when we look back in 50 years, <b>we will know this legislation was the right thing to do.</b> • Because when we look back in <b>one-hundred</b> years, <i><b>we will know this legislation was the right thing to do!</b></i> Today—I hope everyone in this room joins us in doing the <i><b>right thing.</b></i> We know the questions, and we'll answer them if asked. But I encourage us to listen to <i><b>testimonies</b></i>, to listen to the voices who are ready for change, so that we may be reminded—again—just how overdue this legislation is. Thank you, Mister Chair and members of the committee. I hope you report this bill favorably to full committee. <hr> == Support and Opposition == === Support === • ACLU People Power Fairfax • Bridging The Gap In Virginia • Charlottesville Chapter National Organization for Women • Coalition for Justice • EJUSA Evangelical Network • Fighting 4 Freedom • Greater Washington (JCRC) • Inmate Support Virginia • Interfaith Action for Human Rights (IAHR) • HALT Solitary • Jewish Community Relations Council of Just Future Project • Justice & Witness Action Network- VA • United Church of Christ Central Atlantic Conference • LatinoJustice PRLDEF • NAACP Loudoun • National Association of Social Workers • National Association of Social Workers, Virginia Chapter • National Religious Campaign Against Torture • No Left Turns • Resource Information Help for the Disadvantaged and Disenfranchised (RIHD) • RISE for Youth • RVA Health Alliance for Social Justice and Equity • Social Action Linking Together (SALT) • Social Workers and Allies Against Solitary Confinement • The Humanization Project • The Sentencing Project • Unitarian Universalist Legislative Ministry of Virginia • Unlock the Box Campaign • Virginia CURE • Virginia Defenders for Freedom, Justice & Equality • Virginia Justice Democrats • Virginia Justice for Life • Virginia Justice Alliance • Virginia Prisons Accountability Committee • Virginia Prisoner Of Conscience • Virginia Prison Justice Network • WJCC Coalition for Community Justice • 40 Strong === Opposition === • (to be updated) === No Recommendation / Neutral === • (to be updated) === No Position Provided === • Department of Corrections <hr> == Fiscal Impact == No fiscal impact statement is posted for HB35. <hr> == Possible Questions == === TL;DR === <b>Q1: “Does this end solitary confinement in Virginia?”</b> TL;DR: No—it ends <i>prolonged</i> solitary confinement and sets clear limits, oversight, and due-process rules for any use. <br> <b>Q2: “Does this make prisons less safe for staff?”</b> TL;DR: No—HB35 keeps exceptions for imminent threats and requires documentation; it’s about targeted use, not “never.” <br> <b>Q3: “What changes day-to-day?”</b> TL;DR: Frequent reviews, rapid medical/mental health checks, real programming/out-of-cell time, and written accountability when isolation is used. <br> <b>Q4: “Can DOC just use ‘lockdowns’ instead?”</b> TL;DR: The bill defines lockdown and regulates it, and the requested amendment strengthens this further by applying the same time limits to lockdown explicitly. <br> === Q1: “What does the bill aim to accomplish?” === <b>Answer you can use:</b> HB35 ends prolonged solitary confinement by setting clear time limits and requiring real oversight—regular reviews, rapid medical and mental health evaluations, documentation, and in-person due process when isolation continues. <br> === Q2: “How often is placement reviewed?” === <b>Answer you can use:</b> Placement is reviewed frequently, including a required 48-hour review cycle with written documentation explaining why less restrictive settings were not used. <br> === Q3: “What health protections are required?” === <b>Answer you can use:</b> HB35 requires medical and mental health evaluations by certified professionals within one working day of placement in restorative housing or isolated confinement (with limited exceptions). <br> === Q4: “Does this stop people from getting programming or recreation?” === <b>Answer you can use:</b> No—the bill requires at least four hours of out-of-cell programming or congregate activity daily, plus at least one hour of congregate recreation unless exceptional safety circumstances apply. <br> === Q5: “What stops indefinite ‘lockdowns’?” === <b>Answer you can use:</b> Lockdowns that interrupt programming must have a specific documented security purpose, must end as soon as the purpose is served, are time-limited, require approvals to extend or repeat, and must be documented and published. <hr> == Additional Information == <b>1. Definitions are the enforcement backbone</b> • The bill defines isolated confinement and lockdown by hours-per-day and loss of programming, so policy can’t be evaded by unit names. <b>Policy implication:</b> Regulates conditions, not labels. <br> <b>2. The “less restrictive first” rule targets protective-custody misuse</b> • For “own protection” placements, the facility must use less restrictive options first, including transfers or special-purpose housing for similarly threatened individuals, unless infeasible. <b>Policy implication:</b> Safety without defaulting to isolation. <br> <b>3. Reviews + documentation create accountability</b> • Requires regular reviews, documentation in the institutional file, notice up the chain, and formal in-person reviews with appeal rights. <b>Policy implication:</b> Isolation becomes a documented exception, not a routine. <br> <b>4. Lockdown limits matter because lockdown can function like solitary</b> • The bill regulates lockdowns that interrupt programming and requires publication of documentation. <b>Policy implication:</b> Prevents “unit-wide solitary” from becoming the workaround. [[Category:2026 Session]]
2026-01-22 06:34:06
Edited by: 74.110.183.75
Edited by: 74.110.183.75
= HB35 Restorative housing and isolated confinement; restrictions on use. = == Status == [https://house.vga.virginia.gov/subcommittees/H15002/agendas/5187 Public Safety | Subcommittee #2 — agenda] <hr> == Overview == === Summary as Introduced === <b>Restorative housing and isolated confinement; restrictions on use.</b> Prohibits the use of isolated confinement, defined in the bill, in state correctional facilities, subject to certain exceptions. The bill requires that before placing an incarcerated person in restorative housing or isolated confinement for his own protection, the facility administrator shall place an incarcerated person in a less-restrictive setting, including by transferring such person to another institution or to a special-purpose housing unit for incarcerated persons who face similar threats. The bill requires that if an incarcerated person is placed in restorative housing or isolated confinement, such placement shall be reviewed every 48 hours and the facility administrator shall ensure that the incarcerated person receives a medical and mental health evaluation from certified medical and mental health professionals within one working day of placement in restorative housing or any form of isolated confinement. The bill also requires the facility administrator to notify the regional administrator in writing that an incarcerated person was placed in restorative housing or isolated confinement within 24 hours of such placement. Finally, the bill requires that formal reviews of an incarcerated person's placement in any form of isolated confinement shall be held in such person's presence, inform him of any reasons administrative officials believe isolated confinement remains necessary, and give the incarcerated person an opportunity to respond to those reasons, and a formal ruling shall be provided to the incarcerated individual within 24 hours. <hr> === Patrons === ==== House Patrons ==== • Joshua G. Cole (chief patron) • Patrick A. Hope • Sam Rasoul • Holly Seibold ==== Senate Patrons ==== • Bagby <hr> == Language == The language of [https://lis.virginia.gov/bill-details/20261/HB35/text/HB35 HB35] can be viewed here. <hr> == Proposed Amendment == === Amendment Offered for Consideration (requested for subcommittee) === ==== Add “Lockdown” throughout relevant provisions ==== Amend the bill to explicitly include “lockdown” alongside “solitary confinement/isolated confinement” and “restorative housing” in all relevant sections, to prevent facilities from using unit-wide lockdown practices as a functional substitute for individual isolated confinement. ==== Strengthen the time-limit clause (close the cumulative-days gap) ==== Replace the current time-limit phrasing with: “No individual shall be held in solitary confinement, lockdown, or restorative housing for more than 15 consecutive days, nor 15 days in any 60-day period.” <b>Purpose of the amendment:</b> The introduced text already uses “15 consecutive days…in any 60-day period,” but stakeholders have raised concerns that “consecutive” language can be worked around by cycling people in and out (or shifting to lockdown practices) without ever hitting a “consecutive” threshold. The amendment makes the limit explicitly <i>both</i> consecutive and cumulative. <hr> == Opening Statement == === House Subcommittee Statement === - ** Notes on delivery: + <blockquote> - <b>bold</b>—emphasize, increase volume; + ** Notes on delivery: - <i>italicized</i>—stressed, extended pronunciation; + <b>bold</b>—emphasize, increase volume; - <i><b>bold italicized</i></b>—climactic, stressed and emphatic; + <i>italicized</i>—stressed, extended pronunciation; - • bulleted—drum-like repetition. + <i><b>bold italicized</i></b>—climactic, stressed and emphatic; - + • bulleted—drum-like repetition. - <br> + </blockquote> - Mister Chair, members of the subcommittee— + <br> - <i>This is not our first time here.</i> + Mister Chair, members of the subcommittee— - For <b>two straight years</b>, the General Assembly has passed this reform. + <i>This is not our first time here.</i> - <b>In 2024</b>, I gave you a sermon... and then we passed HB 1244. + For <b>two straight years</b>, the General Assembly has passed this reform. - <b>In 2025</b>, my sister, my friend, and my colleague, <b>Delegate Keys-Gamarra</b>, took up the torch... and then we passed HB 2647. + <b>In 2024</b>, I gave you a sermon... and then we passed HB 1244. - Twice, this body has said—<i><b>clearly</b></i>—that we are ready to turn the page on solitary confinement. + <b>In 2025</b>, my sister, my friend, and my colleague, <b>Delegate Keys-Gamarra</b>, took up the torch... and then we passed HB 2647. - And after two straight years, nobody can pretend this is new... + Twice, this body has said—<i><b>clearly</b></i>—that we are ready to turn the page on solitary confinement. - • You know this bill. + And after two straight years, nobody can pretend this is new... - • You know this issue. + - • And you know how overdue this change is. + • You know this bill. - + • You know this issue. - Mister Chair, members of the committee, this is not our first time here, <b>BUT it will be our last</b>—because this year <i>we will make history.</i> + • And you know how overdue this change is. - And what is so great about this year is that we all have a <i>chance</i>—a <i>chance</i> to be part of making history. + Mister Chair, members of the committee, this is not our first time here, <b>BUT it will be our last</b>—because this year <i>we will make history.</i> - If you're still on the fence, I want you to look <i>forward</i> into the future with me. <b>Don't let the past hold you back...</b> + And what is so great about this year is that we all have a <i>chance</i>—a <i>chance</i> to be part of making history. - • Because when we look back in 25 years, <b>we will know this legislation was the right thing to do.</b> + If you're still on the fence, I want you to look <i>forward</i> into the future with me. <b>Don't let the past hold you back...</b> - • Because when we look back in 50 years, <b>we will know this legislation was the right thing to do.</b> + • Because when we look back in 25 years, <b>we will know this legislation was the right thing to do.</b> - • Because when we look back in <b>one-hundred</b> years, <i><b>we will know this legislation was the right thing to do!</b></i> + • Because when we look back in 50 years, <b>we will know this legislation was the right thing to do.</b> - Today—I hope everyone in this room joins us in doing the <i><b>right thing.</b></i> + • Because when we look back in <b>one-hundred</b> years, <i><b>we will know this legislation was the right thing to do!</b></i> - We know the questions, and we'll answer them if asked. But I encourage us to listen to <i><b>testimonies</b></i>, to listen to the voices who are ready for change, so that we may be reminded—again—just how overdue this legislation is. + Today—I hope everyone in this room joins us in doing the <i><b>right thing.</b></i> - Thank you, Mister Chair and members of the committee. I hope you report this bill favorably to full committee. + We know the questions, and we'll answer them if asked. But I encourage us to listen to <i><b>testimonies</b></i>, to listen to the voices who are ready for change, so that we may be reminded—again—just how overdue this legislation is. - <hr> + Thank you, Mister Chair and members of the committee. I hope you report this bill favorably to full committee. - == Support and Opposition == + <hr> - === Support === + == Support and Opposition == - • ACLU People Power Fairfax + - • Bridging The Gap In Virginia + === Support === - • Charlottesville Chapter National Organization for Women + • ACLU People Power Fairfax - • Coalition for Justice + • Bridging The Gap In Virginia - • EJUSA Evangelical Network + • Charlottesville Chapter National Organization for Women - • Fighting 4 Freedom + • Coalition for Justice - • Greater Washington (JCRC) + • EJUSA Evangelical Network - • Inmate Support Virginia + • Fighting 4 Freedom - • Interfaith Action for Human Rights (IAHR) + • Greater Washington (JCRC) - • HALT Solitary + • Inmate Support Virginia - • Jewish Community Relations Council of Just Future Project + • Interfaith Action for Human Rights (IAHR) - • Justice & Witness Action Network- VA + • HALT Solitary - • United Church of Christ Central Atlantic Conference + • Jewish Community Relations Council of Just Future Project - • LatinoJustice PRLDEF + • Justice & Witness Action Network- VA - • NAACP Loudoun + • United Church of Christ Central Atlantic Conference - • National Association of Social Workers + • LatinoJustice PRLDEF - • National Association of Social Workers, Virginia Chapter + • NAACP Loudoun - • National Religious Campaign Against Torture + • National Association of Social Workers - • No Left Turns + • National Association of Social Workers, Virginia Chapter - • Resource Information Help for the Disadvantaged and Disenfranchised (RIHD) + • National Religious Campaign Against Torture - • RISE for Youth + • No Left Turns - • RVA Health Alliance for Social Justice and Equity + • Resource Information Help for the Disadvantaged and Disenfranchised (RIHD) - • Social Action Linking Together (SALT) + • RISE for Youth - • Social Workers and Allies Against Solitary Confinement + • RVA Health Alliance for Social Justice and Equity - • The Humanization Project + • Social Action Linking Together (SALT) - • The Sentencing Project + • Social Workers and Allies Against Solitary Confinement - • Unitarian Universalist Legislative Ministry of Virginia + • The Humanization Project - • Unlock the Box Campaign + • The Sentencing Project - • Virginia CURE + • Unitarian Universalist Legislative Ministry of Virginia - • Virginia Defenders for Freedom, Justice & Equality + • Unlock the Box Campaign - • Virginia Justice Democrats + • Virginia CURE - • Virginia Justice for Life + • Virginia Defenders for Freedom, Justice & Equality - • Virginia Justice Alliance + • Virginia Justice Democrats - • Virginia Prisons Accountability Committee + • Virginia Justice for Life - • Virginia Prisoner Of Conscience + • Virginia Justice Alliance - • Virginia Prison Justice Network + • Virginia Prisons Accountability Committee - • WJCC Coalition for Community Justice + • Virginia Prisoner Of Conscience - • 40 Strong + • Virginia Prison Justice Network - + • WJCC Coalition for Community Justice - === Opposition === + • 40 Strong - • (to be updated) + - + === Opposition === - === No Recommendation / Neutral === + • (to be updated) - • (to be updated) + - + === No Recommendation / Neutral === - === No Position Provided === + • (to be updated) - • Department of Corrections + - + === No Position Provided === - <hr> + • Department of Corrections - == Fiscal Impact == + <hr> - No fiscal impact statement is posted for HB35. + - + == Fiscal Impact == - <hr> + No fiscal impact statement is posted for HB35. - == Possible Questions == + <hr> - === TL;DR === + == Possible Questions == - <b>Q1: “Does this end solitary confinement in Virginia?”</b> TL;DR: No—it ends <i>prolonged</i> solitary confinement and sets clear limits, oversight, and due-process rules for any use. <br> + - <b>Q2: “Does this make prisons less safe for staff?”</b> TL;DR: No—HB35 keeps exceptions for imminent threats and requires documentation; it’s about targeted use, not “never.” + === TL;DR === - + <b>Q1: “Does this end solitary confinement in Virginia?”</b> TL;DR: No—it ends <i>prolonged</i> solitary confinement and sets clear limits, oversight, and due-process rules for any use. <br> - <br> + <b>Q2: “Does this make prisons less safe for staff?”</b> TL;DR: No—HB35 keeps exceptions for imminent threats and requires documentation; it’s about targeted use, not “never.” - <b>Q3: “What changes day-to-day?”</b> TL;DR: Frequent reviews, rapid medical/mental health checks, real programming/out-of-cell time, and written accountability when isolation is used. + - + <br> - <br> + <b>Q3: “What changes day-to-day?”</b> TL;DR: Frequent reviews, rapid medical/mental health checks, real programming/out-of-cell time, and written accountability when isolation is used. - <b>Q4: “Can DOC just use ‘lockdowns’ instead?”</b> TL;DR: The bill defines lockdown and regulates it, and the requested amendment strengthens this further by applying the same time limits to lockdown explicitly. + - + <br> - <br> + <b>Q4: “Can DOC just use ‘lockdowns’ instead?”</b> TL;DR: The bill defines lockdown and regulates it, and the requested amendment strengthens this further by applying the same time limits to lockdown explicitly. - === Q1: “What does the bill aim to accomplish?” === + <br> - <b>Answer you can use:</b> HB35 ends prolonged solitary confinement by setting clear time limits and requiring real oversight—regular reviews, rapid medical and mental health evaluations, documentation, and in-person due process when isolation continues. + - + === Q1: “What does the bill aim to accomplish?” === - <br> + <b>Answer you can use:</b> HB35 ends prolonged solitary confinement by setting clear time limits and requiring real oversight—regular reviews, rapid medical and mental health evaluations, documentation, and in-person due process when isolation continues. - === Q2: “How often is placement reviewed?” === + <br> - <b>Answer you can use:</b> Placement is reviewed frequently, including a required 48-hour review cycle with written documentation explaining why less restrictive settings were not used. + - + === Q2: “How often is placement reviewed?” === - <br> + <b>Answer you can use:</b> Placement is reviewed frequently, including a required 48-hour review cycle with written documentation explaining why less restrictive settings were not used. - === Q3: “What health protections are required?” === + <br> - <b>Answer you can use:</b> HB35 requires medical and mental health evaluations by certified professionals within one working day of placement in restorative housing or isolated confinement (with limited exceptions). + - + === Q3: “What health protections are required?” === - <br> + <b>Answer you can use:</b> HB35 requires medical and mental health evaluations by certified professionals within one working day of placement in restorative housing or isolated confinement (with limited exceptions). - === Q4: “Does this stop people from getting programming or recreation?” === + <br> - <b>Answer you can use:</b> No—the bill requires at least four hours of out-of-cell programming or congregate activity daily, plus at least one hour of congregate recreation unless exceptional safety circumstances apply. + - + === Q4: “Does this stop people from getting programming or recreation?” === - <br> + <b>Answer you can use:</b> No—the bill requires at least four hours of out-of-cell programming or congregate activity daily, plus at least one hour of congregate recreation unless exceptional safety circumstances apply. - === Q5: “What stops indefinite ‘lockdowns’?” === + <br> - <b>Answer you can use:</b> Lockdowns that interrupt programming must have a specific documented security purpose, must end as soon as the purpose is served, are time-limited, require approvals to extend or repeat, and must be documented and published. + - + === Q5: “What stops indefinite ‘lockdowns’?” === - <hr> + <b>Answer you can use:</b> Lockdowns that interrupt programming must have a specific documented security purpose, must end as soon as the purpose is served, are time-limited, require approvals to extend or repeat, and must be documented and published. - == Additional Information == + <hr> - <b>1. Definitions are the enforcement backbone</b> + - • The bill defines isolated confinement and lockdown by hours-per-day and loss of programming, so policy can’t be evaded by unit names. + == Additional Information == - + <b>1. Definitions are the enforcement backbone</b> - + • The bill defines isolated confinement and lockdown by hours-per-day and loss of programming, so policy can’t be evaded by unit names. - <b>Policy implication:</b> Regulates conditions, not labels. + - <br> + <b>Policy implication:</b> Regulates conditions, not labels. - <b>2. The “less restrictive first” rule targets protective-custody misuse</b> + <br> - • For “own protection” placements, the facility must use less restrictive options first, including transfers or special-purpose housing for similarly threatened individuals, unless infeasible. + - + <b>2. The “less restrictive first” rule targets protective-custody misuse</b> - <b>Policy implication:</b> Safety without defaulting to isolation. + • For “own protection” placements, the facility must use less restrictive options first, including transfers or special-purpose housing for similarly threatened individuals, unless infeasible. - <br> + <b>Policy implication:</b> Safety without defaulting to isolation. - <b>3. Reviews + documentation create accountability</b> + <br> - • Requires regular reviews, documentation in the institutional file, notice up the chain, and formal in-person reviews with appeal rights. + - + <b>3. Reviews + documentation create accountability</b> - <b>Policy implication:</b> Isolation becomes a documented exception, not a routine. + • Requires regular reviews, documentation in the institutional file, notice up the chain, and formal in-person reviews with appeal rights. - <br> + <b>Policy implication:</b> Isolation becomes a documented exception, not a routine. - <b>4. Lockdown limits matter because lockdown can function like solitary</b> + <br> - • The bill regulates lockdowns that interrupt programming and requires publication of documentation. + - + <b>4. Lockdown limits matter because lockdown can function like solitary</b> - + • The bill regulates lockdowns that interrupt programming and requires publication of documentation. - <b>Policy implication:</b> Prevents “unit-wide solitary” from becoming the workaround. + - [[Category:2026 Session]] + <b>Policy implication:</b> Prevents “unit-wide solitary” from becoming the workaround. + + [[Category:2026 Session]]
2026-01-22 06:33:49
Edited by: 74.110.183.75
Edited by: 74.110.183.75
= HB35 Restorative housing and isolated confinement; restrictions on use. = == Status == [https://house.vga.virginia.gov/subcommittees/H15002/agendas/5187 Public Safety | Subcommittee #2 — agenda] <hr> == Overview == === Summary as Introduced === <b>Restorative housing and isolated confinement; restrictions on use.</b> Prohibits the use of isolated confinement, defined in the bill, in state correctional facilities, subject to certain exceptions. The bill requires that before placing an incarcerated person in restorative housing or isolated confinement for his own protection, the facility administrator shall place an incarcerated person in a less-restrictive setting, including by transferring such person to another institution or to a special-purpose housing unit for incarcerated persons who face similar threats. The bill requires that if an incarcerated person is placed in restorative housing or isolated confinement, such placement shall be reviewed every 48 hours and the facility administrator shall ensure that the incarcerated person receives a medical and mental health evaluation from certified medical and mental health professionals within one working day of placement in restorative housing or any form of isolated confinement. The bill also requires the facility administrator to notify the regional administrator in writing that an incarcerated person was placed in restorative housing or isolated confinement within 24 hours of such placement. Finally, the bill requires that formal reviews of an incarcerated person's placement in any form of isolated confinement shall be held in such person's presence, inform him of any reasons administrative officials believe isolated confinement remains necessary, and give the incarcerated person an opportunity to respond to those reasons, and a formal ruling shall be provided to the incarcerated individual within 24 hours. <hr> === Patrons === ==== House Patrons ==== • Joshua G. Cole (chief patron) • Patrick A. Hope • Sam Rasoul • Holly Seibold ==== Senate Patrons ==== • Bagby <hr> == Language == The language of [https://lis.virginia.gov/bill-details/20261/HB35/text/HB35 HB35] can be viewed here. <hr> == Proposed Amendment == === Amendment Offered for Consideration (requested for subcommittee) === ==== Add “Lockdown” throughout relevant provisions ==== Amend the bill to explicitly include “lockdown” alongside “solitary confinement/isolated confinement” and “restorative housing” in all relevant sections, to prevent facilities from using unit-wide lockdown practices as a functional substitute for individual isolated confinement. ==== Strengthen the time-limit clause (close the cumulative-days gap) ==== Replace the current time-limit phrasing with: “No individual shall be held in solitary confinement, lockdown, or restorative housing for more than 15 consecutive days, nor 15 days in any 60-day period.” <b>Purpose of the amendment:</b> The introduced text already uses “15 consecutive days…in any 60-day period,” but stakeholders have raised concerns that “consecutive” language can be worked around by cycling people in and out (or shifting to lockdown practices) without ever hitting a “consecutive” threshold. The amendment makes the limit explicitly <i>both</i> consecutive and cumulative. <hr> == Opening Statement == === House Subcommittee Statement === ** Notes on delivery: <b>bold</b>—emphasize, increase volume; <i>italicized</i>—stressed, extended pronunciation; <i><b>bold italicized</i></b>—climactic, stressed and emphatic; • bulleted—drum-like repetition. - Mister Chair, members of the subcommittee— + <br> - <i>This is not our first time here.</i> + Mister Chair, members of the subcommittee— - For <b>two straight years</b>, the General Assembly has passed this reform. + <i>This is not our first time here.</i> - <b>In 2024</b>, I gave you a sermon... and then we passed HB 1244. + For <b>two straight years</b>, the General Assembly has passed this reform. - <b>In 2025</b>, my sister, my friend, and my colleague, <b>Delegate Keys-Gamarra</b>, took up the torch... and then we passed HB 2647. + <b>In 2024</b>, I gave you a sermon... and then we passed HB 1244. - Twice, this body has said—<i><b>clearly</b></i>—that we are ready to turn the page on solitary confinement. + <b>In 2025</b>, my sister, my friend, and my colleague, <b>Delegate Keys-Gamarra</b>, took up the torch... and then we passed HB 2647. - And after two straight years, nobody can pretend this is new... + Twice, this body has said—<i><b>clearly</b></i>—that we are ready to turn the page on solitary confinement. - • You know this bill. + And after two straight years, nobody can pretend this is new... - • You know this issue. + - • And you know how overdue this change is. + • You know this bill. - + • You know this issue. - Mister Chair, members of the committee, this is not our first time here, <b>BUT it will be our last</b>—because this year <i>we will make history.</i> + • And you know how overdue this change is. - And what is so great about this year is that we all have a <i>chance</i>—a <i>chance</i> to be part of making history. + Mister Chair, members of the committee, this is not our first time here, <b>BUT it will be our last</b>—because this year <i>we will make history.</i> - If you're still on the fence, I want you to look <i>forward</i> into the future with me. <b>Don't let the past hold you back...</b> + And what is so great about this year is that we all have a <i>chance</i>—a <i>chance</i> to be part of making history. - • Because when we look back in 25 years, <b>we will know this legislation was the right thing to do.</b> + If you're still on the fence, I want you to look <i>forward</i> into the future with me. <b>Don't let the past hold you back...</b> - • Because when we look back in 50 years, <b>we will know this legislation was the right thing to do.</b> + • Because when we look back in 25 years, <b>we will know this legislation was the right thing to do.</b> - • Because when we look back in <b>one-hundred</b> years, <i><b>we will know this legislation was the right thing to do!</b></i> + • Because when we look back in 50 years, <b>we will know this legislation was the right thing to do.</b> - Today—I hope everyone in this room joins us in doing the <i><b>right thing.</b></i> + • Because when we look back in <b>one-hundred</b> years, <i><b>we will know this legislation was the right thing to do!</b></i> - We know the questions, and we'll answer them if asked. But I encourage us to listen to <i><b>testimonies</b></i>, to listen to the voices who are ready for change, so that we may be reminded—again—just how overdue this legislation is. + Today—I hope everyone in this room joins us in doing the <i><b>right thing.</b></i> - Thank you, Mister Chair and members of the committee. I hope you report this bill favorably to full committee. + We know the questions, and we'll answer them if asked. But I encourage us to listen to <i><b>testimonies</b></i>, to listen to the voices who are ready for change, so that we may be reminded—again—just how overdue this legislation is. - <hr> + Thank you, Mister Chair and members of the committee. I hope you report this bill favorably to full committee. - == Support and Opposition == + <hr> - === Support === + == Support and Opposition == - • ACLU People Power Fairfax + - • Bridging The Gap In Virginia + === Support === - • Charlottesville Chapter National Organization for Women + • ACLU People Power Fairfax - • Coalition for Justice + • Bridging The Gap In Virginia - • EJUSA Evangelical Network + • Charlottesville Chapter National Organization for Women - • Fighting 4 Freedom + • Coalition for Justice - • Greater Washington (JCRC) + • EJUSA Evangelical Network - • Inmate Support Virginia + • Fighting 4 Freedom - • Interfaith Action for Human Rights (IAHR) + • Greater Washington (JCRC) - • HALT Solitary + • Inmate Support Virginia - • Jewish Community Relations Council of Just Future Project + • Interfaith Action for Human Rights (IAHR) - • Justice & Witness Action Network- VA + • HALT Solitary - • United Church of Christ Central Atlantic Conference + • Jewish Community Relations Council of Just Future Project - • LatinoJustice PRLDEF + • Justice & Witness Action Network- VA - • NAACP Loudoun + • United Church of Christ Central Atlantic Conference - • National Association of Social Workers + • LatinoJustice PRLDEF - • National Association of Social Workers, Virginia Chapter + • NAACP Loudoun - • National Religious Campaign Against Torture + • National Association of Social Workers - • No Left Turns + • National Association of Social Workers, Virginia Chapter - • Resource Information Help for the Disadvantaged and Disenfranchised (RIHD) + • National Religious Campaign Against Torture - • RISE for Youth + • No Left Turns - • RVA Health Alliance for Social Justice and Equity + • Resource Information Help for the Disadvantaged and Disenfranchised (RIHD) - • Social Action Linking Together (SALT) + • RISE for Youth - • Social Workers and Allies Against Solitary Confinement + • RVA Health Alliance for Social Justice and Equity - • The Humanization Project + • Social Action Linking Together (SALT) - • The Sentencing Project + • Social Workers and Allies Against Solitary Confinement - • Unitarian Universalist Legislative Ministry of Virginia + • The Humanization Project - • Unlock the Box Campaign + • The Sentencing Project - • Virginia CURE + • Unitarian Universalist Legislative Ministry of Virginia - • Virginia Defenders for Freedom, Justice & Equality + • Unlock the Box Campaign - • Virginia Justice Democrats + • Virginia CURE - • Virginia Justice for Life + • Virginia Defenders for Freedom, Justice & Equality - • Virginia Justice Alliance + • Virginia Justice Democrats - • Virginia Prisons Accountability Committee + • Virginia Justice for Life - • Virginia Prisoner Of Conscience + • Virginia Justice Alliance - • Virginia Prison Justice Network + • Virginia Prisons Accountability Committee - • WJCC Coalition for Community Justice + • Virginia Prisoner Of Conscience - • 40 Strong + • Virginia Prison Justice Network - + • WJCC Coalition for Community Justice - === Opposition === + • 40 Strong - • (to be updated) + - + === Opposition === - === No Recommendation / Neutral === + • (to be updated) - • (to be updated) + - + === No Recommendation / Neutral === - === No Position Provided === + • (to be updated) - • Department of Corrections + - + === No Position Provided === - <hr> + • Department of Corrections - == Fiscal Impact == + <hr> - No fiscal impact statement is posted for HB35. + - + == Fiscal Impact == - <hr> + No fiscal impact statement is posted for HB35. - == Possible Questions == + <hr> - === TL;DR === + == Possible Questions == - <b>Q1: “Does this end solitary confinement in Virginia?”</b> TL;DR: No—it ends <i>prolonged</i> solitary confinement and sets clear limits, oversight, and due-process rules for any use. <br> + - <b>Q2: “Does this make prisons less safe for staff?”</b> TL;DR: No—HB35 keeps exceptions for imminent threats and requires documentation; it’s about targeted use, not “never.” + === TL;DR === - + <b>Q1: “Does this end solitary confinement in Virginia?”</b> TL;DR: No—it ends <i>prolonged</i> solitary confinement and sets clear limits, oversight, and due-process rules for any use. <br> - <br> + <b>Q2: “Does this make prisons less safe for staff?”</b> TL;DR: No—HB35 keeps exceptions for imminent threats and requires documentation; it’s about targeted use, not “never.” - <b>Q3: “What changes day-to-day?”</b> TL;DR: Frequent reviews, rapid medical/mental health checks, real programming/out-of-cell time, and written accountability when isolation is used. + - + <br> - <br> + <b>Q3: “What changes day-to-day?”</b> TL;DR: Frequent reviews, rapid medical/mental health checks, real programming/out-of-cell time, and written accountability when isolation is used. - <b>Q4: “Can DOC just use ‘lockdowns’ instead?”</b> TL;DR: The bill defines lockdown and regulates it, and the requested amendment strengthens this further by applying the same time limits to lockdown explicitly. + - + <br> - <br> + <b>Q4: “Can DOC just use ‘lockdowns’ instead?”</b> TL;DR: The bill defines lockdown and regulates it, and the requested amendment strengthens this further by applying the same time limits to lockdown explicitly. - === Q1: “What does the bill aim to accomplish?” === + <br> - <b>Answer you can use:</b> HB35 ends prolonged solitary confinement by setting clear time limits and requiring real oversight—regular reviews, rapid medical and mental health evaluations, documentation, and in-person due process when isolation continues. + - + === Q1: “What does the bill aim to accomplish?” === - <br> + <b>Answer you can use:</b> HB35 ends prolonged solitary confinement by setting clear time limits and requiring real oversight—regular reviews, rapid medical and mental health evaluations, documentation, and in-person due process when isolation continues. - === Q2: “How often is placement reviewed?” === + <br> - <b>Answer you can use:</b> Placement is reviewed frequently, including a required 48-hour review cycle with written documentation explaining why less restrictive settings were not used. + - + === Q2: “How often is placement reviewed?” === - <br> + <b>Answer you can use:</b> Placement is reviewed frequently, including a required 48-hour review cycle with written documentation explaining why less restrictive settings were not used. - === Q3: “What health protections are required?” === + <br> - <b>Answer you can use:</b> HB35 requires medical and mental health evaluations by certified professionals within one working day of placement in restorative housing or isolated confinement (with limited exceptions). + - + === Q3: “What health protections are required?” === - <br> + <b>Answer you can use:</b> HB35 requires medical and mental health evaluations by certified professionals within one working day of placement in restorative housing or isolated confinement (with limited exceptions). - === Q4: “Does this stop people from getting programming or recreation?” === + <br> - <b>Answer you can use:</b> No—the bill requires at least four hours of out-of-cell programming or congregate activity daily, plus at least one hour of congregate recreation unless exceptional safety circumstances apply. + - + === Q4: “Does this stop people from getting programming or recreation?” === - <br> + <b>Answer you can use:</b> No—the bill requires at least four hours of out-of-cell programming or congregate activity daily, plus at least one hour of congregate recreation unless exceptional safety circumstances apply. - === Q5: “What stops indefinite ‘lockdowns’?” === + <br> - <b>Answer you can use:</b> Lockdowns that interrupt programming must have a specific documented security purpose, must end as soon as the purpose is served, are time-limited, require approvals to extend or repeat, and must be documented and published. + - + === Q5: “What stops indefinite ‘lockdowns’?” === - <hr> + <b>Answer you can use:</b> Lockdowns that interrupt programming must have a specific documented security purpose, must end as soon as the purpose is served, are time-limited, require approvals to extend or repeat, and must be documented and published. - == Additional Information == + <hr> - <b>1. Definitions are the enforcement backbone</b> + - • The bill defines isolated confinement and lockdown by hours-per-day and loss of programming, so policy can’t be evaded by unit names. + == Additional Information == - + <b>1. Definitions are the enforcement backbone</b> - + • The bill defines isolated confinement and lockdown by hours-per-day and loss of programming, so policy can’t be evaded by unit names. - <b>Policy implication:</b> Regulates conditions, not labels. + - <br> + <b>Policy implication:</b> Regulates conditions, not labels. - <b>2. The “less restrictive first” rule targets protective-custody misuse</b> + <br> - • For “own protection” placements, the facility must use less restrictive options first, including transfers or special-purpose housing for similarly threatened individuals, unless infeasible. + - + <b>2. The “less restrictive first” rule targets protective-custody misuse</b> - <b>Policy implication:</b> Safety without defaulting to isolation. + • For “own protection” placements, the facility must use less restrictive options first, including transfers or special-purpose housing for similarly threatened individuals, unless infeasible. - <br> + <b>Policy implication:</b> Safety without defaulting to isolation. - <b>3. Reviews + documentation create accountability</b> + <br> - • Requires regular reviews, documentation in the institutional file, notice up the chain, and formal in-person reviews with appeal rights. + - + <b>3. Reviews + documentation create accountability</b> - <b>Policy implication:</b> Isolation becomes a documented exception, not a routine. + • Requires regular reviews, documentation in the institutional file, notice up the chain, and formal in-person reviews with appeal rights. - <br> + <b>Policy implication:</b> Isolation becomes a documented exception, not a routine. - <b>4. Lockdown limits matter because lockdown can function like solitary</b> + <br> - • The bill regulates lockdowns that interrupt programming and requires publication of documentation. + - + <b>4. Lockdown limits matter because lockdown can function like solitary</b> - + • The bill regulates lockdowns that interrupt programming and requires publication of documentation. - <b>Policy implication:</b> Prevents “unit-wide solitary” from becoming the workaround. + - [[Category:2026 Session]] + <b>Policy implication:</b> Prevents “unit-wide solitary” from becoming the workaround. + + [[Category:2026 Session]]
2026-01-22 06:33:26
Edited by: 74.110.183.75
Edited by: 74.110.183.75
= HB35 Restorative housing and isolated confinement; restrictions on use. = == Status == [https://house.vga.virginia.gov/subcommittees/H15002/agendas/5187 Public Safety | Subcommittee #2 — agenda] <hr> == Overview == === Summary as Introduced === <b>Restorative housing and isolated confinement; restrictions on use.</b> Prohibits the use of isolated confinement, defined in the bill, in state correctional facilities, subject to certain exceptions. The bill requires that before placing an incarcerated person in restorative housing or isolated confinement for his own protection, the facility administrator shall place an incarcerated person in a less-restrictive setting, including by transferring such person to another institution or to a special-purpose housing unit for incarcerated persons who face similar threats. The bill requires that if an incarcerated person is placed in restorative housing or isolated confinement, such placement shall be reviewed every 48 hours and the facility administrator shall ensure that the incarcerated person receives a medical and mental health evaluation from certified medical and mental health professionals within one working day of placement in restorative housing or any form of isolated confinement. The bill also requires the facility administrator to notify the regional administrator in writing that an incarcerated person was placed in restorative housing or isolated confinement within 24 hours of such placement. Finally, the bill requires that formal reviews of an incarcerated person's placement in any form of isolated confinement shall be held in such person's presence, inform him of any reasons administrative officials believe isolated confinement remains necessary, and give the incarcerated person an opportunity to respond to those reasons, and a formal ruling shall be provided to the incarcerated individual within 24 hours. <hr> === Patrons === ==== House Patrons ==== • Joshua G. Cole (chief patron) • Patrick A. Hope • Sam Rasoul • Holly Seibold ==== Senate Patrons ==== • Bagby <hr> == Language == The language of [https://lis.virginia.gov/bill-details/20261/HB35/text/HB35 HB35] can be viewed here. <hr> == Proposed Amendment == === Amendment Offered for Consideration (requested for subcommittee) === ==== Add “Lockdown” throughout relevant provisions ==== Amend the bill to explicitly include “lockdown” alongside “solitary confinement/isolated confinement” and “restorative housing” in all relevant sections, to prevent facilities from using unit-wide lockdown practices as a functional substitute for individual isolated confinement. ==== Strengthen the time-limit clause (close the cumulative-days gap) ==== Replace the current time-limit phrasing with: “No individual shall be held in solitary confinement, lockdown, or restorative housing for more than 15 consecutive days, nor 15 days in any 60-day period.” <b>Purpose of the amendment:</b> The introduced text already uses “15 consecutive days…in any 60-day period,” but stakeholders have raised concerns that “consecutive” language can be worked around by cycling people in and out (or shifting to lockdown practices) without ever hitting a “consecutive” threshold. The amendment makes the limit explicitly <i>both</i> consecutive and cumulative. <hr> == Opening Statement == === House Subcommittee Statement === - ** Notes on delivery: <b>bold</b>—emphasize, increase volume; <i>italicized</i>—stressed, extended pronunciation; <i><b>bold italicized</i></b>—climactic, stressed and emphatic; • bulleted—drum-like repetition. + ** Notes on delivery: - + <b>bold</b>—emphasize, increase volume; - Mister Chair, members of the subcommittee— + <i>italicized</i>—stressed, extended pronunciation; - + <i><b>bold italicized</i></b>—climactic, stressed and emphatic; - <i>This is not our first time here.</i> + • bulleted—drum-like repetition. - For <b>two straight years</b>, the General Assembly has passed this reform. + Mister Chair, members of the subcommittee— - <b>In 2024</b>, I gave you a sermon... and then we passed HB 1244. + <i>This is not our first time here.</i> - <b>In 2025</b>, my sister, my friend, and my colleague, <b>Delegate Keys-Gamarra</b>, took up the torch... and then we passed HB 2647. + For <b>two straight years</b>, the General Assembly has passed this reform. - Twice, this body has said—<i><b>clearly</b></i>—that we are ready to turn the page on solitary confinement. + <b>In 2024</b>, I gave you a sermon... and then we passed HB 1244. - And after two straight years, nobody can pretend this is new... + <b>In 2025</b>, my sister, my friend, and my colleague, <b>Delegate Keys-Gamarra</b>, took up the torch... and then we passed HB 2647. - • You know this bill. + Twice, this body has said—<i><b>clearly</b></i>—that we are ready to turn the page on solitary confinement. - • You know this issue. + - • And you know how overdue this change is. + And after two straight years, nobody can pretend this is new... - Mister Chair, members of the committee, this is not our first time here, <b>BUT it will be our last</b>—because this year <i>we will make history.</i> + • You know this bill. - + • You know this issue. - And what is so great about this year is that we all have a <i>chance</i>—a <i>chance</i> to be part of making history. + • And you know how overdue this change is. - If you're still on the fence, I want you to look <i>forward</i> into the future with me. <b>Don't let the past hold you back...</b> + Mister Chair, members of the committee, this is not our first time here, <b>BUT it will be our last</b>—because this year <i>we will make history.</i> - • Because when we look back in 25 years, <b>we will know this legislation was the right thing to do.</b> + And what is so great about this year is that we all have a <i>chance</i>—a <i>chance</i> to be part of making history. - • Because when we look back in 50 years, <b>we will know this legislation was the right thing to do.</b> + If you're still on the fence, I want you to look <i>forward</i> into the future with me. <b>Don't let the past hold you back...</b> - • Because when we look back in <b>one-hundred</b> years, <i><b>we will know this legislation was the right thing to do!</b></i> + • Because when we look back in 25 years, <b>we will know this legislation was the right thing to do.</b> - Today—I hope everyone in this room joins us in doing the <i><b>right thing.</b></i> + • Because when we look back in 50 years, <b>we will know this legislation was the right thing to do.</b> - We know the questions, and we'll answer them if asked. But I encourage us to listen to <i><b>testimonies</b></i>, to listen to the voices who are ready for change, so that we may be reminded—again—just how overdue this legislation is. + • Because when we look back in <b>one-hundred</b> years, <i><b>we will know this legislation was the right thing to do!</b></i> - Thank you, Mister Chair and members of the committee. I hope you report this bill favorably to full committee. + Today—I hope everyone in this room joins us in doing the <i><b>right thing.</b></i> - <hr> + We know the questions, and we'll answer them if asked. But I encourage us to listen to <i><b>testimonies</b></i>, to listen to the voices who are ready for change, so that we may be reminded—again—just how overdue this legislation is. - == Support and Opposition == + Thank you, Mister Chair and members of the committee. I hope you report this bill favorably to full committee. - === Support === + <hr> - • ACLU People Power Fairfax + - • Bridging The Gap In Virginia + == Support and Opposition == - • Charlottesville Chapter National Organization for Women + - • Coalition for Justice + === Support === - • EJUSA Evangelical Network + • ACLU People Power Fairfax - • Fighting 4 Freedom + • Bridging The Gap In Virginia - • Greater Washington (JCRC) + • Charlottesville Chapter National Organization for Women - • Inmate Support Virginia + • Coalition for Justice - • Interfaith Action for Human Rights (IAHR) + • EJUSA Evangelical Network - • HALT Solitary + • Fighting 4 Freedom - • Jewish Community Relations Council of Just Future Project + • Greater Washington (JCRC) - • Justice & Witness Action Network- VA + • Inmate Support Virginia - • United Church of Christ Central Atlantic Conference + • Interfaith Action for Human Rights (IAHR) - • LatinoJustice PRLDEF + • HALT Solitary - • NAACP Loudoun + • Jewish Community Relations Council of Just Future Project - • National Association of Social Workers + • Justice & Witness Action Network- VA - • National Association of Social Workers, Virginia Chapter + • United Church of Christ Central Atlantic Conference - • National Religious Campaign Against Torture + • LatinoJustice PRLDEF - • No Left Turns + • NAACP Loudoun - • Resource Information Help for the Disadvantaged and Disenfranchised (RIHD) + • National Association of Social Workers - • RISE for Youth + • National Association of Social Workers, Virginia Chapter - • RVA Health Alliance for Social Justice and Equity + • National Religious Campaign Against Torture - • Social Action Linking Together (SALT) + • No Left Turns - • Social Workers and Allies Against Solitary Confinement + • Resource Information Help for the Disadvantaged and Disenfranchised (RIHD) - • The Humanization Project + • RISE for Youth - • The Sentencing Project + • RVA Health Alliance for Social Justice and Equity - • Unitarian Universalist Legislative Ministry of Virginia + • Social Action Linking Together (SALT) - • Unlock the Box Campaign + • Social Workers and Allies Against Solitary Confinement - • Virginia CURE + • The Humanization Project - • Virginia Defenders for Freedom, Justice & Equality + • The Sentencing Project - • Virginia Justice Democrats + • Unitarian Universalist Legislative Ministry of Virginia - • Virginia Justice for Life + • Unlock the Box Campaign - • Virginia Justice Alliance + • Virginia CURE - • Virginia Prisons Accountability Committee + • Virginia Defenders for Freedom, Justice & Equality - • Virginia Prisoner Of Conscience + • Virginia Justice Democrats - • Virginia Prison Justice Network + • Virginia Justice for Life - • WJCC Coalition for Community Justice + • Virginia Justice Alliance - • 40 Strong + • Virginia Prisons Accountability Committee - + • Virginia Prisoner Of Conscience - === Opposition === + • Virginia Prison Justice Network - • (to be updated) + • WJCC Coalition for Community Justice - + • 40 Strong - === No Recommendation / Neutral === + - • (to be updated) + === Opposition === - + • (to be updated) - === No Position Provided === + - • Department of Corrections + === No Recommendation / Neutral === - + • (to be updated) - <hr> + - + === No Position Provided === - == Fiscal Impact == + • Department of Corrections - No fiscal impact statement is posted for HB35. + - + <hr> - <hr> + - + == Fiscal Impact == - == Possible Questions == + No fiscal impact statement is posted for HB35. - === TL;DR === + <hr> - <b>Q1: “Does this end solitary confinement in Virginia?”</b> TL;DR: No—it ends <i>prolonged</i> solitary confinement and sets clear limits, oversight, and due-process rules for any use. <br> + - <b>Q2: “Does this make prisons less safe for staff?”</b> TL;DR: No—HB35 keeps exceptions for imminent threats and requires documentation; it’s about targeted use, not “never.” + == Possible Questions == - <br> + === TL;DR === - <b>Q3: “What changes day-to-day?”</b> TL;DR: Frequent reviews, rapid medical/mental health checks, real programming/out-of-cell time, and written accountability when isolation is used. + <b>Q1: “Does this end solitary confinement in Virginia?”</b> TL;DR: No—it ends <i>prolonged</i> solitary confinement and sets clear limits, oversight, and due-process rules for any use. <br> - + <b>Q2: “Does this make prisons less safe for staff?”</b> TL;DR: No—HB35 keeps exceptions for imminent threats and requires documentation; it’s about targeted use, not “never.” - <br> + - <b>Q4: “Can DOC just use ‘lockdowns’ instead?”</b> TL;DR: The bill defines lockdown and regulates it, and the requested amendment strengthens this further by applying the same time limits to lockdown explicitly. + <br> - + <b>Q3: “What changes day-to-day?”</b> TL;DR: Frequent reviews, rapid medical/mental health checks, real programming/out-of-cell time, and written accountability when isolation is used. - <br> + - + <br> - === Q1: “What does the bill aim to accomplish?” === + <b>Q4: “Can DOC just use ‘lockdowns’ instead?”</b> TL;DR: The bill defines lockdown and regulates it, and the requested amendment strengthens this further by applying the same time limits to lockdown explicitly. - <b>Answer you can use:</b> HB35 ends prolonged solitary confinement by setting clear time limits and requiring real oversight—regular reviews, rapid medical and mental health evaluations, documentation, and in-person due process when isolation continues. + - + <br> - <br> + - + === Q1: “What does the bill aim to accomplish?” === - === Q2: “How often is placement reviewed?” === + <b>Answer you can use:</b> HB35 ends prolonged solitary confinement by setting clear time limits and requiring real oversight—regular reviews, rapid medical and mental health evaluations, documentation, and in-person due process when isolation continues. - <b>Answer you can use:</b> Placement is reviewed frequently, including a required 48-hour review cycle with written documentation explaining why less restrictive settings were not used. + - + <br> - <br> + - + === Q2: “How often is placement reviewed?” === - === Q3: “What health protections are required?” === + <b>Answer you can use:</b> Placement is reviewed frequently, including a required 48-hour review cycle with written documentation explaining why less restrictive settings were not used. - <b>Answer you can use:</b> HB35 requires medical and mental health evaluations by certified professionals within one working day of placement in restorative housing or isolated confinement (with limited exceptions). + - + <br> - <br> + - + === Q3: “What health protections are required?” === - === Q4: “Does this stop people from getting programming or recreation?” === + <b>Answer you can use:</b> HB35 requires medical and mental health evaluations by certified professionals within one working day of placement in restorative housing or isolated confinement (with limited exceptions). - <b>Answer you can use:</b> No—the bill requires at least four hours of out-of-cell programming or congregate activity daily, plus at least one hour of congregate recreation unless exceptional safety circumstances apply. + - + <br> - <br> + - + === Q4: “Does this stop people from getting programming or recreation?” === - === Q5: “What stops indefinite ‘lockdowns’?” === + <b>Answer you can use:</b> No—the bill requires at least four hours of out-of-cell programming or congregate activity daily, plus at least one hour of congregate recreation unless exceptional safety circumstances apply. - <b>Answer you can use:</b> Lockdowns that interrupt programming must have a specific documented security purpose, must end as soon as the purpose is served, are time-limited, require approvals to extend or repeat, and must be documented and published. + - + <br> - <hr> + - + === Q5: “What stops indefinite ‘lockdowns’?” === - == Additional Information == + <b>Answer you can use:</b> Lockdowns that interrupt programming must have a specific documented security purpose, must end as soon as the purpose is served, are time-limited, require approvals to extend or repeat, and must be documented and published. - <b>1. Definitions are the enforcement backbone</b> + - • The bill defines isolated confinement and lockdown by hours-per-day and loss of programming, so policy can’t be evaded by unit names. + <hr> - + == Additional Information == - <b>Policy implication:</b> Regulates conditions, not labels. + <b>1. Definitions are the enforcement backbone</b> - + • The bill defines isolated confinement and lockdown by hours-per-day and loss of programming, so policy can’t be evaded by unit names. - <br> + - <b>2. The “less restrictive first” rule targets protective-custody misuse</b> + <b>Policy implication:</b> Regulates conditions, not labels. - • For “own protection” placements, the facility must use less restrictive options first, including transfers or special-purpose housing for similarly threatened individuals, unless infeasible. + - + <br> - <b>Policy implication:</b> Safety without defaulting to isolation. + - + <b>2. The “less restrictive first” rule targets protective-custody misuse</b> - <br> + • For “own protection” placements, the facility must use less restrictive options first, including transfers or special-purpose housing for similarly threatened individuals, unless infeasible. - <b>3. Reviews + documentation create accountability</b> + <b>Policy implication:</b> Safety without defaulting to isolation. - • Requires regular reviews, documentation in the institutional file, notice up the chain, and formal in-person reviews with appeal rights. + - + <br> - <b>Policy implication:</b> Isolation becomes a documented exception, not a routine. + - + <b>3. Reviews + documentation create accountability</b> - <br> + • Requires regular reviews, documentation in the institutional file, notice up the chain, and formal in-person reviews with appeal rights. - <b>4. Lockdown limits matter because lockdown can function like solitary</b> + <b>Policy implication:</b> Isolation becomes a documented exception, not a routine. - • The bill regulates lockdowns that interrupt programming and requires publication of documentation. + - + <br> - <b>Policy implication:</b> Prevents “unit-wide solitary” from becoming the workaround. + <b>4. Lockdown limits matter because lockdown can function like solitary</b> - + • The bill regulates lockdowns that interrupt programming and requires publication of documentation. - [[Category:2026 Session]] + + + <b>Policy implication:</b> Prevents “unit-wide solitary” from becoming the workaround. + + [[Category:2026 Session]]
2026-01-22 06:33:10
Edited by: 74.110.183.75
Edited by: 74.110.183.75
= HB35 Restorative housing and isolated confinement; restrictions on use. = == Status == [https://house.vga.virginia.gov/subcommittees/H15002/agendas/5187 Public Safety | Subcommittee #2 — agenda] <hr> == Overview == === Summary as Introduced === <b>Restorative housing and isolated confinement; restrictions on use.</b> Prohibits the use of isolated confinement, defined in the bill, in state correctional facilities, subject to certain exceptions. The bill requires that before placing an incarcerated person in restorative housing or isolated confinement for his own protection, the facility administrator shall place an incarcerated person in a less-restrictive setting, including by transferring such person to another institution or to a special-purpose housing unit for incarcerated persons who face similar threats. The bill requires that if an incarcerated person is placed in restorative housing or isolated confinement, such placement shall be reviewed every 48 hours and the facility administrator shall ensure that the incarcerated person receives a medical and mental health evaluation from certified medical and mental health professionals within one working day of placement in restorative housing or any form of isolated confinement. The bill also requires the facility administrator to notify the regional administrator in writing that an incarcerated person was placed in restorative housing or isolated confinement within 24 hours of such placement. Finally, the bill requires that formal reviews of an incarcerated person's placement in any form of isolated confinement shall be held in such person's presence, inform him of any reasons administrative officials believe isolated confinement remains necessary, and give the incarcerated person an opportunity to respond to those reasons, and a formal ruling shall be provided to the incarcerated individual within 24 hours. <hr> === Patrons === ==== House Patrons ==== • Joshua G. Cole (chief patron) • Patrick A. Hope • Sam Rasoul • Holly Seibold ==== Senate Patrons ==== • Bagby <hr> == Language == The language of [https://lis.virginia.gov/bill-details/20261/HB35/text/HB35 HB35] can be viewed here. <hr> == Proposed Amendment == === Amendment Offered for Consideration (requested for subcommittee) === ==== Add “Lockdown” throughout relevant provisions ==== Amend the bill to explicitly include “lockdown” alongside “solitary confinement/isolated confinement” and “restorative housing” in all relevant sections, to prevent facilities from using unit-wide lockdown practices as a functional substitute for individual isolated confinement. ==== Strengthen the time-limit clause (close the cumulative-days gap) ==== Replace the current time-limit phrasing with: “No individual shall be held in solitary confinement, lockdown, or restorative housing for more than 15 consecutive days, nor 15 days in any 60-day period.” <b>Purpose of the amendment:</b> The introduced text already uses “15 consecutive days…in any 60-day period,” but stakeholders have raised concerns that “consecutive” language can be worked around by cycling people in and out (or shifting to lockdown practices) without ever hitting a “consecutive” threshold. The amendment makes the limit explicitly <i>both</i> consecutive and cumulative. <hr> == Opening Statement == === House Subcommittee Statement === - Mister Chair, members of the subcommittee— + ** Notes on delivery: <b>bold</b>—emphasize, increase volume; <i>italicized</i>—stressed, extended pronunciation; <i><b>bold italicized</i></b>—climactic, stressed and emphatic; • bulleted—drum-like repetition. - <i>This is not our first time here.</i> + Mister Chair, members of the subcommittee— - For <b>two straight years</b>, the General Assembly has passed this reform. + <i>This is not our first time here.</i> - <b>In 2024</b>, I gave you a sermon... and then we passed HB 1244. + For <b>two straight years</b>, the General Assembly has passed this reform. - <b>In 2025</b>, my sister, my friend, and my colleague, <b>Delegate Keys-Gamarra</b>, took up the torch... and then we passed HB 2647. + <b>In 2024</b>, I gave you a sermon... and then we passed HB 1244. - Twice, this body has said—<i><b>clearly</b></i>—that we are ready to turn the page on solitary confinement. + <b>In 2025</b>, my sister, my friend, and my colleague, <b>Delegate Keys-Gamarra</b>, took up the torch... and then we passed HB 2647. - And after two straight years, nobody can pretend this is new... + Twice, this body has said—<i><b>clearly</b></i>—that we are ready to turn the page on solitary confinement. - • You know this bill. + And after two straight years, nobody can pretend this is new... - • You know this issue. + - • And you know how overdue this change is. + • You know this bill. - + • You know this issue. - Mister Chair, members of the committee, this is not our first time here, <b>BUT it will be our last</b>—because this year <i>we will make history.</i> + • And you know how overdue this change is. - And what is so great about this year is that we all have a <i>chance</i>—a <i>chance</i> to be part of making history. + Mister Chair, members of the committee, this is not our first time here, <b>BUT it will be our last</b>—because this year <i>we will make history.</i> - If you're still on the fence, I want you to look <i>forward</i> into the future with me. <b>Don't let the past hold you back...</b> + And what is so great about this year is that we all have a <i>chance</i>—a <i>chance</i> to be part of making history. - • Because when we look back in 25 years, <b>we will know this legislation was the right thing to do.</b> + If you're still on the fence, I want you to look <i>forward</i> into the future with me. <b>Don't let the past hold you back...</b> - • Because when we look back in 50 years, <b>we will know this legislation was the right thing to do.</b> + • Because when we look back in 25 years, <b>we will know this legislation was the right thing to do.</b> - • Because when we look back in <b>one-hundred</b> years, <i><b>we will know this legislation was the right thing to do!</b></i> + • Because when we look back in 50 years, <b>we will know this legislation was the right thing to do.</b> - Today—I hope everyone in this room joins us in doing the <i><b>right thing.</b></i> + • Because when we look back in <b>one-hundred</b> years, <i><b>we will know this legislation was the right thing to do!</b></i> - We know the questions, and we'll answer them if asked. But I encourage us to listen to <i><b>testimonies</b></i>, to listen to the voices who are ready for change, so that we may be reminded—again—just how overdue this legislation is. + Today—I hope everyone in this room joins us in doing the <i><b>right thing.</b></i> - Thank you, Mister Chair and members of the committee. I hope you report this bill favorably to full committee. + We know the questions, and we'll answer them if asked. But I encourage us to listen to <i><b>testimonies</b></i>, to listen to the voices who are ready for change, so that we may be reminded—again—just how overdue this legislation is. - <hr> + Thank you, Mister Chair and members of the committee. I hope you report this bill favorably to full committee. - == Support and Opposition == + <hr> - === Support === + == Support and Opposition == - • ACLU People Power Fairfax + - • Bridging The Gap In Virginia + === Support === - • Charlottesville Chapter National Organization for Women + • ACLU People Power Fairfax - • Coalition for Justice + • Bridging The Gap In Virginia - • EJUSA Evangelical Network + • Charlottesville Chapter National Organization for Women - • Fighting 4 Freedom + • Coalition for Justice - • Greater Washington (JCRC) + • EJUSA Evangelical Network - • Inmate Support Virginia + • Fighting 4 Freedom - • Interfaith Action for Human Rights (IAHR) + • Greater Washington (JCRC) - • HALT Solitary + • Inmate Support Virginia - • Jewish Community Relations Council of Just Future Project + • Interfaith Action for Human Rights (IAHR) - • Justice & Witness Action Network- VA + • HALT Solitary - • United Church of Christ Central Atlantic Conference + • Jewish Community Relations Council of Just Future Project - • LatinoJustice PRLDEF + • Justice & Witness Action Network- VA - • NAACP Loudoun + • United Church of Christ Central Atlantic Conference - • National Association of Social Workers + • LatinoJustice PRLDEF - • National Association of Social Workers, Virginia Chapter + • NAACP Loudoun - • National Religious Campaign Against Torture + • National Association of Social Workers - • No Left Turns + • National Association of Social Workers, Virginia Chapter - • Resource Information Help for the Disadvantaged and Disenfranchised (RIHD) + • National Religious Campaign Against Torture - • RISE for Youth + • No Left Turns - • RVA Health Alliance for Social Justice and Equity + • Resource Information Help for the Disadvantaged and Disenfranchised (RIHD) - • Social Action Linking Together (SALT) + • RISE for Youth - • Social Workers and Allies Against Solitary Confinement + • RVA Health Alliance for Social Justice and Equity - • The Humanization Project + • Social Action Linking Together (SALT) - • The Sentencing Project + • Social Workers and Allies Against Solitary Confinement - • Unitarian Universalist Legislative Ministry of Virginia + • The Humanization Project - • Unlock the Box Campaign + • The Sentencing Project - • Virginia CURE + • Unitarian Universalist Legislative Ministry of Virginia - • Virginia Defenders for Freedom, Justice & Equality + • Unlock the Box Campaign - • Virginia Justice Democrats + • Virginia CURE - • Virginia Justice for Life + • Virginia Defenders for Freedom, Justice & Equality - • Virginia Justice Alliance + • Virginia Justice Democrats - • Virginia Prisons Accountability Committee + • Virginia Justice for Life - • Virginia Prisoner Of Conscience + • Virginia Justice Alliance - • Virginia Prison Justice Network + • Virginia Prisons Accountability Committee - • WJCC Coalition for Community Justice + • Virginia Prisoner Of Conscience - • 40 Strong + • Virginia Prison Justice Network - + • WJCC Coalition for Community Justice - === Opposition === + • 40 Strong - • (to be updated) + - + === Opposition === - === No Recommendation / Neutral === + • (to be updated) - • (to be updated) + - + === No Recommendation / Neutral === - === No Position Provided === + • (to be updated) - • Department of Corrections + - + === No Position Provided === - <hr> + • Department of Corrections - == Fiscal Impact == + <hr> - No fiscal impact statement is posted for HB35. + - + == Fiscal Impact == - <hr> + No fiscal impact statement is posted for HB35. - == Possible Questions == + <hr> - === TL;DR === + == Possible Questions == - <b>Q1: “Does this end solitary confinement in Virginia?”</b> TL;DR: No—it ends <i>prolonged</i> solitary confinement and sets clear limits, oversight, and due-process rules for any use. <br> + - <b>Q2: “Does this make prisons less safe for staff?”</b> TL;DR: No—HB35 keeps exceptions for imminent threats and requires documentation; it’s about targeted use, not “never.” + === TL;DR === - + <b>Q1: “Does this end solitary confinement in Virginia?”</b> TL;DR: No—it ends <i>prolonged</i> solitary confinement and sets clear limits, oversight, and due-process rules for any use. <br> - <br> + <b>Q2: “Does this make prisons less safe for staff?”</b> TL;DR: No—HB35 keeps exceptions for imminent threats and requires documentation; it’s about targeted use, not “never.” - <b>Q3: “What changes day-to-day?”</b> TL;DR: Frequent reviews, rapid medical/mental health checks, real programming/out-of-cell time, and written accountability when isolation is used. + - + <br> - <br> + <b>Q3: “What changes day-to-day?”</b> TL;DR: Frequent reviews, rapid medical/mental health checks, real programming/out-of-cell time, and written accountability when isolation is used. - <b>Q4: “Can DOC just use ‘lockdowns’ instead?”</b> TL;DR: The bill defines lockdown and regulates it, and the requested amendment strengthens this further by applying the same time limits to lockdown explicitly. + - + <br> - <br> + <b>Q4: “Can DOC just use ‘lockdowns’ instead?”</b> TL;DR: The bill defines lockdown and regulates it, and the requested amendment strengthens this further by applying the same time limits to lockdown explicitly. - === Q1: “What does the bill aim to accomplish?” === + <br> - <b>Answer you can use:</b> HB35 ends prolonged solitary confinement by setting clear time limits and requiring real oversight—regular reviews, rapid medical and mental health evaluations, documentation, and in-person due process when isolation continues. + - + === Q1: “What does the bill aim to accomplish?” === - <br> + <b>Answer you can use:</b> HB35 ends prolonged solitary confinement by setting clear time limits and requiring real oversight—regular reviews, rapid medical and mental health evaluations, documentation, and in-person due process when isolation continues. - === Q2: “How often is placement reviewed?” === + <br> - <b>Answer you can use:</b> Placement is reviewed frequently, including a required 48-hour review cycle with written documentation explaining why less restrictive settings were not used. + - + === Q2: “How often is placement reviewed?” === - <br> + <b>Answer you can use:</b> Placement is reviewed frequently, including a required 48-hour review cycle with written documentation explaining why less restrictive settings were not used. - === Q3: “What health protections are required?” === + <br> - <b>Answer you can use:</b> HB35 requires medical and mental health evaluations by certified professionals within one working day of placement in restorative housing or isolated confinement (with limited exceptions). + - + === Q3: “What health protections are required?” === - <br> + <b>Answer you can use:</b> HB35 requires medical and mental health evaluations by certified professionals within one working day of placement in restorative housing or isolated confinement (with limited exceptions). - === Q4: “Does this stop people from getting programming or recreation?” === + <br> - <b>Answer you can use:</b> No—the bill requires at least four hours of out-of-cell programming or congregate activity daily, plus at least one hour of congregate recreation unless exceptional safety circumstances apply. + - + === Q4: “Does this stop people from getting programming or recreation?” === - <br> + <b>Answer you can use:</b> No—the bill requires at least four hours of out-of-cell programming or congregate activity daily, plus at least one hour of congregate recreation unless exceptional safety circumstances apply. - === Q5: “What stops indefinite ‘lockdowns’?” === + <br> - <b>Answer you can use:</b> Lockdowns that interrupt programming must have a specific documented security purpose, must end as soon as the purpose is served, are time-limited, require approvals to extend or repeat, and must be documented and published. + - + === Q5: “What stops indefinite ‘lockdowns’?” === - <hr> + <b>Answer you can use:</b> Lockdowns that interrupt programming must have a specific documented security purpose, must end as soon as the purpose is served, are time-limited, require approvals to extend or repeat, and must be documented and published. - == Additional Information == + <hr> - <b>1. Definitions are the enforcement backbone</b> + - • The bill defines isolated confinement and lockdown by hours-per-day and loss of programming, so policy can’t be evaded by unit names. + == Additional Information == - + <b>1. Definitions are the enforcement backbone</b> - + • The bill defines isolated confinement and lockdown by hours-per-day and loss of programming, so policy can’t be evaded by unit names. - <b>Policy implication:</b> Regulates conditions, not labels. + - <br> + <b>Policy implication:</b> Regulates conditions, not labels. - <b>2. The “less restrictive first” rule targets protective-custody misuse</b> + <br> - • For “own protection” placements, the facility must use less restrictive options first, including transfers or special-purpose housing for similarly threatened individuals, unless infeasible. + - + <b>2. The “less restrictive first” rule targets protective-custody misuse</b> - <b>Policy implication:</b> Safety without defaulting to isolation. + • For “own protection” placements, the facility must use less restrictive options first, including transfers or special-purpose housing for similarly threatened individuals, unless infeasible. - <br> + <b>Policy implication:</b> Safety without defaulting to isolation. - <b>3. Reviews + documentation create accountability</b> + <br> - • Requires regular reviews, documentation in the institutional file, notice up the chain, and formal in-person reviews with appeal rights. + - + <b>3. Reviews + documentation create accountability</b> - <b>Policy implication:</b> Isolation becomes a documented exception, not a routine. + • Requires regular reviews, documentation in the institutional file, notice up the chain, and formal in-person reviews with appeal rights. - <br> + <b>Policy implication:</b> Isolation becomes a documented exception, not a routine. - <b>4. Lockdown limits matter because lockdown can function like solitary</b> + <br> - • The bill regulates lockdowns that interrupt programming and requires publication of documentation. + - + <b>4. Lockdown limits matter because lockdown can function like solitary</b> - + • The bill regulates lockdowns that interrupt programming and requires publication of documentation. - <b>Policy implication:</b> Prevents “unit-wide solitary” from becoming the workaround. + - [[Category:2026 Session]] + <b>Policy implication:</b> Prevents “unit-wide solitary” from becoming the workaround. + + [[Category:2026 Session]]
2026-01-22 06:32:47
Edited by: 74.110.183.75
Edited by: 74.110.183.75
= HB35 Restorative housing and isolated confinement; restrictions on use. = == Status == [https://house.vga.virginia.gov/subcommittees/H15002/agendas/5187 Public Safety | Subcommittee #2 — agenda] <hr> == Overview == === Summary as Introduced === <b>Restorative housing and isolated confinement; restrictions on use.</b> Prohibits the use of isolated confinement, defined in the bill, in state correctional facilities, subject to certain exceptions. The bill requires that before placing an incarcerated person in restorative housing or isolated confinement for his own protection, the facility administrator shall place an incarcerated person in a less-restrictive setting, including by transferring such person to another institution or to a special-purpose housing unit for incarcerated persons who face similar threats. The bill requires that if an incarcerated person is placed in restorative housing or isolated confinement, such placement shall be reviewed every 48 hours and the facility administrator shall ensure that the incarcerated person receives a medical and mental health evaluation from certified medical and mental health professionals within one working day of placement in restorative housing or any form of isolated confinement. The bill also requires the facility administrator to notify the regional administrator in writing that an incarcerated person was placed in restorative housing or isolated confinement within 24 hours of such placement. Finally, the bill requires that formal reviews of an incarcerated person's placement in any form of isolated confinement shall be held in such person's presence, inform him of any reasons administrative officials believe isolated confinement remains necessary, and give the incarcerated person an opportunity to respond to those reasons, and a formal ruling shall be provided to the incarcerated individual within 24 hours. <hr> === Patrons === ==== House Patrons ==== • Joshua G. Cole (chief patron) • Patrick A. Hope • Sam Rasoul • Holly Seibold ==== Senate Patrons ==== • Bagby <hr> == Language == The language of [https://lis.virginia.gov/bill-details/20261/HB35/text/HB35 HB35] can be viewed here. <hr> == Proposed Amendment == === Amendment Offered for Consideration (requested for subcommittee) === ==== Add “Lockdown” throughout relevant provisions ==== Amend the bill to explicitly include “lockdown” alongside “solitary confinement/isolated confinement” and “restorative housing” in all relevant sections, to prevent facilities from using unit-wide lockdown practices as a functional substitute for individual isolated confinement. ==== Strengthen the time-limit clause (close the cumulative-days gap) ==== Replace the current time-limit phrasing with: “No individual shall be held in solitary confinement, lockdown, or restorative housing for more than 15 consecutive days, nor 15 days in any 60-day period.” <b>Purpose of the amendment:</b> The introduced text already uses “15 consecutive days…in any 60-day period,” but stakeholders have raised concerns that “consecutive” language can be worked around by cycling people in and out (or shifting to lockdown practices) without ever hitting a “consecutive” threshold. The amendment makes the limit explicitly <i>both</i> consecutive and cumulative. <hr> == Opening Statement == === House Subcommittee Statement === Mister Chair, members of the subcommittee— <i>This is not our first time here.</i> For <b>two straight years</b>, the General Assembly has passed this reform. <b>In 2024</b>, I gave you a sermon... and then we passed HB 1244. <b>In 2025</b>, my sister, my friend, and my colleague, <b>Delegate Keys-Gamarra</b>, took up the torch... and then we passed HB 2647. Twice, this body has said—<i><b>clearly</b></i>—that we are ready to turn the page on solitary confinement. And after two straight years, nobody can pretend this is new... • You know this bill. • You know this issue. • And you know how overdue this change is. Mister Chair, members of the committee, this is not our first time here, <b>BUT it will be our last</b>—because this year <i>we will make history.</i> And what is so great about this year is that we all have a <i>chance</i>—a <i>chance</i> to be part of making history. - If you're still on the fence, I want you to look forward into the future with me. <i>Don't let the past hold you back...</i> + If you're still on the fence, I want you to look <i>forward</i> into the future with me. <b>Don't let the past hold you back...</b> • Because when we look back in 25 years, <b>we will know this legislation was the right thing to do.</b> • Because when we look back in 50 years, <b>we will know this legislation was the right thing to do.</b> • Because when we look back in <b>one-hundred</b> years, <i><b>we will know this legislation was the right thing to do!</b></i> Today—I hope everyone in this room joins us in doing the <i><b>right thing.</b></i> We know the questions, and we'll answer them if asked. But I encourage us to listen to <i><b>testimonies</b></i>, to listen to the voices who are ready for change, so that we may be reminded—again—just how overdue this legislation is. Thank you, Mister Chair and members of the committee. I hope you report this bill favorably to full committee. <hr> == Support and Opposition == === Support === • ACLU People Power Fairfax • Bridging The Gap In Virginia • Charlottesville Chapter National Organization for Women • Coalition for Justice • EJUSA Evangelical Network • Fighting 4 Freedom • Greater Washington (JCRC) • Inmate Support Virginia • Interfaith Action for Human Rights (IAHR) • HALT Solitary • Jewish Community Relations Council of Just Future Project • Justice & Witness Action Network- VA • United Church of Christ Central Atlantic Conference • LatinoJustice PRLDEF • NAACP Loudoun • National Association of Social Workers • National Association of Social Workers, Virginia Chapter • National Religious Campaign Against Torture • No Left Turns • Resource Information Help for the Disadvantaged and Disenfranchised (RIHD) • RISE for Youth • RVA Health Alliance for Social Justice and Equity • Social Action Linking Together (SALT) • Social Workers and Allies Against Solitary Confinement • The Humanization Project • The Sentencing Project • Unitarian Universalist Legislative Ministry of Virginia • Unlock the Box Campaign • Virginia CURE • Virginia Defenders for Freedom, Justice & Equality • Virginia Justice Democrats • Virginia Justice for Life • Virginia Justice Alliance • Virginia Prisons Accountability Committee • Virginia Prisoner Of Conscience • Virginia Prison Justice Network • WJCC Coalition for Community Justice • 40 Strong === Opposition === • (to be updated) === No Recommendation / Neutral === • (to be updated) === No Position Provided === • Department of Corrections <hr> == Fiscal Impact == No fiscal impact statement is posted for HB35. <hr> == Possible Questions == === TL;DR === <b>Q1: “Does this end solitary confinement in Virginia?”</b> TL;DR: No—it ends <i>prolonged</i> solitary confinement and sets clear limits, oversight, and due-process rules for any use. <br> <b>Q2: “Does this make prisons less safe for staff?”</b> TL;DR: No—HB35 keeps exceptions for imminent threats and requires documentation; it’s about targeted use, not “never.” <br> <b>Q3: “What changes day-to-day?”</b> TL;DR: Frequent reviews, rapid medical/mental health checks, real programming/out-of-cell time, and written accountability when isolation is used. <br> <b>Q4: “Can DOC just use ‘lockdowns’ instead?”</b> TL;DR: The bill defines lockdown and regulates it, and the requested amendment strengthens this further by applying the same time limits to lockdown explicitly. <br> === Q1: “What does the bill aim to accomplish?” === <b>Answer you can use:</b> HB35 ends prolonged solitary confinement by setting clear time limits and requiring real oversight—regular reviews, rapid medical and mental health evaluations, documentation, and in-person due process when isolation continues. <br> === Q2: “How often is placement reviewed?” === <b>Answer you can use:</b> Placement is reviewed frequently, including a required 48-hour review cycle with written documentation explaining why less restrictive settings were not used. <br> === Q3: “What health protections are required?” === <b>Answer you can use:</b> HB35 requires medical and mental health evaluations by certified professionals within one working day of placement in restorative housing or isolated confinement (with limited exceptions). <br> === Q4: “Does this stop people from getting programming or recreation?” === <b>Answer you can use:</b> No—the bill requires at least four hours of out-of-cell programming or congregate activity daily, plus at least one hour of congregate recreation unless exceptional safety circumstances apply. <br> === Q5: “What stops indefinite ‘lockdowns’?” === <b>Answer you can use:</b> Lockdowns that interrupt programming must have a specific documented security purpose, must end as soon as the purpose is served, are time-limited, require approvals to extend or repeat, and must be documented and published. <hr> == Additional Information == <b>1. Definitions are the enforcement backbone</b> • The bill defines isolated confinement and lockdown by hours-per-day and loss of programming, so policy can’t be evaded by unit names. <b>Policy implication:</b> Regulates conditions, not labels. <br> <b>2. The “less restrictive first” rule targets protective-custody misuse</b> • For “own protection” placements, the facility must use less restrictive options first, including transfers or special-purpose housing for similarly threatened individuals, unless infeasible. <b>Policy implication:</b> Safety without defaulting to isolation. <br> <b>3. Reviews + documentation create accountability</b> • Requires regular reviews, documentation in the institutional file, notice up the chain, and formal in-person reviews with appeal rights. <b>Policy implication:</b> Isolation becomes a documented exception, not a routine. <br> <b>4. Lockdown limits matter because lockdown can function like solitary</b> • The bill regulates lockdowns that interrupt programming and requires publication of documentation. <b>Policy implication:</b> Prevents “unit-wide solitary” from becoming the workaround. [[Category:2026 Session]]
2026-01-22 06:29:04
Edited by: 74.110.183.75
Edited by: 74.110.183.75
= HB35 Restorative housing and isolated confinement; restrictions on use. = == Status == [https://house.vga.virginia.gov/subcommittees/H15002/agendas/5187 Public Safety | Subcommittee #2 — agenda] <hr> == Overview == === Summary as Introduced === <b>Restorative housing and isolated confinement; restrictions on use.</b> Prohibits the use of isolated confinement, defined in the bill, in state correctional facilities, subject to certain exceptions. The bill requires that before placing an incarcerated person in restorative housing or isolated confinement for his own protection, the facility administrator shall place an incarcerated person in a less-restrictive setting, including by transferring such person to another institution or to a special-purpose housing unit for incarcerated persons who face similar threats. The bill requires that if an incarcerated person is placed in restorative housing or isolated confinement, such placement shall be reviewed every 48 hours and the facility administrator shall ensure that the incarcerated person receives a medical and mental health evaluation from certified medical and mental health professionals within one working day of placement in restorative housing or any form of isolated confinement. The bill also requires the facility administrator to notify the regional administrator in writing that an incarcerated person was placed in restorative housing or isolated confinement within 24 hours of such placement. Finally, the bill requires that formal reviews of an incarcerated person's placement in any form of isolated confinement shall be held in such person's presence, inform him of any reasons administrative officials believe isolated confinement remains necessary, and give the incarcerated person an opportunity to respond to those reasons, and a formal ruling shall be provided to the incarcerated individual within 24 hours. <hr> === Patrons === ==== House Patrons ==== • Joshua G. Cole (chief patron) • Patrick A. Hope • Sam Rasoul • Holly Seibold ==== Senate Patrons ==== • Bagby <hr> == Language == The language of [https://lis.virginia.gov/bill-details/20261/HB35/text/HB35 HB35] can be viewed here. <hr> == Proposed Amendment == === Amendment Offered for Consideration (requested for subcommittee) === ==== Add “Lockdown” throughout relevant provisions ==== Amend the bill to explicitly include “lockdown” alongside “solitary confinement/isolated confinement” and “restorative housing” in all relevant sections, to prevent facilities from using unit-wide lockdown practices as a functional substitute for individual isolated confinement. ==== Strengthen the time-limit clause (close the cumulative-days gap) ==== Replace the current time-limit phrasing with: “No individual shall be held in solitary confinement, lockdown, or restorative housing for more than 15 consecutive days, nor 15 days in any 60-day period.” <b>Purpose of the amendment:</b> The introduced text already uses “15 consecutive days…in any 60-day period,” but stakeholders have raised concerns that “consecutive” language can be worked around by cycling people in and out (or shifting to lockdown practices) without ever hitting a “consecutive” threshold. The amendment makes the limit explicitly <i>both</i> consecutive and cumulative. <hr> == Opening Statement == === House Subcommittee Statement === Mister Chair, members of the subcommittee— <i>This is not our first time here.</i> For <b>two straight years</b>, the General Assembly has passed this reform. <b>In 2024</b>, I gave you a sermon... and then we passed HB 1244. <b>In 2025</b>, my sister, my friend, and my colleague, <b>Delegate Keys-Gamarra</b>, took up the torch... and then we passed HB 2647. Twice, this body has said—<i><b>clearly</b></i>—that we are ready to turn the page on solitary confinement. And after two straight years, nobody can pretend this is new... • You know this bill. • You know this issue. • And you know how overdue this change is. Mister Chair, members of the committee, this is not our first time here, <b>BUT it will be our last</b>—because this year <i>we will make history.</i> And what is so great about this year is that we all have a <i>chance</i>—a <i>chance</i> to be part of making history. - If you're still on the fence, I want you to look forward into the future with me. <b>Don't let the past hold you back...</b> + If you're still on the fence, I want you to look forward into the future with me. <i>Don't let the past hold you back...</i> • Because when we look back in 25 years, <b>we will know this legislation was the right thing to do.</b> • Because when we look back in 50 years, <b>we will know this legislation was the right thing to do.</b> • Because when we look back in <b>one-hundred</b> years, <i><b>we will know this legislation was the right thing to do!</b></i> Today—I hope everyone in this room joins us in doing the <i><b>right thing.</b></i> We know the questions, and we'll answer them if asked. But I encourage us to listen to <i><b>testimonies</b></i>, to listen to the voices who are ready for change, so that we may be reminded—again—just how overdue this legislation is. Thank you, Mister Chair and members of the committee. I hope you report this bill favorably to full committee. <hr> == Support and Opposition == === Support === • ACLU People Power Fairfax • Bridging The Gap In Virginia • Charlottesville Chapter National Organization for Women • Coalition for Justice • EJUSA Evangelical Network • Fighting 4 Freedom • Greater Washington (JCRC) • Inmate Support Virginia • Interfaith Action for Human Rights (IAHR) • HALT Solitary • Jewish Community Relations Council of Just Future Project • Justice & Witness Action Network- VA • United Church of Christ Central Atlantic Conference • LatinoJustice PRLDEF • NAACP Loudoun • National Association of Social Workers • National Association of Social Workers, Virginia Chapter • National Religious Campaign Against Torture • No Left Turns • Resource Information Help for the Disadvantaged and Disenfranchised (RIHD) • RISE for Youth • RVA Health Alliance for Social Justice and Equity • Social Action Linking Together (SALT) • Social Workers and Allies Against Solitary Confinement • The Humanization Project • The Sentencing Project • Unitarian Universalist Legislative Ministry of Virginia • Unlock the Box Campaign • Virginia CURE • Virginia Defenders for Freedom, Justice & Equality • Virginia Justice Democrats • Virginia Justice for Life • Virginia Justice Alliance • Virginia Prisons Accountability Committee • Virginia Prisoner Of Conscience • Virginia Prison Justice Network • WJCC Coalition for Community Justice • 40 Strong === Opposition === • (to be updated) === No Recommendation / Neutral === • (to be updated) === No Position Provided === • Department of Corrections <hr> == Fiscal Impact == No fiscal impact statement is posted for HB35. <hr> == Possible Questions == === TL;DR === <b>Q1: “Does this end solitary confinement in Virginia?”</b> TL;DR: No—it ends <i>prolonged</i> solitary confinement and sets clear limits, oversight, and due-process rules for any use. <br> <b>Q2: “Does this make prisons less safe for staff?”</b> TL;DR: No—HB35 keeps exceptions for imminent threats and requires documentation; it’s about targeted use, not “never.” <br> <b>Q3: “What changes day-to-day?”</b> TL;DR: Frequent reviews, rapid medical/mental health checks, real programming/out-of-cell time, and written accountability when isolation is used. <br> <b>Q4: “Can DOC just use ‘lockdowns’ instead?”</b> TL;DR: The bill defines lockdown and regulates it, and the requested amendment strengthens this further by applying the same time limits to lockdown explicitly. <br> === Q1: “What does the bill aim to accomplish?” === <b>Answer you can use:</b> HB35 ends prolonged solitary confinement by setting clear time limits and requiring real oversight—regular reviews, rapid medical and mental health evaluations, documentation, and in-person due process when isolation continues. <br> === Q2: “How often is placement reviewed?” === <b>Answer you can use:</b> Placement is reviewed frequently, including a required 48-hour review cycle with written documentation explaining why less restrictive settings were not used. <br> === Q3: “What health protections are required?” === <b>Answer you can use:</b> HB35 requires medical and mental health evaluations by certified professionals within one working day of placement in restorative housing or isolated confinement (with limited exceptions). <br> === Q4: “Does this stop people from getting programming or recreation?” === <b>Answer you can use:</b> No—the bill requires at least four hours of out-of-cell programming or congregate activity daily, plus at least one hour of congregate recreation unless exceptional safety circumstances apply. <br> === Q5: “What stops indefinite ‘lockdowns’?” === <b>Answer you can use:</b> Lockdowns that interrupt programming must have a specific documented security purpose, must end as soon as the purpose is served, are time-limited, require approvals to extend or repeat, and must be documented and published. <hr> == Additional Information == <b>1. Definitions are the enforcement backbone</b> • The bill defines isolated confinement and lockdown by hours-per-day and loss of programming, so policy can’t be evaded by unit names. <b>Policy implication:</b> Regulates conditions, not labels. <br> <b>2. The “less restrictive first” rule targets protective-custody misuse</b> • For “own protection” placements, the facility must use less restrictive options first, including transfers or special-purpose housing for similarly threatened individuals, unless infeasible. <b>Policy implication:</b> Safety without defaulting to isolation. <br> <b>3. Reviews + documentation create accountability</b> • Requires regular reviews, documentation in the institutional file, notice up the chain, and formal in-person reviews with appeal rights. <b>Policy implication:</b> Isolation becomes a documented exception, not a routine. <br> <b>4. Lockdown limits matter because lockdown can function like solitary</b> • The bill regulates lockdowns that interrupt programming and requires publication of documentation. <b>Policy implication:</b> Prevents “unit-wide solitary” from becoming the workaround. [[Category:2026 Session]]
2026-01-22 06:28:28
Edited by: 74.110.183.75
Edited by: 74.110.183.75
= HB35 Restorative housing and isolated confinement; restrictions on use. = == Status == [https://house.vga.virginia.gov/subcommittees/H15002/agendas/5187 Public Safety | Subcommittee #2 — agenda] <hr> == Overview == === Summary as Introduced === <b>Restorative housing and isolated confinement; restrictions on use.</b> Prohibits the use of isolated confinement, defined in the bill, in state correctional facilities, subject to certain exceptions. The bill requires that before placing an incarcerated person in restorative housing or isolated confinement for his own protection, the facility administrator shall place an incarcerated person in a less-restrictive setting, including by transferring such person to another institution or to a special-purpose housing unit for incarcerated persons who face similar threats. The bill requires that if an incarcerated person is placed in restorative housing or isolated confinement, such placement shall be reviewed every 48 hours and the facility administrator shall ensure that the incarcerated person receives a medical and mental health evaluation from certified medical and mental health professionals within one working day of placement in restorative housing or any form of isolated confinement. The bill also requires the facility administrator to notify the regional administrator in writing that an incarcerated person was placed in restorative housing or isolated confinement within 24 hours of such placement. Finally, the bill requires that formal reviews of an incarcerated person's placement in any form of isolated confinement shall be held in such person's presence, inform him of any reasons administrative officials believe isolated confinement remains necessary, and give the incarcerated person an opportunity to respond to those reasons, and a formal ruling shall be provided to the incarcerated individual within 24 hours. <hr> === Patrons === ==== House Patrons ==== • Joshua G. Cole (chief patron) • Patrick A. Hope • Sam Rasoul • Holly Seibold ==== Senate Patrons ==== • Bagby <hr> == Language == The language of [https://lis.virginia.gov/bill-details/20261/HB35/text/HB35 HB35] can be viewed here. <hr> == Proposed Amendment == === Amendment Offered for Consideration (requested for subcommittee) === ==== Add “Lockdown” throughout relevant provisions ==== Amend the bill to explicitly include “lockdown” alongside “solitary confinement/isolated confinement” and “restorative housing” in all relevant sections, to prevent facilities from using unit-wide lockdown practices as a functional substitute for individual isolated confinement. ==== Strengthen the time-limit clause (close the cumulative-days gap) ==== Replace the current time-limit phrasing with: “No individual shall be held in solitary confinement, lockdown, or restorative housing for more than 15 consecutive days, nor 15 days in any 60-day period.” <b>Purpose of the amendment:</b> The introduced text already uses “15 consecutive days…in any 60-day period,” but stakeholders have raised concerns that “consecutive” language can be worked around by cycling people in and out (or shifting to lockdown practices) without ever hitting a “consecutive” threshold. The amendment makes the limit explicitly <i>both</i> consecutive and cumulative. <hr> == Opening Statement == === House Subcommittee Statement === Mister Chair, members of the subcommittee— <i>This is not our first time here.</i> For <b>two straight years</b>, the General Assembly has passed this reform. <b>In 2024</b>, I gave you a sermon... and then we passed HB 1244. <b>In 2025</b>, my sister, my friend, and my colleague, <b>Delegate Keys-Gamarra</b>, took up the torch... and then we passed HB 2647. Twice, this body has said—<i><b>clearly</b></i>—that we are ready to turn the page on solitary confinement. And after two straight years, nobody can pretend this is new... • You know this bill. • You know this issue. • And you know how overdue this change is. Mister Chair, members of the committee, this is not our first time here, <b>BUT it will be our last</b>—because this year <i>we will make history.</i> And what is so great about this year is that we all have a <i>chance</i>—a <i>chance</i> to be part of making history. - If you're still on the fence, I want you to look forward into the future with me. Don't let the past hold you back... + If you're still on the fence, I want you to look forward into the future with me. <b>Don't let the past hold you back...</b> • Because when we look back in 25 years, <b>we will know this legislation was the right thing to do.</b> • Because when we look back in 50 years, <b>we will know this legislation was the right thing to do.</b> • Because when we look back in <b>one-hundred</b> years, <i><b>we will know this legislation was the right thing to do!</b></i> Today—I hope everyone in this room joins us in doing the <i><b>right thing.</b></i> We know the questions, and we'll answer them if asked. But I encourage us to listen to <i><b>testimonies</b></i>, to listen to the voices who are ready for change, so that we may be reminded—again—just how overdue this legislation is. Thank you, Mister Chair and members of the committee. I hope you report this bill favorably to full committee. <hr> == Support and Opposition == === Support === • ACLU People Power Fairfax • Bridging The Gap In Virginia • Charlottesville Chapter National Organization for Women • Coalition for Justice • EJUSA Evangelical Network • Fighting 4 Freedom • Greater Washington (JCRC) • Inmate Support Virginia • Interfaith Action for Human Rights (IAHR) • HALT Solitary • Jewish Community Relations Council of Just Future Project • Justice & Witness Action Network- VA • United Church of Christ Central Atlantic Conference • LatinoJustice PRLDEF • NAACP Loudoun • National Association of Social Workers • National Association of Social Workers, Virginia Chapter • National Religious Campaign Against Torture • No Left Turns • Resource Information Help for the Disadvantaged and Disenfranchised (RIHD) • RISE for Youth • RVA Health Alliance for Social Justice and Equity • Social Action Linking Together (SALT) • Social Workers and Allies Against Solitary Confinement • The Humanization Project • The Sentencing Project • Unitarian Universalist Legislative Ministry of Virginia • Unlock the Box Campaign • Virginia CURE • Virginia Defenders for Freedom, Justice & Equality • Virginia Justice Democrats • Virginia Justice for Life • Virginia Justice Alliance • Virginia Prisons Accountability Committee • Virginia Prisoner Of Conscience • Virginia Prison Justice Network • WJCC Coalition for Community Justice • 40 Strong === Opposition === • (to be updated) === No Recommendation / Neutral === • (to be updated) === No Position Provided === • Department of Corrections <hr> == Fiscal Impact == No fiscal impact statement is posted for HB35. <hr> == Possible Questions == === TL;DR === <b>Q1: “Does this end solitary confinement in Virginia?”</b> TL;DR: No—it ends <i>prolonged</i> solitary confinement and sets clear limits, oversight, and due-process rules for any use. <br> <b>Q2: “Does this make prisons less safe for staff?”</b> TL;DR: No—HB35 keeps exceptions for imminent threats and requires documentation; it’s about targeted use, not “never.” <br> <b>Q3: “What changes day-to-day?”</b> TL;DR: Frequent reviews, rapid medical/mental health checks, real programming/out-of-cell time, and written accountability when isolation is used. <br> <b>Q4: “Can DOC just use ‘lockdowns’ instead?”</b> TL;DR: The bill defines lockdown and regulates it, and the requested amendment strengthens this further by applying the same time limits to lockdown explicitly. <br> === Q1: “What does the bill aim to accomplish?” === <b>Answer you can use:</b> HB35 ends prolonged solitary confinement by setting clear time limits and requiring real oversight—regular reviews, rapid medical and mental health evaluations, documentation, and in-person due process when isolation continues. <br> === Q2: “How often is placement reviewed?” === <b>Answer you can use:</b> Placement is reviewed frequently, including a required 48-hour review cycle with written documentation explaining why less restrictive settings were not used. <br> === Q3: “What health protections are required?” === <b>Answer you can use:</b> HB35 requires medical and mental health evaluations by certified professionals within one working day of placement in restorative housing or isolated confinement (with limited exceptions). <br> === Q4: “Does this stop people from getting programming or recreation?” === <b>Answer you can use:</b> No—the bill requires at least four hours of out-of-cell programming or congregate activity daily, plus at least one hour of congregate recreation unless exceptional safety circumstances apply. <br> === Q5: “What stops indefinite ‘lockdowns’?” === <b>Answer you can use:</b> Lockdowns that interrupt programming must have a specific documented security purpose, must end as soon as the purpose is served, are time-limited, require approvals to extend or repeat, and must be documented and published. <hr> == Additional Information == <b>1. Definitions are the enforcement backbone</b> • The bill defines isolated confinement and lockdown by hours-per-day and loss of programming, so policy can’t be evaded by unit names. <b>Policy implication:</b> Regulates conditions, not labels. <br> <b>2. The “less restrictive first” rule targets protective-custody misuse</b> • For “own protection” placements, the facility must use less restrictive options first, including transfers or special-purpose housing for similarly threatened individuals, unless infeasible. <b>Policy implication:</b> Safety without defaulting to isolation. <br> <b>3. Reviews + documentation create accountability</b> • Requires regular reviews, documentation in the institutional file, notice up the chain, and formal in-person reviews with appeal rights. <b>Policy implication:</b> Isolation becomes a documented exception, not a routine. <br> <b>4. Lockdown limits matter because lockdown can function like solitary</b> • The bill regulates lockdowns that interrupt programming and requires publication of documentation. <b>Policy implication:</b> Prevents “unit-wide solitary” from becoming the workaround. [[Category:2026 Session]]
2026-01-22 06:28:04
Edited by: 74.110.183.75
Edited by: 74.110.183.75
= HB35 Restorative housing and isolated confinement; restrictions on use. = == Status == [https://house.vga.virginia.gov/subcommittees/H15002/agendas/5187 Public Safety | Subcommittee #2 — agenda] <hr> == Overview == === Summary as Introduced === <b>Restorative housing and isolated confinement; restrictions on use.</b> Prohibits the use of isolated confinement, defined in the bill, in state correctional facilities, subject to certain exceptions. The bill requires that before placing an incarcerated person in restorative housing or isolated confinement for his own protection, the facility administrator shall place an incarcerated person in a less-restrictive setting, including by transferring such person to another institution or to a special-purpose housing unit for incarcerated persons who face similar threats. The bill requires that if an incarcerated person is placed in restorative housing or isolated confinement, such placement shall be reviewed every 48 hours and the facility administrator shall ensure that the incarcerated person receives a medical and mental health evaluation from certified medical and mental health professionals within one working day of placement in restorative housing or any form of isolated confinement. The bill also requires the facility administrator to notify the regional administrator in writing that an incarcerated person was placed in restorative housing or isolated confinement within 24 hours of such placement. Finally, the bill requires that formal reviews of an incarcerated person's placement in any form of isolated confinement shall be held in such person's presence, inform him of any reasons administrative officials believe isolated confinement remains necessary, and give the incarcerated person an opportunity to respond to those reasons, and a formal ruling shall be provided to the incarcerated individual within 24 hours. <hr> === Patrons === ==== House Patrons ==== • Joshua G. Cole (chief patron) • Patrick A. Hope • Sam Rasoul • Holly Seibold ==== Senate Patrons ==== • Bagby <hr> == Language == The language of [https://lis.virginia.gov/bill-details/20261/HB35/text/HB35 HB35] can be viewed here. <hr> == Proposed Amendment == === Amendment Offered for Consideration (requested for subcommittee) === ==== Add “Lockdown” throughout relevant provisions ==== Amend the bill to explicitly include “lockdown” alongside “solitary confinement/isolated confinement” and “restorative housing” in all relevant sections, to prevent facilities from using unit-wide lockdown practices as a functional substitute for individual isolated confinement. ==== Strengthen the time-limit clause (close the cumulative-days gap) ==== Replace the current time-limit phrasing with: “No individual shall be held in solitary confinement, lockdown, or restorative housing for more than 15 consecutive days, nor 15 days in any 60-day period.” <b>Purpose of the amendment:</b> The introduced text already uses “15 consecutive days…in any 60-day period,” but stakeholders have raised concerns that “consecutive” language can be worked around by cycling people in and out (or shifting to lockdown practices) without ever hitting a “consecutive” threshold. The amendment makes the limit explicitly <i>both</i> consecutive and cumulative. <hr> == Opening Statement == === House Subcommittee Statement === Mister Chair, members of the subcommittee— <i>This is not our first time here.</i> For <b>two straight years</b>, the General Assembly has passed this reform. <b>In 2024</b>, I gave you a sermon... and then we passed HB 1244. <b>In 2025</b>, my sister, my friend, and my colleague, <b>Delegate Keys-Gamarra</b>, took up the torch... and then we passed HB 2647. Twice, this body has said—<i><b>clearly</b></i>—that we are ready to turn the page on solitary confinement. And after two straight years, nobody can pretend this is new... • You know this bill. • You know this issue. • And you know how overdue this change is. Mister Chair, members of the committee, this is not our first time here, <b>BUT it will be our last</b>—because this year <i>we will make history.</i> And what is so great about this year is that we all have a <i>chance</i>—a <i>chance</i> to be part of making history. - If you're still on the fence, I want you to look forward into the future with me. I want you to look forward with me... + If you're still on the fence, I want you to look forward into the future with me. Don't let the past hold you back... • Because when we look back in 25 years, <b>we will know this legislation was the right thing to do.</b> • Because when we look back in 50 years, <b>we will know this legislation was the right thing to do.</b> • Because when we look back in <b>one-hundred</b> years, <i><b>we will know this legislation was the right thing to do!</b></i> Today—I hope everyone in this room joins us in doing the <i><b>right thing.</b></i> We know the questions, and we'll answer them if asked. But I encourage us to listen to <i><b>testimonies</b></i>, to listen to the voices who are ready for change, so that we may be reminded—again—just how overdue this legislation is. Thank you, Mister Chair and members of the committee. I hope you report this bill favorably to full committee. <hr> == Support and Opposition == === Support === • ACLU People Power Fairfax • Bridging The Gap In Virginia • Charlottesville Chapter National Organization for Women • Coalition for Justice • EJUSA Evangelical Network • Fighting 4 Freedom • Greater Washington (JCRC) • Inmate Support Virginia • Interfaith Action for Human Rights (IAHR) • HALT Solitary • Jewish Community Relations Council of Just Future Project • Justice & Witness Action Network- VA • United Church of Christ Central Atlantic Conference • LatinoJustice PRLDEF • NAACP Loudoun • National Association of Social Workers • National Association of Social Workers, Virginia Chapter • National Religious Campaign Against Torture • No Left Turns • Resource Information Help for the Disadvantaged and Disenfranchised (RIHD) • RISE for Youth • RVA Health Alliance for Social Justice and Equity • Social Action Linking Together (SALT) • Social Workers and Allies Against Solitary Confinement • The Humanization Project • The Sentencing Project • Unitarian Universalist Legislative Ministry of Virginia • Unlock the Box Campaign • Virginia CURE • Virginia Defenders for Freedom, Justice & Equality • Virginia Justice Democrats • Virginia Justice for Life • Virginia Justice Alliance • Virginia Prisons Accountability Committee • Virginia Prisoner Of Conscience • Virginia Prison Justice Network • WJCC Coalition for Community Justice • 40 Strong === Opposition === • (to be updated) === No Recommendation / Neutral === • (to be updated) === No Position Provided === • Department of Corrections <hr> == Fiscal Impact == No fiscal impact statement is posted for HB35. <hr> == Possible Questions == === TL;DR === <b>Q1: “Does this end solitary confinement in Virginia?”</b> TL;DR: No—it ends <i>prolonged</i> solitary confinement and sets clear limits, oversight, and due-process rules for any use. <br> <b>Q2: “Does this make prisons less safe for staff?”</b> TL;DR: No—HB35 keeps exceptions for imminent threats and requires documentation; it’s about targeted use, not “never.” <br> <b>Q3: “What changes day-to-day?”</b> TL;DR: Frequent reviews, rapid medical/mental health checks, real programming/out-of-cell time, and written accountability when isolation is used. <br> <b>Q4: “Can DOC just use ‘lockdowns’ instead?”</b> TL;DR: The bill defines lockdown and regulates it, and the requested amendment strengthens this further by applying the same time limits to lockdown explicitly. <br> === Q1: “What does the bill aim to accomplish?” === <b>Answer you can use:</b> HB35 ends prolonged solitary confinement by setting clear time limits and requiring real oversight—regular reviews, rapid medical and mental health evaluations, documentation, and in-person due process when isolation continues. <br> === Q2: “How often is placement reviewed?” === <b>Answer you can use:</b> Placement is reviewed frequently, including a required 48-hour review cycle with written documentation explaining why less restrictive settings were not used. <br> === Q3: “What health protections are required?” === <b>Answer you can use:</b> HB35 requires medical and mental health evaluations by certified professionals within one working day of placement in restorative housing or isolated confinement (with limited exceptions). <br> === Q4: “Does this stop people from getting programming or recreation?” === <b>Answer you can use:</b> No—the bill requires at least four hours of out-of-cell programming or congregate activity daily, plus at least one hour of congregate recreation unless exceptional safety circumstances apply. <br> === Q5: “What stops indefinite ‘lockdowns’?” === <b>Answer you can use:</b> Lockdowns that interrupt programming must have a specific documented security purpose, must end as soon as the purpose is served, are time-limited, require approvals to extend or repeat, and must be documented and published. <hr> == Additional Information == <b>1. Definitions are the enforcement backbone</b> • The bill defines isolated confinement and lockdown by hours-per-day and loss of programming, so policy can’t be evaded by unit names. <b>Policy implication:</b> Regulates conditions, not labels. <br> <b>2. The “less restrictive first” rule targets protective-custody misuse</b> • For “own protection” placements, the facility must use less restrictive options first, including transfers or special-purpose housing for similarly threatened individuals, unless infeasible. <b>Policy implication:</b> Safety without defaulting to isolation. <br> <b>3. Reviews + documentation create accountability</b> • Requires regular reviews, documentation in the institutional file, notice up the chain, and formal in-person reviews with appeal rights. <b>Policy implication:</b> Isolation becomes a documented exception, not a routine. <br> <b>4. Lockdown limits matter because lockdown can function like solitary</b> • The bill regulates lockdowns that interrupt programming and requires publication of documentation. <b>Policy implication:</b> Prevents “unit-wide solitary” from becoming the workaround. [[Category:2026 Session]]
2026-01-22 06:27:49
Edited by: 74.110.183.75
Edited by: 74.110.183.75
= HB35 Restorative housing and isolated confinement; restrictions on use. = == Status == [https://house.vga.virginia.gov/subcommittees/H15002/agendas/5187 Public Safety | Subcommittee #2 — agenda] <hr> == Overview == === Summary as Introduced === <b>Restorative housing and isolated confinement; restrictions on use.</b> Prohibits the use of isolated confinement, defined in the bill, in state correctional facilities, subject to certain exceptions. The bill requires that before placing an incarcerated person in restorative housing or isolated confinement for his own protection, the facility administrator shall place an incarcerated person in a less-restrictive setting, including by transferring such person to another institution or to a special-purpose housing unit for incarcerated persons who face similar threats. The bill requires that if an incarcerated person is placed in restorative housing or isolated confinement, such placement shall be reviewed every 48 hours and the facility administrator shall ensure that the incarcerated person receives a medical and mental health evaluation from certified medical and mental health professionals within one working day of placement in restorative housing or any form of isolated confinement. The bill also requires the facility administrator to notify the regional administrator in writing that an incarcerated person was placed in restorative housing or isolated confinement within 24 hours of such placement. Finally, the bill requires that formal reviews of an incarcerated person's placement in any form of isolated confinement shall be held in such person's presence, inform him of any reasons administrative officials believe isolated confinement remains necessary, and give the incarcerated person an opportunity to respond to those reasons, and a formal ruling shall be provided to the incarcerated individual within 24 hours. <hr> === Patrons === ==== House Patrons ==== • Joshua G. Cole (chief patron) • Patrick A. Hope • Sam Rasoul • Holly Seibold ==== Senate Patrons ==== • Bagby <hr> == Language == The language of [https://lis.virginia.gov/bill-details/20261/HB35/text/HB35 HB35] can be viewed here. <hr> == Proposed Amendment == === Amendment Offered for Consideration (requested for subcommittee) === ==== Add “Lockdown” throughout relevant provisions ==== Amend the bill to explicitly include “lockdown” alongside “solitary confinement/isolated confinement” and “restorative housing” in all relevant sections, to prevent facilities from using unit-wide lockdown practices as a functional substitute for individual isolated confinement. ==== Strengthen the time-limit clause (close the cumulative-days gap) ==== Replace the current time-limit phrasing with: “No individual shall be held in solitary confinement, lockdown, or restorative housing for more than 15 consecutive days, nor 15 days in any 60-day period.” <b>Purpose of the amendment:</b> The introduced text already uses “15 consecutive days…in any 60-day period,” but stakeholders have raised concerns that “consecutive” language can be worked around by cycling people in and out (or shifting to lockdown practices) without ever hitting a “consecutive” threshold. The amendment makes the limit explicitly <i>both</i> consecutive and cumulative. <hr> == Opening Statement == === House Subcommittee Statement === Mister Chair, members of the subcommittee— <i>This is not our first time here.</i> For <b>two straight years</b>, the General Assembly has passed this reform. <b>In 2024</b>, I gave you a sermon... and then we passed HB 1244. <b>In 2025</b>, my sister, my friend, and my colleague, <b>Delegate Keys-Gamarra</b>, took up the torch... and then we passed HB 2647. Twice, this body has said—<i><b>clearly</b></i>—that we are ready to turn the page on solitary confinement. And after two straight years, nobody can pretend this is new... • You know this bill. • You know this issue. • And you know how overdue this change is. Mister Chair, members of the committee, this is not our first time here, <b>BUT it will be our last</b>—because this year <i>we will make history.</i> - And what is so great about this year is that we all have a chance—a chance to be part of making history— + And what is so great about this year is that we all have a <i>chance</i>—a <i>chance</i> to be part of making history. - • Because when we look back in 25 years, <b>we will know this legislation was the right thing to do.</b> + If you're still on the fence, I want you to look forward into the future with me. I want you to look forward with me... - • Because when we look back in 50 years, <b>we will know this legislation was the right thing to do.</b> + • Because when we look back in 25 years, <b>we will know this legislation was the right thing to do.</b> - • Because when we look back in <b>one-hundred</b> years, <i><b>we will know this legislation was the right thing to do!</b></i> + • Because when we look back in 50 years, <b>we will know this legislation was the right thing to do.</b> - Today—I hope everyone in this room joins us in doing the <i><b>right thing.</b></i> + • Because when we look back in <b>one-hundred</b> years, <i><b>we will know this legislation was the right thing to do!</b></i> - I’ll keep my remarks brief; we know the questions, and we'll answer them if asked. But I encourage us to listen to <i><b>testimonies</b></i>, to listen to the voices who are ready for change, so that we may be reminded—again—just how overdue this legislation is. + Today—I hope everyone in this room joins us in doing the <i><b>right thing.</b></i> - Thank you, Mister Chair and members of the committee. I hope you report this bill favorably to full committee. + We know the questions, and we'll answer them if asked. But I encourage us to listen to <i><b>testimonies</b></i>, to listen to the voices who are ready for change, so that we may be reminded—again—just how overdue this legislation is. - <hr> + Thank you, Mister Chair and members of the committee. I hope you report this bill favorably to full committee. - == Support and Opposition == + <hr> - === Support === + == Support and Opposition == - • ACLU People Power Fairfax + - • Bridging The Gap In Virginia + === Support === - • Charlottesville Chapter National Organization for Women + • ACLU People Power Fairfax - • Coalition for Justice + • Bridging The Gap In Virginia - • EJUSA Evangelical Network + • Charlottesville Chapter National Organization for Women - • Fighting 4 Freedom + • Coalition for Justice - • Greater Washington (JCRC) + • EJUSA Evangelical Network - • Inmate Support Virginia + • Fighting 4 Freedom - • Interfaith Action for Human Rights (IAHR) + • Greater Washington (JCRC) - • HALT Solitary + • Inmate Support Virginia - • Jewish Community Relations Council of Just Future Project + • Interfaith Action for Human Rights (IAHR) - • Justice & Witness Action Network- VA + • HALT Solitary - • United Church of Christ Central Atlantic Conference + • Jewish Community Relations Council of Just Future Project - • LatinoJustice PRLDEF + • Justice & Witness Action Network- VA - • NAACP Loudoun + • United Church of Christ Central Atlantic Conference - • National Association of Social Workers + • LatinoJustice PRLDEF - • National Association of Social Workers, Virginia Chapter + • NAACP Loudoun - • National Religious Campaign Against Torture + • National Association of Social Workers - • No Left Turns + • National Association of Social Workers, Virginia Chapter - • Resource Information Help for the Disadvantaged and Disenfranchised (RIHD) + • National Religious Campaign Against Torture - • RISE for Youth + • No Left Turns - • RVA Health Alliance for Social Justice and Equity + • Resource Information Help for the Disadvantaged and Disenfranchised (RIHD) - • Social Action Linking Together (SALT) + • RISE for Youth - • Social Workers and Allies Against Solitary Confinement + • RVA Health Alliance for Social Justice and Equity - • The Humanization Project + • Social Action Linking Together (SALT) - • The Sentencing Project + • Social Workers and Allies Against Solitary Confinement - • Unitarian Universalist Legislative Ministry of Virginia + • The Humanization Project - • Unlock the Box Campaign + • The Sentencing Project - • Virginia CURE + • Unitarian Universalist Legislative Ministry of Virginia - • Virginia Defenders for Freedom, Justice & Equality + • Unlock the Box Campaign - • Virginia Justice Democrats + • Virginia CURE - • Virginia Justice for Life + • Virginia Defenders for Freedom, Justice & Equality - • Virginia Justice Alliance + • Virginia Justice Democrats - • Virginia Prisons Accountability Committee + • Virginia Justice for Life - • Virginia Prisoner Of Conscience + • Virginia Justice Alliance - • Virginia Prison Justice Network + • Virginia Prisons Accountability Committee - • WJCC Coalition for Community Justice + • Virginia Prisoner Of Conscience - • 40 Strong + • Virginia Prison Justice Network - + • WJCC Coalition for Community Justice - === Opposition === + • 40 Strong - • (to be updated) + - + === Opposition === - === No Recommendation / Neutral === + • (to be updated) - • (to be updated) + - + === No Recommendation / Neutral === - === No Position Provided === + • (to be updated) - • Department of Corrections + - + === No Position Provided === - <hr> + • Department of Corrections - == Fiscal Impact == + <hr> - No fiscal impact statement is posted for HB35. + - + == Fiscal Impact == - <hr> + No fiscal impact statement is posted for HB35. - == Possible Questions == + <hr> - === TL;DR === + == Possible Questions == - <b>Q1: “Does this end solitary confinement in Virginia?”</b> TL;DR: No—it ends <i>prolonged</i> solitary confinement and sets clear limits, oversight, and due-process rules for any use. <br> + - <b>Q2: “Does this make prisons less safe for staff?”</b> TL;DR: No—HB35 keeps exceptions for imminent threats and requires documentation; it’s about targeted use, not “never.” + === TL;DR === - + <b>Q1: “Does this end solitary confinement in Virginia?”</b> TL;DR: No—it ends <i>prolonged</i> solitary confinement and sets clear limits, oversight, and due-process rules for any use. <br> - <br> + <b>Q2: “Does this make prisons less safe for staff?”</b> TL;DR: No—HB35 keeps exceptions for imminent threats and requires documentation; it’s about targeted use, not “never.” - <b>Q3: “What changes day-to-day?”</b> TL;DR: Frequent reviews, rapid medical/mental health checks, real programming/out-of-cell time, and written accountability when isolation is used. + - + <br> - <br> + <b>Q3: “What changes day-to-day?”</b> TL;DR: Frequent reviews, rapid medical/mental health checks, real programming/out-of-cell time, and written accountability when isolation is used. - <b>Q4: “Can DOC just use ‘lockdowns’ instead?”</b> TL;DR: The bill defines lockdown and regulates it, and the requested amendment strengthens this further by applying the same time limits to lockdown explicitly. + - + <br> - <br> + <b>Q4: “Can DOC just use ‘lockdowns’ instead?”</b> TL;DR: The bill defines lockdown and regulates it, and the requested amendment strengthens this further by applying the same time limits to lockdown explicitly. - === Q1: “What does the bill aim to accomplish?” === + <br> - <b>Answer you can use:</b> HB35 ends prolonged solitary confinement by setting clear time limits and requiring real oversight—regular reviews, rapid medical and mental health evaluations, documentation, and in-person due process when isolation continues. + - + === Q1: “What does the bill aim to accomplish?” === - <br> + <b>Answer you can use:</b> HB35 ends prolonged solitary confinement by setting clear time limits and requiring real oversight—regular reviews, rapid medical and mental health evaluations, documentation, and in-person due process when isolation continues. - === Q2: “How often is placement reviewed?” === + <br> - <b>Answer you can use:</b> Placement is reviewed frequently, including a required 48-hour review cycle with written documentation explaining why less restrictive settings were not used. + - + === Q2: “How often is placement reviewed?” === - <br> + <b>Answer you can use:</b> Placement is reviewed frequently, including a required 48-hour review cycle with written documentation explaining why less restrictive settings were not used. - === Q3: “What health protections are required?” === + <br> - <b>Answer you can use:</b> HB35 requires medical and mental health evaluations by certified professionals within one working day of placement in restorative housing or isolated confinement (with limited exceptions). + - + === Q3: “What health protections are required?” === - <br> + <b>Answer you can use:</b> HB35 requires medical and mental health evaluations by certified professionals within one working day of placement in restorative housing or isolated confinement (with limited exceptions). - === Q4: “Does this stop people from getting programming or recreation?” === + <br> - <b>Answer you can use:</b> No—the bill requires at least four hours of out-of-cell programming or congregate activity daily, plus at least one hour of congregate recreation unless exceptional safety circumstances apply. + - + === Q4: “Does this stop people from getting programming or recreation?” === - <br> + <b>Answer you can use:</b> No—the bill requires at least four hours of out-of-cell programming or congregate activity daily, plus at least one hour of congregate recreation unless exceptional safety circumstances apply. - === Q5: “What stops indefinite ‘lockdowns’?” === + <br> - <b>Answer you can use:</b> Lockdowns that interrupt programming must have a specific documented security purpose, must end as soon as the purpose is served, are time-limited, require approvals to extend or repeat, and must be documented and published. + - + === Q5: “What stops indefinite ‘lockdowns’?” === - <hr> + <b>Answer you can use:</b> Lockdowns that interrupt programming must have a specific documented security purpose, must end as soon as the purpose is served, are time-limited, require approvals to extend or repeat, and must be documented and published. - == Additional Information == + <hr> - <b>1. Definitions are the enforcement backbone</b> + - • The bill defines isolated confinement and lockdown by hours-per-day and loss of programming, so policy can’t be evaded by unit names. + == Additional Information == - + <b>1. Definitions are the enforcement backbone</b> - + • The bill defines isolated confinement and lockdown by hours-per-day and loss of programming, so policy can’t be evaded by unit names. - <b>Policy implication:</b> Regulates conditions, not labels. + - <br> + <b>Policy implication:</b> Regulates conditions, not labels. - <b>2. The “less restrictive first” rule targets protective-custody misuse</b> + <br> - • For “own protection” placements, the facility must use less restrictive options first, including transfers or special-purpose housing for similarly threatened individuals, unless infeasible. + - + <b>2. The “less restrictive first” rule targets protective-custody misuse</b> - <b>Policy implication:</b> Safety without defaulting to isolation. + • For “own protection” placements, the facility must use less restrictive options first, including transfers or special-purpose housing for similarly threatened individuals, unless infeasible. - <br> + <b>Policy implication:</b> Safety without defaulting to isolation. - <b>3. Reviews + documentation create accountability</b> + <br> - • Requires regular reviews, documentation in the institutional file, notice up the chain, and formal in-person reviews with appeal rights. + - + <b>3. Reviews + documentation create accountability</b> - <b>Policy implication:</b> Isolation becomes a documented exception, not a routine. + • Requires regular reviews, documentation in the institutional file, notice up the chain, and formal in-person reviews with appeal rights. - <br> + <b>Policy implication:</b> Isolation becomes a documented exception, not a routine. - <b>4. Lockdown limits matter because lockdown can function like solitary</b> + <br> - • The bill regulates lockdowns that interrupt programming and requires publication of documentation. + - + <b>4. Lockdown limits matter because lockdown can function like solitary</b> - + • The bill regulates lockdowns that interrupt programming and requires publication of documentation. - <b>Policy implication:</b> Prevents “unit-wide solitary” from becoming the workaround. + - [[Category:2026 Session]] + <b>Policy implication:</b> Prevents “unit-wide solitary” from becoming the workaround. + + [[Category:2026 Session]]
2026-01-22 06:27:02
Edited by: 74.110.183.75
Edited by: 74.110.183.75
= HB35 Restorative housing and isolated confinement; restrictions on use. = == Status == [https://house.vga.virginia.gov/subcommittees/H15002/agendas/5187 Public Safety | Subcommittee #2 — agenda] <hr> == Overview == === Summary as Introduced === <b>Restorative housing and isolated confinement; restrictions on use.</b> Prohibits the use of isolated confinement, defined in the bill, in state correctional facilities, subject to certain exceptions. The bill requires that before placing an incarcerated person in restorative housing or isolated confinement for his own protection, the facility administrator shall place an incarcerated person in a less-restrictive setting, including by transferring such person to another institution or to a special-purpose housing unit for incarcerated persons who face similar threats. The bill requires that if an incarcerated person is placed in restorative housing or isolated confinement, such placement shall be reviewed every 48 hours and the facility administrator shall ensure that the incarcerated person receives a medical and mental health evaluation from certified medical and mental health professionals within one working day of placement in restorative housing or any form of isolated confinement. The bill also requires the facility administrator to notify the regional administrator in writing that an incarcerated person was placed in restorative housing or isolated confinement within 24 hours of such placement. Finally, the bill requires that formal reviews of an incarcerated person's placement in any form of isolated confinement shall be held in such person's presence, inform him of any reasons administrative officials believe isolated confinement remains necessary, and give the incarcerated person an opportunity to respond to those reasons, and a formal ruling shall be provided to the incarcerated individual within 24 hours. <hr> === Patrons === ==== House Patrons ==== • Joshua G. Cole (chief patron) • Patrick A. Hope • Sam Rasoul • Holly Seibold ==== Senate Patrons ==== • Bagby <hr> == Language == The language of [https://lis.virginia.gov/bill-details/20261/HB35/text/HB35 HB35] can be viewed here. <hr> == Proposed Amendment == === Amendment Offered for Consideration (requested for subcommittee) === ==== Add “Lockdown” throughout relevant provisions ==== Amend the bill to explicitly include “lockdown” alongside “solitary confinement/isolated confinement” and “restorative housing” in all relevant sections, to prevent facilities from using unit-wide lockdown practices as a functional substitute for individual isolated confinement. ==== Strengthen the time-limit clause (close the cumulative-days gap) ==== Replace the current time-limit phrasing with: “No individual shall be held in solitary confinement, lockdown, or restorative housing for more than 15 consecutive days, nor 15 days in any 60-day period.” <b>Purpose of the amendment:</b> The introduced text already uses “15 consecutive days…in any 60-day period,” but stakeholders have raised concerns that “consecutive” language can be worked around by cycling people in and out (or shifting to lockdown practices) without ever hitting a “consecutive” threshold. The amendment makes the limit explicitly <i>both</i> consecutive and cumulative. <hr> == Opening Statement == === House Subcommittee Statement === Mister Chair, members of the subcommittee— <i>This is not our first time here.</i> For <b>two straight years</b>, the General Assembly has passed this reform. <b>In 2024</b>, I gave you a sermon... and then we passed HB 1244. <b>In 2025</b>, my sister, my friend, and my colleague, <b>Delegate Keys-Gamarra</b>, took up the torch... and then we passed HB 2647. Twice, this body has said—<i><b>clearly</b></i>—that we are ready to turn the page on solitary confinement. And after two straight years, nobody can pretend this is new... • You know this bill. • You know this issue. • And you know how overdue this change is. - Mister Chair, members of the committee, this is not our first time here, <b>BUT it will be our last</b>—because this year we will make history. + Mister Chair, members of the committee, this is not our first time here, <b>BUT it will be our last</b>—because this year <i>we will make history.</i> And what is so great about this year is that we all have a chance—a chance to be part of making history— • Because when we look back in 25 years, <b>we will know this legislation was the right thing to do.</b> • Because when we look back in 50 years, <b>we will know this legislation was the right thing to do.</b> • Because when we look back in <b>one-hundred</b> years, <i><b>we will know this legislation was the right thing to do!</b></i> Today—I hope everyone in this room joins us in doing the <i><b>right thing.</b></i> I’ll keep my remarks brief; we know the questions, and we'll answer them if asked. But I encourage us to listen to <i><b>testimonies</b></i>, to listen to the voices who are ready for change, so that we may be reminded—again—just how overdue this legislation is. Thank you, Mister Chair and members of the committee. I hope you report this bill favorably to full committee. <hr> == Support and Opposition == === Support === • ACLU People Power Fairfax • Bridging The Gap In Virginia • Charlottesville Chapter National Organization for Women • Coalition for Justice • EJUSA Evangelical Network • Fighting 4 Freedom • Greater Washington (JCRC) • Inmate Support Virginia • Interfaith Action for Human Rights (IAHR) • HALT Solitary • Jewish Community Relations Council of Just Future Project • Justice & Witness Action Network- VA • United Church of Christ Central Atlantic Conference • LatinoJustice PRLDEF • NAACP Loudoun • National Association of Social Workers • National Association of Social Workers, Virginia Chapter • National Religious Campaign Against Torture • No Left Turns • Resource Information Help for the Disadvantaged and Disenfranchised (RIHD) • RISE for Youth • RVA Health Alliance for Social Justice and Equity • Social Action Linking Together (SALT) • Social Workers and Allies Against Solitary Confinement • The Humanization Project • The Sentencing Project • Unitarian Universalist Legislative Ministry of Virginia • Unlock the Box Campaign • Virginia CURE • Virginia Defenders for Freedom, Justice & Equality • Virginia Justice Democrats • Virginia Justice for Life • Virginia Justice Alliance • Virginia Prisons Accountability Committee • Virginia Prisoner Of Conscience • Virginia Prison Justice Network • WJCC Coalition for Community Justice • 40 Strong === Opposition === • (to be updated) === No Recommendation / Neutral === • (to be updated) === No Position Provided === • Department of Corrections <hr> == Fiscal Impact == No fiscal impact statement is posted for HB35. <hr> == Possible Questions == === TL;DR === <b>Q1: “Does this end solitary confinement in Virginia?”</b> TL;DR: No—it ends <i>prolonged</i> solitary confinement and sets clear limits, oversight, and due-process rules for any use. <br> <b>Q2: “Does this make prisons less safe for staff?”</b> TL;DR: No—HB35 keeps exceptions for imminent threats and requires documentation; it’s about targeted use, not “never.” <br> <b>Q3: “What changes day-to-day?”</b> TL;DR: Frequent reviews, rapid medical/mental health checks, real programming/out-of-cell time, and written accountability when isolation is used. <br> <b>Q4: “Can DOC just use ‘lockdowns’ instead?”</b> TL;DR: The bill defines lockdown and regulates it, and the requested amendment strengthens this further by applying the same time limits to lockdown explicitly. <br> === Q1: “What does the bill aim to accomplish?” === <b>Answer you can use:</b> HB35 ends prolonged solitary confinement by setting clear time limits and requiring real oversight—regular reviews, rapid medical and mental health evaluations, documentation, and in-person due process when isolation continues. <br> === Q2: “How often is placement reviewed?” === <b>Answer you can use:</b> Placement is reviewed frequently, including a required 48-hour review cycle with written documentation explaining why less restrictive settings were not used. <br> === Q3: “What health protections are required?” === <b>Answer you can use:</b> HB35 requires medical and mental health evaluations by certified professionals within one working day of placement in restorative housing or isolated confinement (with limited exceptions). <br> === Q4: “Does this stop people from getting programming or recreation?” === <b>Answer you can use:</b> No—the bill requires at least four hours of out-of-cell programming or congregate activity daily, plus at least one hour of congregate recreation unless exceptional safety circumstances apply. <br> === Q5: “What stops indefinite ‘lockdowns’?” === <b>Answer you can use:</b> Lockdowns that interrupt programming must have a specific documented security purpose, must end as soon as the purpose is served, are time-limited, require approvals to extend or repeat, and must be documented and published. <hr> == Additional Information == <b>1. Definitions are the enforcement backbone</b> • The bill defines isolated confinement and lockdown by hours-per-day and loss of programming, so policy can’t be evaded by unit names. <b>Policy implication:</b> Regulates conditions, not labels. <br> <b>2. The “less restrictive first” rule targets protective-custody misuse</b> • For “own protection” placements, the facility must use less restrictive options first, including transfers or special-purpose housing for similarly threatened individuals, unless infeasible. <b>Policy implication:</b> Safety without defaulting to isolation. <br> <b>3. Reviews + documentation create accountability</b> • Requires regular reviews, documentation in the institutional file, notice up the chain, and formal in-person reviews with appeal rights. <b>Policy implication:</b> Isolation becomes a documented exception, not a routine. <br> <b>4. Lockdown limits matter because lockdown can function like solitary</b> • The bill regulates lockdowns that interrupt programming and requires publication of documentation. <b>Policy implication:</b> Prevents “unit-wide solitary” from becoming the workaround. [[Category:2026 Session]]
2026-01-22 06:22:56
Edited by: 74.110.183.75
Edited by: 74.110.183.75
= HB35 Restorative housing and isolated confinement; restrictions on use. = == Status == [https://house.vga.virginia.gov/subcommittees/H15002/agendas/5187 Public Safety | Subcommittee #2 — agenda] <hr> == Overview == === Summary as Introduced === <b>Restorative housing and isolated confinement; restrictions on use.</b> Prohibits the use of isolated confinement, defined in the bill, in state correctional facilities, subject to certain exceptions. The bill requires that before placing an incarcerated person in restorative housing or isolated confinement for his own protection, the facility administrator shall place an incarcerated person in a less-restrictive setting, including by transferring such person to another institution or to a special-purpose housing unit for incarcerated persons who face similar threats. The bill requires that if an incarcerated person is placed in restorative housing or isolated confinement, such placement shall be reviewed every 48 hours and the facility administrator shall ensure that the incarcerated person receives a medical and mental health evaluation from certified medical and mental health professionals within one working day of placement in restorative housing or any form of isolated confinement. The bill also requires the facility administrator to notify the regional administrator in writing that an incarcerated person was placed in restorative housing or isolated confinement within 24 hours of such placement. Finally, the bill requires that formal reviews of an incarcerated person's placement in any form of isolated confinement shall be held in such person's presence, inform him of any reasons administrative officials believe isolated confinement remains necessary, and give the incarcerated person an opportunity to respond to those reasons, and a formal ruling shall be provided to the incarcerated individual within 24 hours. <hr> === Patrons === ==== House Patrons ==== • Joshua G. Cole (chief patron) • Patrick A. Hope • Sam Rasoul • Holly Seibold ==== Senate Patrons ==== • Bagby <hr> == Language == The language of [https://lis.virginia.gov/bill-details/20261/HB35/text/HB35 HB35] can be viewed here. <hr> == Proposed Amendment == === Amendment Offered for Consideration (requested for subcommittee) === ==== Add “Lockdown” throughout relevant provisions ==== Amend the bill to explicitly include “lockdown” alongside “solitary confinement/isolated confinement” and “restorative housing” in all relevant sections, to prevent facilities from using unit-wide lockdown practices as a functional substitute for individual isolated confinement. ==== Strengthen the time-limit clause (close the cumulative-days gap) ==== Replace the current time-limit phrasing with: “No individual shall be held in solitary confinement, lockdown, or restorative housing for more than 15 consecutive days, nor 15 days in any 60-day period.” <b>Purpose of the amendment:</b> The introduced text already uses “15 consecutive days…in any 60-day period,” but stakeholders have raised concerns that “consecutive” language can be worked around by cycling people in and out (or shifting to lockdown practices) without ever hitting a “consecutive” threshold. The amendment makes the limit explicitly <i>both</i> consecutive and cumulative. <hr> == Opening Statement == === House Subcommittee Statement === Mister Chair, members of the subcommittee— <i>This is not our first time here.</i> For <b>two straight years</b>, the General Assembly has passed this reform. <b>In 2024</b>, I gave you a sermon... and then we passed HB 1244. <b>In 2025</b>, my sister, my friend, and my colleague, <b>Delegate Keys-Gamarra</b>, took up the torch... and then we passed HB 2647. Twice, this body has said—<i><b>clearly</b></i>—that we are ready to turn the page on solitary confinement. And after two straight years, nobody can pretend this is new... • You know this bill. • You know this issue. • And you know how overdue this change is. - Mister Chair, members of the committee, this is not our first time here, <b>BUT it will be our last time here</b>—because this year we will make history. + Mister Chair, members of the committee, this is not our first time here, <b>BUT it will be our last</b>—because this year we will make history. And what is so great about this year is that we all have a chance—a chance to be part of making history— • Because when we look back in 25 years, <b>we will know this legislation was the right thing to do.</b> • Because when we look back in 50 years, <b>we will know this legislation was the right thing to do.</b> • Because when we look back in <b>one-hundred</b> years, <i><b>we will know this legislation was the right thing to do!</b></i> Today—I hope everyone in this room joins us in doing the <i><b>right thing.</b></i> I’ll keep my remarks brief; we know the questions, and we'll answer them if asked. But I encourage us to listen to <i><b>testimonies</b></i>, to listen to the voices who are ready for change, so that we may be reminded—again—just how overdue this legislation is. Thank you, Mister Chair and members of the committee. I hope you report this bill favorably to full committee. <hr> == Support and Opposition == === Support === • ACLU People Power Fairfax • Bridging The Gap In Virginia • Charlottesville Chapter National Organization for Women • Coalition for Justice • EJUSA Evangelical Network • Fighting 4 Freedom • Greater Washington (JCRC) • Inmate Support Virginia • Interfaith Action for Human Rights (IAHR) • HALT Solitary • Jewish Community Relations Council of Just Future Project • Justice & Witness Action Network- VA • United Church of Christ Central Atlantic Conference • LatinoJustice PRLDEF • NAACP Loudoun • National Association of Social Workers • National Association of Social Workers, Virginia Chapter • National Religious Campaign Against Torture • No Left Turns • Resource Information Help for the Disadvantaged and Disenfranchised (RIHD) • RISE for Youth • RVA Health Alliance for Social Justice and Equity • Social Action Linking Together (SALT) • Social Workers and Allies Against Solitary Confinement • The Humanization Project • The Sentencing Project • Unitarian Universalist Legislative Ministry of Virginia • Unlock the Box Campaign • Virginia CURE • Virginia Defenders for Freedom, Justice & Equality • Virginia Justice Democrats • Virginia Justice for Life • Virginia Justice Alliance • Virginia Prisons Accountability Committee • Virginia Prisoner Of Conscience • Virginia Prison Justice Network • WJCC Coalition for Community Justice • 40 Strong === Opposition === • (to be updated) === No Recommendation / Neutral === • (to be updated) === No Position Provided === • Department of Corrections <hr> == Fiscal Impact == No fiscal impact statement is posted for HB35. <hr> == Possible Questions == === TL;DR === <b>Q1: “Does this end solitary confinement in Virginia?”</b> TL;DR: No—it ends <i>prolonged</i> solitary confinement and sets clear limits, oversight, and due-process rules for any use. <br> <b>Q2: “Does this make prisons less safe for staff?”</b> TL;DR: No—HB35 keeps exceptions for imminent threats and requires documentation; it’s about targeted use, not “never.” <br> <b>Q3: “What changes day-to-day?”</b> TL;DR: Frequent reviews, rapid medical/mental health checks, real programming/out-of-cell time, and written accountability when isolation is used. <br> <b>Q4: “Can DOC just use ‘lockdowns’ instead?”</b> TL;DR: The bill defines lockdown and regulates it, and the requested amendment strengthens this further by applying the same time limits to lockdown explicitly. <br> === Q1: “What does the bill aim to accomplish?” === <b>Answer you can use:</b> HB35 ends prolonged solitary confinement by setting clear time limits and requiring real oversight—regular reviews, rapid medical and mental health evaluations, documentation, and in-person due process when isolation continues. <br> === Q2: “How often is placement reviewed?” === <b>Answer you can use:</b> Placement is reviewed frequently, including a required 48-hour review cycle with written documentation explaining why less restrictive settings were not used. <br> === Q3: “What health protections are required?” === <b>Answer you can use:</b> HB35 requires medical and mental health evaluations by certified professionals within one working day of placement in restorative housing or isolated confinement (with limited exceptions). <br> === Q4: “Does this stop people from getting programming or recreation?” === <b>Answer you can use:</b> No—the bill requires at least four hours of out-of-cell programming or congregate activity daily, plus at least one hour of congregate recreation unless exceptional safety circumstances apply. <br> === Q5: “What stops indefinite ‘lockdowns’?” === <b>Answer you can use:</b> Lockdowns that interrupt programming must have a specific documented security purpose, must end as soon as the purpose is served, are time-limited, require approvals to extend or repeat, and must be documented and published. <hr> == Additional Information == <b>1. Definitions are the enforcement backbone</b> • The bill defines isolated confinement and lockdown by hours-per-day and loss of programming, so policy can’t be evaded by unit names. <b>Policy implication:</b> Regulates conditions, not labels. <br> <b>2. The “less restrictive first” rule targets protective-custody misuse</b> • For “own protection” placements, the facility must use less restrictive options first, including transfers or special-purpose housing for similarly threatened individuals, unless infeasible. <b>Policy implication:</b> Safety without defaulting to isolation. <br> <b>3. Reviews + documentation create accountability</b> • Requires regular reviews, documentation in the institutional file, notice up the chain, and formal in-person reviews with appeal rights. <b>Policy implication:</b> Isolation becomes a documented exception, not a routine. <br> <b>4. Lockdown limits matter because lockdown can function like solitary</b> • The bill regulates lockdowns that interrupt programming and requires publication of documentation. <b>Policy implication:</b> Prevents “unit-wide solitary” from becoming the workaround. [[Category:2026 Session]]
2026-01-22 06:22:37
Edited by: 74.110.183.75
Edited by: 74.110.183.75
= HB35 Restorative housing and isolated confinement; restrictions on use. = == Status == [https://house.vga.virginia.gov/subcommittees/H15002/agendas/5187 Public Safety | Subcommittee #2 — agenda] <hr> == Overview == === Summary as Introduced === <b>Restorative housing and isolated confinement; restrictions on use.</b> Prohibits the use of isolated confinement, defined in the bill, in state correctional facilities, subject to certain exceptions. The bill requires that before placing an incarcerated person in restorative housing or isolated confinement for his own protection, the facility administrator shall place an incarcerated person in a less-restrictive setting, including by transferring such person to another institution or to a special-purpose housing unit for incarcerated persons who face similar threats. The bill requires that if an incarcerated person is placed in restorative housing or isolated confinement, such placement shall be reviewed every 48 hours and the facility administrator shall ensure that the incarcerated person receives a medical and mental health evaluation from certified medical and mental health professionals within one working day of placement in restorative housing or any form of isolated confinement. The bill also requires the facility administrator to notify the regional administrator in writing that an incarcerated person was placed in restorative housing or isolated confinement within 24 hours of such placement. Finally, the bill requires that formal reviews of an incarcerated person's placement in any form of isolated confinement shall be held in such person's presence, inform him of any reasons administrative officials believe isolated confinement remains necessary, and give the incarcerated person an opportunity to respond to those reasons, and a formal ruling shall be provided to the incarcerated individual within 24 hours. <hr> === Patrons === ==== House Patrons ==== • Joshua G. Cole (chief patron) • Patrick A. Hope • Sam Rasoul • Holly Seibold ==== Senate Patrons ==== • Bagby <hr> == Language == The language of [https://lis.virginia.gov/bill-details/20261/HB35/text/HB35 HB35] can be viewed here. <hr> == Proposed Amendment == === Amendment Offered for Consideration (requested for subcommittee) === ==== Add “Lockdown” throughout relevant provisions ==== Amend the bill to explicitly include “lockdown” alongside “solitary confinement/isolated confinement” and “restorative housing” in all relevant sections, to prevent facilities from using unit-wide lockdown practices as a functional substitute for individual isolated confinement. ==== Strengthen the time-limit clause (close the cumulative-days gap) ==== Replace the current time-limit phrasing with: “No individual shall be held in solitary confinement, lockdown, or restorative housing for more than 15 consecutive days, nor 15 days in any 60-day period.” <b>Purpose of the amendment:</b> The introduced text already uses “15 consecutive days…in any 60-day period,” but stakeholders have raised concerns that “consecutive” language can be worked around by cycling people in and out (or shifting to lockdown practices) without ever hitting a “consecutive” threshold. The amendment makes the limit explicitly <i>both</i> consecutive and cumulative. <hr> == Opening Statement == === House Subcommittee Statement === Mister Chair, members of the subcommittee— <i>This is not our first time here.</i> For <b>two straight years</b>, the General Assembly has passed this reform. <b>In 2024</b>, I gave you a sermon... and then we passed HB 1244. <b>In 2025</b>, my sister, my friend, and my colleague, <b>Delegate Keys-Gamarra</b>, took up the torch... and then we passed HB 2647. Twice, this body has said—<i><b>clearly</b></i>—that we are ready to turn the page on solitary confinement. - And after two straight years, nobody can pretend this is new. + And after two straight years, nobody can pretend this is new... • You know this bill. • You know this issue. • And you know how overdue this change is. Mister Chair, members of the committee, this is not our first time here, <b>BUT it will be our last time here</b>—because this year we will make history. And what is so great about this year is that we all have a chance—a chance to be part of making history— • Because when we look back in 25 years, <b>we will know this legislation was the right thing to do.</b> • Because when we look back in 50 years, <b>we will know this legislation was the right thing to do.</b> • Because when we look back in <b>one-hundred</b> years, <i><b>we will know this legislation was the right thing to do!</b></i> Today—I hope everyone in this room joins us in doing the <i><b>right thing.</b></i> I’ll keep my remarks brief; we know the questions, and we'll answer them if asked. But I encourage us to listen to <i><b>testimonies</b></i>, to listen to the voices who are ready for change, so that we may be reminded—again—just how overdue this legislation is. Thank you, Mister Chair and members of the committee. I hope you report this bill favorably to full committee. <hr> == Support and Opposition == === Support === • ACLU People Power Fairfax • Bridging The Gap In Virginia • Charlottesville Chapter National Organization for Women • Coalition for Justice • EJUSA Evangelical Network • Fighting 4 Freedom • Greater Washington (JCRC) • Inmate Support Virginia • Interfaith Action for Human Rights (IAHR) • HALT Solitary • Jewish Community Relations Council of Just Future Project • Justice & Witness Action Network- VA • United Church of Christ Central Atlantic Conference • LatinoJustice PRLDEF • NAACP Loudoun • National Association of Social Workers • National Association of Social Workers, Virginia Chapter • National Religious Campaign Against Torture • No Left Turns • Resource Information Help for the Disadvantaged and Disenfranchised (RIHD) • RISE for Youth • RVA Health Alliance for Social Justice and Equity • Social Action Linking Together (SALT) • Social Workers and Allies Against Solitary Confinement • The Humanization Project • The Sentencing Project • Unitarian Universalist Legislative Ministry of Virginia • Unlock the Box Campaign • Virginia CURE • Virginia Defenders for Freedom, Justice & Equality • Virginia Justice Democrats • Virginia Justice for Life • Virginia Justice Alliance • Virginia Prisons Accountability Committee • Virginia Prisoner Of Conscience • Virginia Prison Justice Network • WJCC Coalition for Community Justice • 40 Strong === Opposition === • (to be updated) === No Recommendation / Neutral === • (to be updated) === No Position Provided === • Department of Corrections <hr> == Fiscal Impact == No fiscal impact statement is posted for HB35. <hr> == Possible Questions == === TL;DR === <b>Q1: “Does this end solitary confinement in Virginia?”</b> TL;DR: No—it ends <i>prolonged</i> solitary confinement and sets clear limits, oversight, and due-process rules for any use. <br> <b>Q2: “Does this make prisons less safe for staff?”</b> TL;DR: No—HB35 keeps exceptions for imminent threats and requires documentation; it’s about targeted use, not “never.” <br> <b>Q3: “What changes day-to-day?”</b> TL;DR: Frequent reviews, rapid medical/mental health checks, real programming/out-of-cell time, and written accountability when isolation is used. <br> <b>Q4: “Can DOC just use ‘lockdowns’ instead?”</b> TL;DR: The bill defines lockdown and regulates it, and the requested amendment strengthens this further by applying the same time limits to lockdown explicitly. <br> === Q1: “What does the bill aim to accomplish?” === <b>Answer you can use:</b> HB35 ends prolonged solitary confinement by setting clear time limits and requiring real oversight—regular reviews, rapid medical and mental health evaluations, documentation, and in-person due process when isolation continues. <br> === Q2: “How often is placement reviewed?” === <b>Answer you can use:</b> Placement is reviewed frequently, including a required 48-hour review cycle with written documentation explaining why less restrictive settings were not used. <br> === Q3: “What health protections are required?” === <b>Answer you can use:</b> HB35 requires medical and mental health evaluations by certified professionals within one working day of placement in restorative housing or isolated confinement (with limited exceptions). <br> === Q4: “Does this stop people from getting programming or recreation?” === <b>Answer you can use:</b> No—the bill requires at least four hours of out-of-cell programming or congregate activity daily, plus at least one hour of congregate recreation unless exceptional safety circumstances apply. <br> === Q5: “What stops indefinite ‘lockdowns’?” === <b>Answer you can use:</b> Lockdowns that interrupt programming must have a specific documented security purpose, must end as soon as the purpose is served, are time-limited, require approvals to extend or repeat, and must be documented and published. <hr> == Additional Information == <b>1. Definitions are the enforcement backbone</b> • The bill defines isolated confinement and lockdown by hours-per-day and loss of programming, so policy can’t be evaded by unit names. <b>Policy implication:</b> Regulates conditions, not labels. <br> <b>2. The “less restrictive first” rule targets protective-custody misuse</b> • For “own protection” placements, the facility must use less restrictive options first, including transfers or special-purpose housing for similarly threatened individuals, unless infeasible. <b>Policy implication:</b> Safety without defaulting to isolation. <br> <b>3. Reviews + documentation create accountability</b> • Requires regular reviews, documentation in the institutional file, notice up the chain, and formal in-person reviews with appeal rights. <b>Policy implication:</b> Isolation becomes a documented exception, not a routine. <br> <b>4. Lockdown limits matter because lockdown can function like solitary</b> • The bill regulates lockdowns that interrupt programming and requires publication of documentation. <b>Policy implication:</b> Prevents “unit-wide solitary” from becoming the workaround. [[Category:2026 Session]]
2026-01-22 06:21:44
Edited by: 74.110.183.75
Edited by: 74.110.183.75
= HB35 Restorative housing and isolated confinement; restrictions on use. = == Status == [https://house.vga.virginia.gov/subcommittees/H15002/agendas/5187 Public Safety | Subcommittee #2 — agenda] <hr> == Overview == === Summary as Introduced === <b>Restorative housing and isolated confinement; restrictions on use.</b> Prohibits the use of isolated confinement, defined in the bill, in state correctional facilities, subject to certain exceptions. The bill requires that before placing an incarcerated person in restorative housing or isolated confinement for his own protection, the facility administrator shall place an incarcerated person in a less-restrictive setting, including by transferring such person to another institution or to a special-purpose housing unit for incarcerated persons who face similar threats. The bill requires that if an incarcerated person is placed in restorative housing or isolated confinement, such placement shall be reviewed every 48 hours and the facility administrator shall ensure that the incarcerated person receives a medical and mental health evaluation from certified medical and mental health professionals within one working day of placement in restorative housing or any form of isolated confinement. The bill also requires the facility administrator to notify the regional administrator in writing that an incarcerated person was placed in restorative housing or isolated confinement within 24 hours of such placement. Finally, the bill requires that formal reviews of an incarcerated person's placement in any form of isolated confinement shall be held in such person's presence, inform him of any reasons administrative officials believe isolated confinement remains necessary, and give the incarcerated person an opportunity to respond to those reasons, and a formal ruling shall be provided to the incarcerated individual within 24 hours. <hr> === Patrons === ==== House Patrons ==== • Joshua G. Cole (chief patron) • Patrick A. Hope • Sam Rasoul • Holly Seibold ==== Senate Patrons ==== • Bagby <hr> == Language == The language of [https://lis.virginia.gov/bill-details/20261/HB35/text/HB35 HB35] can be viewed here. <hr> == Proposed Amendment == === Amendment Offered for Consideration (requested for subcommittee) === ==== Add “Lockdown” throughout relevant provisions ==== Amend the bill to explicitly include “lockdown” alongside “solitary confinement/isolated confinement” and “restorative housing” in all relevant sections, to prevent facilities from using unit-wide lockdown practices as a functional substitute for individual isolated confinement. ==== Strengthen the time-limit clause (close the cumulative-days gap) ==== Replace the current time-limit phrasing with: “No individual shall be held in solitary confinement, lockdown, or restorative housing for more than 15 consecutive days, nor 15 days in any 60-day period.” <b>Purpose of the amendment:</b> The introduced text already uses “15 consecutive days…in any 60-day period,” but stakeholders have raised concerns that “consecutive” language can be worked around by cycling people in and out (or shifting to lockdown practices) without ever hitting a “consecutive” threshold. The amendment makes the limit explicitly <i>both</i> consecutive and cumulative. <hr> == Opening Statement == === House Subcommittee Statement === Mister Chair, members of the subcommittee— <i>This is not our first time here.</i> For <b>two straight years</b>, the General Assembly has passed this reform. <b>In 2024</b>, I gave you a sermon... and then we passed HB 1244. <b>In 2025</b>, my sister, my friend, and my colleague, <b>Delegate Keys-Gamarra</b>, took up the torch... and then we passed HB 2647. - Twice, this body has said—<i>clearly</i>—that we are ready to turn the page on solitary confinement. + Twice, this body has said—<i><b>clearly</b></i>—that we are ready to turn the page on solitary confinement. And after two straight years, nobody can pretend this is new. • You know this bill. • You know this issue. • And you know how overdue this change is. Mister Chair, members of the committee, this is not our first time here, <b>BUT it will be our last time here</b>—because this year we will make history. And what is so great about this year is that we all have a chance—a chance to be part of making history— • Because when we look back in 25 years, <b>we will know this legislation was the right thing to do.</b> • Because when we look back in 50 years, <b>we will know this legislation was the right thing to do.</b> • Because when we look back in <b>one-hundred</b> years, <i><b>we will know this legislation was the right thing to do!</b></i> Today—I hope everyone in this room joins us in doing the <i><b>right thing.</b></i> I’ll keep my remarks brief; we know the questions, and we'll answer them if asked. But I encourage us to listen to <i><b>testimonies</b></i>, to listen to the voices who are ready for change, so that we may be reminded—again—just how overdue this legislation is. Thank you, Mister Chair and members of the committee. I hope you report this bill favorably to full committee. <hr> == Support and Opposition == === Support === • ACLU People Power Fairfax • Bridging The Gap In Virginia • Charlottesville Chapter National Organization for Women • Coalition for Justice • EJUSA Evangelical Network • Fighting 4 Freedom • Greater Washington (JCRC) • Inmate Support Virginia • Interfaith Action for Human Rights (IAHR) • HALT Solitary • Jewish Community Relations Council of Just Future Project • Justice & Witness Action Network- VA • United Church of Christ Central Atlantic Conference • LatinoJustice PRLDEF • NAACP Loudoun • National Association of Social Workers • National Association of Social Workers, Virginia Chapter • National Religious Campaign Against Torture • No Left Turns • Resource Information Help for the Disadvantaged and Disenfranchised (RIHD) • RISE for Youth • RVA Health Alliance for Social Justice and Equity • Social Action Linking Together (SALT) • Social Workers and Allies Against Solitary Confinement • The Humanization Project • The Sentencing Project • Unitarian Universalist Legislative Ministry of Virginia • Unlock the Box Campaign • Virginia CURE • Virginia Defenders for Freedom, Justice & Equality • Virginia Justice Democrats • Virginia Justice for Life • Virginia Justice Alliance • Virginia Prisons Accountability Committee • Virginia Prisoner Of Conscience • Virginia Prison Justice Network • WJCC Coalition for Community Justice • 40 Strong === Opposition === • (to be updated) === No Recommendation / Neutral === • (to be updated) === No Position Provided === • Department of Corrections <hr> == Fiscal Impact == No fiscal impact statement is posted for HB35. <hr> == Possible Questions == === TL;DR === <b>Q1: “Does this end solitary confinement in Virginia?”</b> TL;DR: No—it ends <i>prolonged</i> solitary confinement and sets clear limits, oversight, and due-process rules for any use. <br> <b>Q2: “Does this make prisons less safe for staff?”</b> TL;DR: No—HB35 keeps exceptions for imminent threats and requires documentation; it’s about targeted use, not “never.” <br> <b>Q3: “What changes day-to-day?”</b> TL;DR: Frequent reviews, rapid medical/mental health checks, real programming/out-of-cell time, and written accountability when isolation is used. <br> <b>Q4: “Can DOC just use ‘lockdowns’ instead?”</b> TL;DR: The bill defines lockdown and regulates it, and the requested amendment strengthens this further by applying the same time limits to lockdown explicitly. <br> === Q1: “What does the bill aim to accomplish?” === <b>Answer you can use:</b> HB35 ends prolonged solitary confinement by setting clear time limits and requiring real oversight—regular reviews, rapid medical and mental health evaluations, documentation, and in-person due process when isolation continues. <br> === Q2: “How often is placement reviewed?” === <b>Answer you can use:</b> Placement is reviewed frequently, including a required 48-hour review cycle with written documentation explaining why less restrictive settings were not used. <br> === Q3: “What health protections are required?” === <b>Answer you can use:</b> HB35 requires medical and mental health evaluations by certified professionals within one working day of placement in restorative housing or isolated confinement (with limited exceptions). <br> === Q4: “Does this stop people from getting programming or recreation?” === <b>Answer you can use:</b> No—the bill requires at least four hours of out-of-cell programming or congregate activity daily, plus at least one hour of congregate recreation unless exceptional safety circumstances apply. <br> === Q5: “What stops indefinite ‘lockdowns’?” === <b>Answer you can use:</b> Lockdowns that interrupt programming must have a specific documented security purpose, must end as soon as the purpose is served, are time-limited, require approvals to extend or repeat, and must be documented and published. <hr> == Additional Information == <b>1. Definitions are the enforcement backbone</b> • The bill defines isolated confinement and lockdown by hours-per-day and loss of programming, so policy can’t be evaded by unit names. <b>Policy implication:</b> Regulates conditions, not labels. <br> <b>2. The “less restrictive first” rule targets protective-custody misuse</b> • For “own protection” placements, the facility must use less restrictive options first, including transfers or special-purpose housing for similarly threatened individuals, unless infeasible. <b>Policy implication:</b> Safety without defaulting to isolation. <br> <b>3. Reviews + documentation create accountability</b> • Requires regular reviews, documentation in the institutional file, notice up the chain, and formal in-person reviews with appeal rights. <b>Policy implication:</b> Isolation becomes a documented exception, not a routine. <br> <b>4. Lockdown limits matter because lockdown can function like solitary</b> • The bill regulates lockdowns that interrupt programming and requires publication of documentation. <b>Policy implication:</b> Prevents “unit-wide solitary” from becoming the workaround. [[Category:2026 Session]]
2026-01-22 06:21:27
Edited by: 74.110.183.75
Edited by: 74.110.183.75
= HB35 Restorative housing and isolated confinement; restrictions on use. = == Status == [https://house.vga.virginia.gov/subcommittees/H15002/agendas/5187 Public Safety | Subcommittee #2 — agenda] <hr> == Overview == === Summary as Introduced === <b>Restorative housing and isolated confinement; restrictions on use.</b> Prohibits the use of isolated confinement, defined in the bill, in state correctional facilities, subject to certain exceptions. The bill requires that before placing an incarcerated person in restorative housing or isolated confinement for his own protection, the facility administrator shall place an incarcerated person in a less-restrictive setting, including by transferring such person to another institution or to a special-purpose housing unit for incarcerated persons who face similar threats. The bill requires that if an incarcerated person is placed in restorative housing or isolated confinement, such placement shall be reviewed every 48 hours and the facility administrator shall ensure that the incarcerated person receives a medical and mental health evaluation from certified medical and mental health professionals within one working day of placement in restorative housing or any form of isolated confinement. The bill also requires the facility administrator to notify the regional administrator in writing that an incarcerated person was placed in restorative housing or isolated confinement within 24 hours of such placement. Finally, the bill requires that formal reviews of an incarcerated person's placement in any form of isolated confinement shall be held in such person's presence, inform him of any reasons administrative officials believe isolated confinement remains necessary, and give the incarcerated person an opportunity to respond to those reasons, and a formal ruling shall be provided to the incarcerated individual within 24 hours. <hr> === Patrons === ==== House Patrons ==== • Joshua G. Cole (chief patron) • Patrick A. Hope • Sam Rasoul • Holly Seibold ==== Senate Patrons ==== • Bagby <hr> == Language == The language of [https://lis.virginia.gov/bill-details/20261/HB35/text/HB35 HB35] can be viewed here. <hr> == Proposed Amendment == === Amendment Offered for Consideration (requested for subcommittee) === ==== Add “Lockdown” throughout relevant provisions ==== Amend the bill to explicitly include “lockdown” alongside “solitary confinement/isolated confinement” and “restorative housing” in all relevant sections, to prevent facilities from using unit-wide lockdown practices as a functional substitute for individual isolated confinement. ==== Strengthen the time-limit clause (close the cumulative-days gap) ==== Replace the current time-limit phrasing with: “No individual shall be held in solitary confinement, lockdown, or restorative housing for more than 15 consecutive days, nor 15 days in any 60-day period.” <b>Purpose of the amendment:</b> The introduced text already uses “15 consecutive days…in any 60-day period,” but stakeholders have raised concerns that “consecutive” language can be worked around by cycling people in and out (or shifting to lockdown practices) without ever hitting a “consecutive” threshold. The amendment makes the limit explicitly <i>both</i> consecutive and cumulative. <hr> == Opening Statement == === House Subcommittee Statement === Mister Chair, members of the subcommittee— <i>This is not our first time here.</i> For <b>two straight years</b>, the General Assembly has passed this reform. <b>In 2024</b>, I gave you a sermon... and then we passed HB 1244. <b>In 2025</b>, my sister, my friend, and my colleague, <b>Delegate Keys-Gamarra</b>, took up the torch... and then we passed HB 2647. - Twice, this body has said—clearly—that we are ready to turn the page on solitary confinement. + Twice, this body has said—<i>clearly</i>—that we are ready to turn the page on solitary confinement. And after two straight years, nobody can pretend this is new. • You know this bill. • You know this issue. • And you know how overdue this change is. Mister Chair, members of the committee, this is not our first time here, <b>BUT it will be our last time here</b>—because this year we will make history. And what is so great about this year is that we all have a chance—a chance to be part of making history— • Because when we look back in 25 years, <b>we will know this legislation was the right thing to do.</b> • Because when we look back in 50 years, <b>we will know this legislation was the right thing to do.</b> • Because when we look back in <b>one-hundred</b> years, <i><b>we will know this legislation was the right thing to do!</b></i> Today—I hope everyone in this room joins us in doing the <i><b>right thing.</b></i> I’ll keep my remarks brief; we know the questions, and we'll answer them if asked. But I encourage us to listen to <i><b>testimonies</b></i>, to listen to the voices who are ready for change, so that we may be reminded—again—just how overdue this legislation is. Thank you, Mister Chair and members of the committee. I hope you report this bill favorably to full committee. <hr> == Support and Opposition == === Support === • ACLU People Power Fairfax • Bridging The Gap In Virginia • Charlottesville Chapter National Organization for Women • Coalition for Justice • EJUSA Evangelical Network • Fighting 4 Freedom • Greater Washington (JCRC) • Inmate Support Virginia • Interfaith Action for Human Rights (IAHR) • HALT Solitary • Jewish Community Relations Council of Just Future Project • Justice & Witness Action Network- VA • United Church of Christ Central Atlantic Conference • LatinoJustice PRLDEF • NAACP Loudoun • National Association of Social Workers • National Association of Social Workers, Virginia Chapter • National Religious Campaign Against Torture • No Left Turns • Resource Information Help for the Disadvantaged and Disenfranchised (RIHD) • RISE for Youth • RVA Health Alliance for Social Justice and Equity • Social Action Linking Together (SALT) • Social Workers and Allies Against Solitary Confinement • The Humanization Project • The Sentencing Project • Unitarian Universalist Legislative Ministry of Virginia • Unlock the Box Campaign • Virginia CURE • Virginia Defenders for Freedom, Justice & Equality • Virginia Justice Democrats • Virginia Justice for Life • Virginia Justice Alliance • Virginia Prisons Accountability Committee • Virginia Prisoner Of Conscience • Virginia Prison Justice Network • WJCC Coalition for Community Justice • 40 Strong === Opposition === • (to be updated) === No Recommendation / Neutral === • (to be updated) === No Position Provided === • Department of Corrections <hr> == Fiscal Impact == No fiscal impact statement is posted for HB35. <hr> == Possible Questions == === TL;DR === <b>Q1: “Does this end solitary confinement in Virginia?”</b> TL;DR: No—it ends <i>prolonged</i> solitary confinement and sets clear limits, oversight, and due-process rules for any use. <br> <b>Q2: “Does this make prisons less safe for staff?”</b> TL;DR: No—HB35 keeps exceptions for imminent threats and requires documentation; it’s about targeted use, not “never.” <br> <b>Q3: “What changes day-to-day?”</b> TL;DR: Frequent reviews, rapid medical/mental health checks, real programming/out-of-cell time, and written accountability when isolation is used. <br> <b>Q4: “Can DOC just use ‘lockdowns’ instead?”</b> TL;DR: The bill defines lockdown and regulates it, and the requested amendment strengthens this further by applying the same time limits to lockdown explicitly. <br> === Q1: “What does the bill aim to accomplish?” === <b>Answer you can use:</b> HB35 ends prolonged solitary confinement by setting clear time limits and requiring real oversight—regular reviews, rapid medical and mental health evaluations, documentation, and in-person due process when isolation continues. <br> === Q2: “How often is placement reviewed?” === <b>Answer you can use:</b> Placement is reviewed frequently, including a required 48-hour review cycle with written documentation explaining why less restrictive settings were not used. <br> === Q3: “What health protections are required?” === <b>Answer you can use:</b> HB35 requires medical and mental health evaluations by certified professionals within one working day of placement in restorative housing or isolated confinement (with limited exceptions). <br> === Q4: “Does this stop people from getting programming or recreation?” === <b>Answer you can use:</b> No—the bill requires at least four hours of out-of-cell programming or congregate activity daily, plus at least one hour of congregate recreation unless exceptional safety circumstances apply. <br> === Q5: “What stops indefinite ‘lockdowns’?” === <b>Answer you can use:</b> Lockdowns that interrupt programming must have a specific documented security purpose, must end as soon as the purpose is served, are time-limited, require approvals to extend or repeat, and must be documented and published. <hr> == Additional Information == <b>1. Definitions are the enforcement backbone</b> • The bill defines isolated confinement and lockdown by hours-per-day and loss of programming, so policy can’t be evaded by unit names. <b>Policy implication:</b> Regulates conditions, not labels. <br> <b>2. The “less restrictive first” rule targets protective-custody misuse</b> • For “own protection” placements, the facility must use less restrictive options first, including transfers or special-purpose housing for similarly threatened individuals, unless infeasible. <b>Policy implication:</b> Safety without defaulting to isolation. <br> <b>3. Reviews + documentation create accountability</b> • Requires regular reviews, documentation in the institutional file, notice up the chain, and formal in-person reviews with appeal rights. <b>Policy implication:</b> Isolation becomes a documented exception, not a routine. <br> <b>4. Lockdown limits matter because lockdown can function like solitary</b> • The bill regulates lockdowns that interrupt programming and requires publication of documentation. <b>Policy implication:</b> Prevents “unit-wide solitary” from becoming the workaround. [[Category:2026 Session]]
2026-01-22 06:21:06
Edited by: 74.110.183.75
Edited by: 74.110.183.75
= HB35 Restorative housing and isolated confinement; restrictions on use. = == Status == [https://house.vga.virginia.gov/subcommittees/H15002/agendas/5187 Public Safety | Subcommittee #2 — agenda] <hr> == Overview == === Summary as Introduced === <b>Restorative housing and isolated confinement; restrictions on use.</b> Prohibits the use of isolated confinement, defined in the bill, in state correctional facilities, subject to certain exceptions. The bill requires that before placing an incarcerated person in restorative housing or isolated confinement for his own protection, the facility administrator shall place an incarcerated person in a less-restrictive setting, including by transferring such person to another institution or to a special-purpose housing unit for incarcerated persons who face similar threats. The bill requires that if an incarcerated person is placed in restorative housing or isolated confinement, such placement shall be reviewed every 48 hours and the facility administrator shall ensure that the incarcerated person receives a medical and mental health evaluation from certified medical and mental health professionals within one working day of placement in restorative housing or any form of isolated confinement. The bill also requires the facility administrator to notify the regional administrator in writing that an incarcerated person was placed in restorative housing or isolated confinement within 24 hours of such placement. Finally, the bill requires that formal reviews of an incarcerated person's placement in any form of isolated confinement shall be held in such person's presence, inform him of any reasons administrative officials believe isolated confinement remains necessary, and give the incarcerated person an opportunity to respond to those reasons, and a formal ruling shall be provided to the incarcerated individual within 24 hours. <hr> === Patrons === ==== House Patrons ==== • Joshua G. Cole (chief patron) • Patrick A. Hope • Sam Rasoul • Holly Seibold ==== Senate Patrons ==== • Bagby <hr> == Language == The language of [https://lis.virginia.gov/bill-details/20261/HB35/text/HB35 HB35] can be viewed here. <hr> == Proposed Amendment == === Amendment Offered for Consideration (requested for subcommittee) === ==== Add “Lockdown” throughout relevant provisions ==== Amend the bill to explicitly include “lockdown” alongside “solitary confinement/isolated confinement” and “restorative housing” in all relevant sections, to prevent facilities from using unit-wide lockdown practices as a functional substitute for individual isolated confinement. ==== Strengthen the time-limit clause (close the cumulative-days gap) ==== Replace the current time-limit phrasing with: “No individual shall be held in solitary confinement, lockdown, or restorative housing for more than 15 consecutive days, nor 15 days in any 60-day period.” <b>Purpose of the amendment:</b> The introduced text already uses “15 consecutive days…in any 60-day period,” but stakeholders have raised concerns that “consecutive” language can be worked around by cycling people in and out (or shifting to lockdown practices) without ever hitting a “consecutive” threshold. The amendment makes the limit explicitly <i>both</i> consecutive and cumulative. <hr> == Opening Statement == === House Subcommittee Statement === Mister Chair, members of the subcommittee— <i>This is not our first time here.</i> For <b>two straight years</b>, the General Assembly has passed this reform. <b>In 2024</b>, I gave you a sermon... and then we passed HB 1244. <b>In 2025</b>, my sister, my friend, and my colleague, <b>Delegate Keys-Gamarra</b>, took up the torch... and then we passed HB 2647. Twice, this body has said—clearly—that we are ready to turn the page on solitary confinement. And after two straight years, nobody can pretend this is new. • You know this bill. • You know this issue. • And you know how overdue this change is. Mister Chair, members of the committee, this is not our first time here, <b>BUT it will be our last time here</b>—because this year we will make history. And what is so great about this year is that we all have a chance—a chance to be part of making history— • Because when we look back in 25 years, <b>we will know this legislation was the right thing to do.</b> • Because when we look back in 50 years, <b>we will know this legislation was the right thing to do.</b> • Because when we look back in <b>one-hundred</b> years, <i><b>we will know this legislation was the right thing to do!</b></i> Today—I hope everyone in this room joins us in doing the <i><b>right thing.</b></i> I’ll keep my remarks brief; we know the questions, and we'll answer them if asked. But I encourage us to listen to <i><b>testimonies</b></i>, to listen to the voices who are ready for change, so that we may be reminded—again—just how overdue this legislation is. Thank you, Mister Chair and members of the committee. I hope you report this bill favorably to full committee. <hr> == Support and Opposition == === Support === • ACLU People Power Fairfax • Bridging The Gap In Virginia • Charlottesville Chapter National Organization for Women • Coalition for Justice • EJUSA Evangelical Network • Fighting 4 Freedom • Greater Washington (JCRC) • Inmate Support Virginia • Interfaith Action for Human Rights (IAHR) • HALT Solitary • Jewish Community Relations Council of Just Future Project • Justice & Witness Action Network- VA • United Church of Christ Central Atlantic Conference • LatinoJustice PRLDEF • NAACP Loudoun • National Association of Social Workers • National Association of Social Workers, Virginia Chapter • National Religious Campaign Against Torture • No Left Turns • Resource Information Help for the Disadvantaged and Disenfranchised (RIHD) • RISE for Youth • RVA Health Alliance for Social Justice and Equity • Social Action Linking Together (SALT) • Social Workers and Allies Against Solitary Confinement • The Humanization Project • The Sentencing Project • Unitarian Universalist Legislative Ministry of Virginia • Unlock the Box Campaign • Virginia CURE • Virginia Defenders for Freedom, Justice & Equality • Virginia Justice Democrats • Virginia Justice for Life • Virginia Justice Alliance • Virginia Prisons Accountability Committee • Virginia Prisoner Of Conscience • Virginia Prison Justice Network • WJCC Coalition for Community Justice • 40 Strong === Opposition === • (to be updated) === No Recommendation / Neutral === • (to be updated) - === No Position provided === + === No Position Provided === • Department of Corrections <hr> == Fiscal Impact == No fiscal impact statement is posted for HB35. <hr> == Possible Questions == === TL;DR === <b>Q1: “Does this end solitary confinement in Virginia?”</b> TL;DR: No—it ends <i>prolonged</i> solitary confinement and sets clear limits, oversight, and due-process rules for any use. <br> <b>Q2: “Does this make prisons less safe for staff?”</b> TL;DR: No—HB35 keeps exceptions for imminent threats and requires documentation; it’s about targeted use, not “never.” <br> <b>Q3: “What changes day-to-day?”</b> TL;DR: Frequent reviews, rapid medical/mental health checks, real programming/out-of-cell time, and written accountability when isolation is used. <br> <b>Q4: “Can DOC just use ‘lockdowns’ instead?”</b> TL;DR: The bill defines lockdown and regulates it, and the requested amendment strengthens this further by applying the same time limits to lockdown explicitly. <br> === Q1: “What does the bill aim to accomplish?” === <b>Answer you can use:</b> HB35 ends prolonged solitary confinement by setting clear time limits and requiring real oversight—regular reviews, rapid medical and mental health evaluations, documentation, and in-person due process when isolation continues. <br> === Q2: “How often is placement reviewed?” === <b>Answer you can use:</b> Placement is reviewed frequently, including a required 48-hour review cycle with written documentation explaining why less restrictive settings were not used. <br> === Q3: “What health protections are required?” === <b>Answer you can use:</b> HB35 requires medical and mental health evaluations by certified professionals within one working day of placement in restorative housing or isolated confinement (with limited exceptions). <br> === Q4: “Does this stop people from getting programming or recreation?” === <b>Answer you can use:</b> No—the bill requires at least four hours of out-of-cell programming or congregate activity daily, plus at least one hour of congregate recreation unless exceptional safety circumstances apply. <br> === Q5: “What stops indefinite ‘lockdowns’?” === <b>Answer you can use:</b> Lockdowns that interrupt programming must have a specific documented security purpose, must end as soon as the purpose is served, are time-limited, require approvals to extend or repeat, and must be documented and published. <hr> == Additional Information == <b>1. Definitions are the enforcement backbone</b> • The bill defines isolated confinement and lockdown by hours-per-day and loss of programming, so policy can’t be evaded by unit names. <b>Policy implication:</b> Regulates conditions, not labels. <br> <b>2. The “less restrictive first” rule targets protective-custody misuse</b> • For “own protection” placements, the facility must use less restrictive options first, including transfers or special-purpose housing for similarly threatened individuals, unless infeasible. <b>Policy implication:</b> Safety without defaulting to isolation. <br> <b>3. Reviews + documentation create accountability</b> • Requires regular reviews, documentation in the institutional file, notice up the chain, and formal in-person reviews with appeal rights. <b>Policy implication:</b> Isolation becomes a documented exception, not a routine. <br> <b>4. Lockdown limits matter because lockdown can function like solitary</b> • The bill regulates lockdowns that interrupt programming and requires publication of documentation. <b>Policy implication:</b> Prevents “unit-wide solitary” from becoming the workaround. [[Category:2026 Session]]
2026-01-22 06:20:34
Edited by: 74.110.183.75
Edited by: 74.110.183.75
= HB35 Restorative housing and isolated confinement; restrictions on use. = == Status == [https://house.vga.virginia.gov/subcommittees/H15002/agendas/5187 Public Safety | Subcommittee #2 — agenda] <hr> == Overview == === Summary as Introduced === <b>Restorative housing and isolated confinement; restrictions on use.</b> Prohibits the use of isolated confinement, defined in the bill, in state correctional facilities, subject to certain exceptions. The bill requires that before placing an incarcerated person in restorative housing or isolated confinement for his own protection, the facility administrator shall place an incarcerated person in a less-restrictive setting, including by transferring such person to another institution or to a special-purpose housing unit for incarcerated persons who face similar threats. The bill requires that if an incarcerated person is placed in restorative housing or isolated confinement, such placement shall be reviewed every 48 hours and the facility administrator shall ensure that the incarcerated person receives a medical and mental health evaluation from certified medical and mental health professionals within one working day of placement in restorative housing or any form of isolated confinement. The bill also requires the facility administrator to notify the regional administrator in writing that an incarcerated person was placed in restorative housing or isolated confinement within 24 hours of such placement. Finally, the bill requires that formal reviews of an incarcerated person's placement in any form of isolated confinement shall be held in such person's presence, inform him of any reasons administrative officials believe isolated confinement remains necessary, and give the incarcerated person an opportunity to respond to those reasons, and a formal ruling shall be provided to the incarcerated individual within 24 hours. <hr> === Patrons === ==== House Patrons ==== • Joshua G. Cole (chief patron) • Patrick A. Hope • Sam Rasoul • Holly Seibold ==== Senate Patrons ==== • Bagby <hr> == Language == The language of [https://lis.virginia.gov/bill-details/20261/HB35/text/HB35 HB35] can be viewed here. <hr> == Proposed Amendment == === Amendment Offered for Consideration (requested for subcommittee) === ==== Add “Lockdown” throughout relevant provisions ==== Amend the bill to explicitly include “lockdown” alongside “solitary confinement/isolated confinement” and “restorative housing” in all relevant sections, to prevent facilities from using unit-wide lockdown practices as a functional substitute for individual isolated confinement. ==== Strengthen the time-limit clause (close the cumulative-days gap) ==== Replace the current time-limit phrasing with: “No individual shall be held in solitary confinement, lockdown, or restorative housing for more than 15 consecutive days, nor 15 days in any 60-day period.” <b>Purpose of the amendment:</b> The introduced text already uses “15 consecutive days…in any 60-day period,” but stakeholders have raised concerns that “consecutive” language can be worked around by cycling people in and out (or shifting to lockdown practices) without ever hitting a “consecutive” threshold. The amendment makes the limit explicitly <i>both</i> consecutive and cumulative. <hr> == Opening Statement == === House Subcommittee Statement === Mister Chair, members of the subcommittee— <i>This is not our first time here.</i> For <b>two straight years</b>, the General Assembly has passed this reform. <b>In 2024</b>, I gave you a sermon... and then we passed HB 1244. <b>In 2025</b>, my sister, my friend, and my colleague, <b>Delegate Keys-Gamarra</b>, took up the torch... and then we passed HB 2647. Twice, this body has said—clearly—that we are ready to turn the page on solitary confinement. And after two straight years, nobody can pretend this is new. • You know this bill. • You know this issue. • And you know how overdue this change is. Mister Chair, members of the committee, this is not our first time here, <b>BUT it will be our last time here</b>—because this year we will make history. And what is so great about this year is that we all have a chance—a chance to be part of making history— • Because when we look back in 25 years, <b>we will know this legislation was the right thing to do.</b> • Because when we look back in 50 years, <b>we will know this legislation was the right thing to do.</b> • Because when we look back in <b>one-hundred</b> years, <i><b>we will know this legislation was the right thing to do!</b></i> Today—I hope everyone in this room joins us in doing the <i><b>right thing.</b></i> I’ll keep my remarks brief; we know the questions, and we'll answer them if asked. But I encourage us to listen to <i><b>testimonies</b></i>, to listen to the voices who are ready for change, so that we may be reminded—again—just how overdue this legislation is. Thank you, Mister Chair and members of the committee. I hope you report this bill favorably to full committee. <hr> == Support and Opposition == === Support === • ACLU People Power Fairfax • Bridging The Gap In Virginia • Charlottesville Chapter National Organization for Women • Coalition for Justice • EJUSA Evangelical Network • Fighting 4 Freedom • Greater Washington (JCRC) • Inmate Support Virginia • Interfaith Action for Human Rights (IAHR) • HALT Solitary • Jewish Community Relations Council of Just Future Project • Justice & Witness Action Network- VA • United Church of Christ Central Atlantic Conference • LatinoJustice PRLDEF • NAACP Loudoun • National Association of Social Workers • National Association of Social Workers, Virginia Chapter • National Religious Campaign Against Torture • No Left Turns • Resource Information Help for the Disadvantaged and Disenfranchised (RIHD) • RISE for Youth • RVA Health Alliance for Social Justice and Equity • Social Action Linking Together (SALT) • Social Workers and Allies Against Solitary Confinement • The Humanization Project • The Sentencing Project • Unitarian Universalist Legislative Ministry of Virginia • Unlock the Box Campaign • Virginia CURE • Virginia Defenders for Freedom, Justice & Equality • Virginia Justice Democrats • Virginia Justice for Life • Virginia Justice Alliance • Virginia Prisons Accountability Committee • Virginia Prisoner Of Conscience • Virginia Prison Justice Network • WJCC Coalition for Community Justice • 40 Strong === Opposition === • (to be updated) === No Recommendation / Neutral === • (to be updated) - <hr> + === No Position provided === - + • Department of Corrections - == Fiscal Impact == + - No fiscal impact statement is posted for HB35. + <hr> - <hr> + == Fiscal Impact == - + No fiscal impact statement is posted for HB35. - == Possible Questions == + - + <hr> - === TL;DR === + - <b>Q1: “Does this end solitary confinement in Virginia?”</b> TL;DR: No—it ends <i>prolonged</i> solitary confinement and sets clear limits, oversight, and due-process rules for any use. <br> + == Possible Questions == - <b>Q2: “Does this make prisons less safe for staff?”</b> TL;DR: No—HB35 keeps exceptions for imminent threats and requires documentation; it’s about targeted use, not “never.” + - + === TL;DR === - <br> + <b>Q1: “Does this end solitary confinement in Virginia?”</b> TL;DR: No—it ends <i>prolonged</i> solitary confinement and sets clear limits, oversight, and due-process rules for any use. <br> - <b>Q3: “What changes day-to-day?”</b> TL;DR: Frequent reviews, rapid medical/mental health checks, real programming/out-of-cell time, and written accountability when isolation is used. + <b>Q2: “Does this make prisons less safe for staff?”</b> TL;DR: No—HB35 keeps exceptions for imminent threats and requires documentation; it’s about targeted use, not “never.” <br> - <b>Q4: “Can DOC just use ‘lockdowns’ instead?”</b> TL;DR: The bill defines lockdown and regulates it, and the requested amendment strengthens this further by applying the same time limits to lockdown explicitly. + <b>Q3: “What changes day-to-day?”</b> TL;DR: Frequent reviews, rapid medical/mental health checks, real programming/out-of-cell time, and written accountability when isolation is used. <br> - + <b>Q4: “Can DOC just use ‘lockdowns’ instead?”</b> TL;DR: The bill defines lockdown and regulates it, and the requested amendment strengthens this further by applying the same time limits to lockdown explicitly. - === Q1: “What does the bill aim to accomplish?” === + - <b>Answer you can use:</b> HB35 ends prolonged solitary confinement by setting clear time limits and requiring real oversight—regular reviews, rapid medical and mental health evaluations, documentation, and in-person due process when isolation continues. + <br> - <br> + === Q1: “What does the bill aim to accomplish?” === - + <b>Answer you can use:</b> HB35 ends prolonged solitary confinement by setting clear time limits and requiring real oversight—regular reviews, rapid medical and mental health evaluations, documentation, and in-person due process when isolation continues. - === Q2: “How often is placement reviewed?” === + - <b>Answer you can use:</b> Placement is reviewed frequently, including a required 48-hour review cycle with written documentation explaining why less restrictive settings were not used. + <br> - <br> + === Q2: “How often is placement reviewed?” === - + <b>Answer you can use:</b> Placement is reviewed frequently, including a required 48-hour review cycle with written documentation explaining why less restrictive settings were not used. - === Q3: “What health protections are required?” === + - <b>Answer you can use:</b> HB35 requires medical and mental health evaluations by certified professionals within one working day of placement in restorative housing or isolated confinement (with limited exceptions). + <br> - <br> + === Q3: “What health protections are required?” === - + <b>Answer you can use:</b> HB35 requires medical and mental health evaluations by certified professionals within one working day of placement in restorative housing or isolated confinement (with limited exceptions). - === Q4: “Does this stop people from getting programming or recreation?” === + - <b>Answer you can use:</b> No—the bill requires at least four hours of out-of-cell programming or congregate activity daily, plus at least one hour of congregate recreation unless exceptional safety circumstances apply. + <br> - <br> + === Q4: “Does this stop people from getting programming or recreation?” === - + <b>Answer you can use:</b> No—the bill requires at least four hours of out-of-cell programming or congregate activity daily, plus at least one hour of congregate recreation unless exceptional safety circumstances apply. - === Q5: “What stops indefinite ‘lockdowns’?” === + - <b>Answer you can use:</b> Lockdowns that interrupt programming must have a specific documented security purpose, must end as soon as the purpose is served, are time-limited, require approvals to extend or repeat, and must be documented and published. + <br> - <hr> + === Q5: “What stops indefinite ‘lockdowns’?” === - + <b>Answer you can use:</b> Lockdowns that interrupt programming must have a specific documented security purpose, must end as soon as the purpose is served, are time-limited, require approvals to extend or repeat, and must be documented and published. - == Additional Information == + - <b>1. Definitions are the enforcement backbone</b> + <hr> - • The bill defines isolated confinement and lockdown by hours-per-day and loss of programming, so policy can’t be evaded by unit names. + - + == Additional Information == - + <b>1. Definitions are the enforcement backbone</b> - <b>Policy implication:</b> Regulates conditions, not labels. + • The bill defines isolated confinement and lockdown by hours-per-day and loss of programming, so policy can’t be evaded by unit names. - <br> + - + <b>Policy implication:</b> Regulates conditions, not labels. - <b>2. The “less restrictive first” rule targets protective-custody misuse</b> + - • For “own protection” placements, the facility must use less restrictive options first, including transfers or special-purpose housing for similarly threatened individuals, unless infeasible. + <br> - <b>Policy implication:</b> Safety without defaulting to isolation. + <b>2. The “less restrictive first” rule targets protective-custody misuse</b> - + • For “own protection” placements, the facility must use less restrictive options first, including transfers or special-purpose housing for similarly threatened individuals, unless infeasible. - <br> + - + <b>Policy implication:</b> Safety without defaulting to isolation. - <b>3. Reviews + documentation create accountability</b> + - • Requires regular reviews, documentation in the institutional file, notice up the chain, and formal in-person reviews with appeal rights. + <br> - <b>Policy implication:</b> Isolation becomes a documented exception, not a routine. + <b>3. Reviews + documentation create accountability</b> - + • Requires regular reviews, documentation in the institutional file, notice up the chain, and formal in-person reviews with appeal rights. - <br> + - + <b>Policy implication:</b> Isolation becomes a documented exception, not a routine. - <b>4. Lockdown limits matter because lockdown can function like solitary</b> + - • The bill regulates lockdowns that interrupt programming and requires publication of documentation. + <br> - + <b>4. Lockdown limits matter because lockdown can function like solitary</b> - <b>Policy implication:</b> Prevents “unit-wide solitary” from becoming the workaround. + • The bill regulates lockdowns that interrupt programming and requires publication of documentation. - [[Category:2026 Session]] + + <b>Policy implication:</b> Prevents “unit-wide solitary” from becoming the workaround. + + [[Category:2026 Session]]
2026-01-22 06:20:23
Edited by: 74.110.183.75
Edited by: 74.110.183.75
= HB35 Restorative housing and isolated confinement; restrictions on use. = == Status == [https://house.vga.virginia.gov/subcommittees/H15002/agendas/5187 Public Safety | Subcommittee #2 — agenda] <hr> == Overview == === Summary as Introduced === <b>Restorative housing and isolated confinement; restrictions on use.</b> Prohibits the use of isolated confinement, defined in the bill, in state correctional facilities, subject to certain exceptions. The bill requires that before placing an incarcerated person in restorative housing or isolated confinement for his own protection, the facility administrator shall place an incarcerated person in a less-restrictive setting, including by transferring such person to another institution or to a special-purpose housing unit for incarcerated persons who face similar threats. The bill requires that if an incarcerated person is placed in restorative housing or isolated confinement, such placement shall be reviewed every 48 hours and the facility administrator shall ensure that the incarcerated person receives a medical and mental health evaluation from certified medical and mental health professionals within one working day of placement in restorative housing or any form of isolated confinement. The bill also requires the facility administrator to notify the regional administrator in writing that an incarcerated person was placed in restorative housing or isolated confinement within 24 hours of such placement. Finally, the bill requires that formal reviews of an incarcerated person's placement in any form of isolated confinement shall be held in such person's presence, inform him of any reasons administrative officials believe isolated confinement remains necessary, and give the incarcerated person an opportunity to respond to those reasons, and a formal ruling shall be provided to the incarcerated individual within 24 hours. <hr> === Patrons === ==== House Patrons ==== • Joshua G. Cole (chief patron) • Patrick A. Hope • Sam Rasoul • Holly Seibold ==== Senate Patrons ==== • Bagby <hr> == Language == The language of [https://lis.virginia.gov/bill-details/20261/HB35/text/HB35 HB35] can be viewed here. <hr> == Proposed Amendment == === Amendment Offered for Consideration (requested for subcommittee) === ==== Add “Lockdown” throughout relevant provisions ==== Amend the bill to explicitly include “lockdown” alongside “solitary confinement/isolated confinement” and “restorative housing” in all relevant sections, to prevent facilities from using unit-wide lockdown practices as a functional substitute for individual isolated confinement. ==== Strengthen the time-limit clause (close the cumulative-days gap) ==== Replace the current time-limit phrasing with: “No individual shall be held in solitary confinement, lockdown, or restorative housing for more than 15 consecutive days, nor 15 days in any 60-day period.” <b>Purpose of the amendment:</b> The introduced text already uses “15 consecutive days…in any 60-day period,” but stakeholders have raised concerns that “consecutive” language can be worked around by cycling people in and out (or shifting to lockdown practices) without ever hitting a “consecutive” threshold. The amendment makes the limit explicitly <i>both</i> consecutive and cumulative. <hr> == Opening Statement == === House Subcommittee Statement === Mister Chair, members of the subcommittee— <i>This is not our first time here.</i> For <b>two straight years</b>, the General Assembly has passed this reform. <b>In 2024</b>, I gave you a sermon... and then we passed HB 1244. <b>In 2025</b>, my sister, my friend, and my colleague, <b>Delegate Keys-Gamarra</b>, took up the torch... and then we passed HB 2647. - Twice, this body has said—clearly—that we are ready to turn the page on solitary. + Twice, this body has said—clearly—that we are ready to turn the page on solitary confinement. And after two straight years, nobody can pretend this is new. • You know this bill. • You know this issue. • And you know how overdue this change is. Mister Chair, members of the committee, this is not our first time here, <b>BUT it will be our last time here</b>—because this year we will make history. And what is so great about this year is that we all have a chance—a chance to be part of making history— • Because when we look back in 25 years, <b>we will know this legislation was the right thing to do.</b> • Because when we look back in 50 years, <b>we will know this legislation was the right thing to do.</b> • Because when we look back in <b>one-hundred</b> years, <i><b>we will know this legislation was the right thing to do!</b></i> Today—I hope everyone in this room joins us in doing the <i><b>right thing.</b></i> I’ll keep my remarks brief; we know the questions, and we'll answer them if asked. But I encourage us to listen to <i><b>testimonies</b></i>, to listen to the voices who are ready for change, so that we may be reminded—again—just how overdue this legislation is. Thank you, Mister Chair and members of the committee. I hope you report this bill favorably to full committee. <hr> == Support and Opposition == === Support === • ACLU People Power Fairfax • Bridging The Gap In Virginia • Charlottesville Chapter National Organization for Women • Coalition for Justice • EJUSA Evangelical Network • Fighting 4 Freedom • Greater Washington (JCRC) • Inmate Support Virginia • Interfaith Action for Human Rights (IAHR) • HALT Solitary • Jewish Community Relations Council of Just Future Project • Justice & Witness Action Network- VA • United Church of Christ Central Atlantic Conference • LatinoJustice PRLDEF • NAACP Loudoun • National Association of Social Workers • National Association of Social Workers, Virginia Chapter • National Religious Campaign Against Torture • No Left Turns • Resource Information Help for the Disadvantaged and Disenfranchised (RIHD) • RISE for Youth • RVA Health Alliance for Social Justice and Equity • Social Action Linking Together (SALT) • Social Workers and Allies Against Solitary Confinement • The Humanization Project • The Sentencing Project • Unitarian Universalist Legislative Ministry of Virginia • Unlock the Box Campaign • Virginia CURE • Virginia Defenders for Freedom, Justice & Equality • Virginia Justice Democrats • Virginia Justice for Life • Virginia Justice Alliance • Virginia Prisons Accountability Committee • Virginia Prisoner Of Conscience • Virginia Prison Justice Network • WJCC Coalition for Community Justice • 40 Strong === Opposition === • (to be updated) === No Recommendation / Neutral === • (to be updated) <hr> == Fiscal Impact == No fiscal impact statement is posted for HB35. <hr> == Possible Questions == === TL;DR === <b>Q1: “Does this end solitary confinement in Virginia?”</b> TL;DR: No—it ends <i>prolonged</i> solitary confinement and sets clear limits, oversight, and due-process rules for any use. <br> <b>Q2: “Does this make prisons less safe for staff?”</b> TL;DR: No—HB35 keeps exceptions for imminent threats and requires documentation; it’s about targeted use, not “never.” <br> <b>Q3: “What changes day-to-day?”</b> TL;DR: Frequent reviews, rapid medical/mental health checks, real programming/out-of-cell time, and written accountability when isolation is used. <br> <b>Q4: “Can DOC just use ‘lockdowns’ instead?”</b> TL;DR: The bill defines lockdown and regulates it, and the requested amendment strengthens this further by applying the same time limits to lockdown explicitly. <br> === Q1: “What does the bill aim to accomplish?” === <b>Answer you can use:</b> HB35 ends prolonged solitary confinement by setting clear time limits and requiring real oversight—regular reviews, rapid medical and mental health evaluations, documentation, and in-person due process when isolation continues. <br> === Q2: “How often is placement reviewed?” === <b>Answer you can use:</b> Placement is reviewed frequently, including a required 48-hour review cycle with written documentation explaining why less restrictive settings were not used. <br> === Q3: “What health protections are required?” === <b>Answer you can use:</b> HB35 requires medical and mental health evaluations by certified professionals within one working day of placement in restorative housing or isolated confinement (with limited exceptions). <br> === Q4: “Does this stop people from getting programming or recreation?” === <b>Answer you can use:</b> No—the bill requires at least four hours of out-of-cell programming or congregate activity daily, plus at least one hour of congregate recreation unless exceptional safety circumstances apply. <br> === Q5: “What stops indefinite ‘lockdowns’?” === <b>Answer you can use:</b> Lockdowns that interrupt programming must have a specific documented security purpose, must end as soon as the purpose is served, are time-limited, require approvals to extend or repeat, and must be documented and published. <hr> == Additional Information == <b>1. Definitions are the enforcement backbone</b> • The bill defines isolated confinement and lockdown by hours-per-day and loss of programming, so policy can’t be evaded by unit names. <b>Policy implication:</b> Regulates conditions, not labels. <br> <b>2. The “less restrictive first” rule targets protective-custody misuse</b> • For “own protection” placements, the facility must use less restrictive options first, including transfers or special-purpose housing for similarly threatened individuals, unless infeasible. <b>Policy implication:</b> Safety without defaulting to isolation. <br> <b>3. Reviews + documentation create accountability</b> • Requires regular reviews, documentation in the institutional file, notice up the chain, and formal in-person reviews with appeal rights. <b>Policy implication:</b> Isolation becomes a documented exception, not a routine. <br> <b>4. Lockdown limits matter because lockdown can function like solitary</b> • The bill regulates lockdowns that interrupt programming and requires publication of documentation. <b>Policy implication:</b> Prevents “unit-wide solitary” from becoming the workaround. [[Category:2026 Session]]
2026-01-22 06:19:27
Edited by: 74.110.183.75
Edited by: 74.110.183.75
= HB35 Restorative housing and isolated confinement; restrictions on use. = == Status == [https://house.vga.virginia.gov/subcommittees/H15002/agendas/5187 Public Safety | Subcommittee #2 — agenda] <hr> == Overview == === Summary as Introduced === <b>Restorative housing and isolated confinement; restrictions on use.</b> Prohibits the use of isolated confinement, defined in the bill, in state correctional facilities, subject to certain exceptions. The bill requires that before placing an incarcerated person in restorative housing or isolated confinement for his own protection, the facility administrator shall place an incarcerated person in a less-restrictive setting, including by transferring such person to another institution or to a special-purpose housing unit for incarcerated persons who face similar threats. The bill requires that if an incarcerated person is placed in restorative housing or isolated confinement, such placement shall be reviewed every 48 hours and the facility administrator shall ensure that the incarcerated person receives a medical and mental health evaluation from certified medical and mental health professionals within one working day of placement in restorative housing or any form of isolated confinement. The bill also requires the facility administrator to notify the regional administrator in writing that an incarcerated person was placed in restorative housing or isolated confinement within 24 hours of such placement. Finally, the bill requires that formal reviews of an incarcerated person's placement in any form of isolated confinement shall be held in such person's presence, inform him of any reasons administrative officials believe isolated confinement remains necessary, and give the incarcerated person an opportunity to respond to those reasons, and a formal ruling shall be provided to the incarcerated individual within 24 hours. <hr> === Patrons === ==== House Patrons ==== • Joshua G. Cole (chief patron) • Patrick A. Hope • Sam Rasoul • Holly Seibold ==== Senate Patrons ==== • Bagby <hr> == Language == The language of [https://lis.virginia.gov/bill-details/20261/HB35/text/HB35 HB35] can be viewed here. <hr> == Proposed Amendment == === Amendment Offered for Consideration (requested for subcommittee) === ==== Add “Lockdown” throughout relevant provisions ==== Amend the bill to explicitly include “lockdown” alongside “solitary confinement/isolated confinement” and “restorative housing” in all relevant sections, to prevent facilities from using unit-wide lockdown practices as a functional substitute for individual isolated confinement. ==== Strengthen the time-limit clause (close the cumulative-days gap) ==== Replace the current time-limit phrasing with: “No individual shall be held in solitary confinement, lockdown, or restorative housing for more than 15 consecutive days, nor 15 days in any 60-day period.” <b>Purpose of the amendment:</b> The introduced text already uses “15 consecutive days…in any 60-day period,” but stakeholders have raised concerns that “consecutive” language can be worked around by cycling people in and out (or shifting to lockdown practices) without ever hitting a “consecutive” threshold. The amendment makes the limit explicitly <i>both</i> consecutive and cumulative. <hr> == Opening Statement == === House Subcommittee Statement === Mister Chair, members of the subcommittee— <i>This is not our first time here.</i> For <b>two straight years</b>, the General Assembly has passed this reform. - <b>In 2024</b>, I gave you a sermon—and we passed HB 1244. + <b>In 2024</b>, I gave you a sermon... and then we passed HB 1244. - <b>In 2025</b>, my sister, my friend, and my colleague, <b>Delegate Keys-Gamarra</b>, took up the torch—and we passed HB 2647. + <b>In 2025</b>, my sister, my friend, and my colleague, <b>Delegate Keys-Gamarra</b>, took up the torch... and then we passed HB 2647. Twice, this body has said—clearly—that we are ready to turn the page on solitary. And after two straight years, nobody can pretend this is new. • You know this bill. • You know this issue. • And you know how overdue this change is. Mister Chair, members of the committee, this is not our first time here, <b>BUT it will be our last time here</b>—because this year we will make history. And what is so great about this year is that we all have a chance—a chance to be part of making history— • Because when we look back in 25 years, <b>we will know this legislation was the right thing to do.</b> • Because when we look back in 50 years, <b>we will know this legislation was the right thing to do.</b> • Because when we look back in <b>one-hundred</b> years, <i><b>we will know this legislation was the right thing to do!</b></i> Today—I hope everyone in this room joins us in doing the <i><b>right thing.</b></i> I’ll keep my remarks brief; we know the questions, and we'll answer them if asked. But I encourage us to listen to <i><b>testimonies</b></i>, to listen to the voices who are ready for change, so that we may be reminded—again—just how overdue this legislation is. Thank you, Mister Chair and members of the committee. I hope you report this bill favorably to full committee. <hr> == Support and Opposition == === Support === • ACLU People Power Fairfax • Bridging The Gap In Virginia • Charlottesville Chapter National Organization for Women • Coalition for Justice • EJUSA Evangelical Network • Fighting 4 Freedom • Greater Washington (JCRC) • Inmate Support Virginia • Interfaith Action for Human Rights (IAHR) • HALT Solitary • Jewish Community Relations Council of Just Future Project • Justice & Witness Action Network- VA • United Church of Christ Central Atlantic Conference • LatinoJustice PRLDEF • NAACP Loudoun • National Association of Social Workers • National Association of Social Workers, Virginia Chapter • National Religious Campaign Against Torture • No Left Turns • Resource Information Help for the Disadvantaged and Disenfranchised (RIHD) • RISE for Youth • RVA Health Alliance for Social Justice and Equity • Social Action Linking Together (SALT) • Social Workers and Allies Against Solitary Confinement • The Humanization Project • The Sentencing Project • Unitarian Universalist Legislative Ministry of Virginia • Unlock the Box Campaign • Virginia CURE • Virginia Defenders for Freedom, Justice & Equality • Virginia Justice Democrats • Virginia Justice for Life • Virginia Justice Alliance • Virginia Prisons Accountability Committee • Virginia Prisoner Of Conscience • Virginia Prison Justice Network • WJCC Coalition for Community Justice • 40 Strong === Opposition === • (to be updated) === No Recommendation / Neutral === • (to be updated) <hr> == Fiscal Impact == No fiscal impact statement is posted for HB35. <hr> == Possible Questions == === TL;DR === <b>Q1: “Does this end solitary confinement in Virginia?”</b> TL;DR: No—it ends <i>prolonged</i> solitary confinement and sets clear limits, oversight, and due-process rules for any use. <br> <b>Q2: “Does this make prisons less safe for staff?”</b> TL;DR: No—HB35 keeps exceptions for imminent threats and requires documentation; it’s about targeted use, not “never.” <br> <b>Q3: “What changes day-to-day?”</b> TL;DR: Frequent reviews, rapid medical/mental health checks, real programming/out-of-cell time, and written accountability when isolation is used. <br> <b>Q4: “Can DOC just use ‘lockdowns’ instead?”</b> TL;DR: The bill defines lockdown and regulates it, and the requested amendment strengthens this further by applying the same time limits to lockdown explicitly. <br> === Q1: “What does the bill aim to accomplish?” === <b>Answer you can use:</b> HB35 ends prolonged solitary confinement by setting clear time limits and requiring real oversight—regular reviews, rapid medical and mental health evaluations, documentation, and in-person due process when isolation continues. <br> === Q2: “How often is placement reviewed?” === <b>Answer you can use:</b> Placement is reviewed frequently, including a required 48-hour review cycle with written documentation explaining why less restrictive settings were not used. <br> === Q3: “What health protections are required?” === <b>Answer you can use:</b> HB35 requires medical and mental health evaluations by certified professionals within one working day of placement in restorative housing or isolated confinement (with limited exceptions). <br> === Q4: “Does this stop people from getting programming or recreation?” === <b>Answer you can use:</b> No—the bill requires at least four hours of out-of-cell programming or congregate activity daily, plus at least one hour of congregate recreation unless exceptional safety circumstances apply. <br> === Q5: “What stops indefinite ‘lockdowns’?” === <b>Answer you can use:</b> Lockdowns that interrupt programming must have a specific documented security purpose, must end as soon as the purpose is served, are time-limited, require approvals to extend or repeat, and must be documented and published. <hr> == Additional Information == <b>1. Definitions are the enforcement backbone</b> • The bill defines isolated confinement and lockdown by hours-per-day and loss of programming, so policy can’t be evaded by unit names. <b>Policy implication:</b> Regulates conditions, not labels. <br> <b>2. The “less restrictive first” rule targets protective-custody misuse</b> • For “own protection” placements, the facility must use less restrictive options first, including transfers or special-purpose housing for similarly threatened individuals, unless infeasible. <b>Policy implication:</b> Safety without defaulting to isolation. <br> <b>3. Reviews + documentation create accountability</b> • Requires regular reviews, documentation in the institutional file, notice up the chain, and formal in-person reviews with appeal rights. <b>Policy implication:</b> Isolation becomes a documented exception, not a routine. <br> <b>4. Lockdown limits matter because lockdown can function like solitary</b> • The bill regulates lockdowns that interrupt programming and requires publication of documentation. <b>Policy implication:</b> Prevents “unit-wide solitary” from becoming the workaround. [[Category:2026 Session]]
2026-01-22 06:18:00
Edited by: 74.110.183.75
Edited by: 74.110.183.75
= HB35 Restorative housing and isolated confinement; restrictions on use. = == Status == [https://house.vga.virginia.gov/subcommittees/H15002/agendas/5187 Public Safety | Subcommittee #2 — agenda] <hr> == Overview == === Summary as Introduced === <b>Restorative housing and isolated confinement; restrictions on use.</b> Prohibits the use of isolated confinement, defined in the bill, in state correctional facilities, subject to certain exceptions. The bill requires that before placing an incarcerated person in restorative housing or isolated confinement for his own protection, the facility administrator shall place an incarcerated person in a less-restrictive setting, including by transferring such person to another institution or to a special-purpose housing unit for incarcerated persons who face similar threats. The bill requires that if an incarcerated person is placed in restorative housing or isolated confinement, such placement shall be reviewed every 48 hours and the facility administrator shall ensure that the incarcerated person receives a medical and mental health evaluation from certified medical and mental health professionals within one working day of placement in restorative housing or any form of isolated confinement. The bill also requires the facility administrator to notify the regional administrator in writing that an incarcerated person was placed in restorative housing or isolated confinement within 24 hours of such placement. Finally, the bill requires that formal reviews of an incarcerated person's placement in any form of isolated confinement shall be held in such person's presence, inform him of any reasons administrative officials believe isolated confinement remains necessary, and give the incarcerated person an opportunity to respond to those reasons, and a formal ruling shall be provided to the incarcerated individual within 24 hours. <hr> === Patrons === ==== House Patrons ==== • Joshua G. Cole (chief patron) • Patrick A. Hope • Sam Rasoul • Holly Seibold ==== Senate Patrons ==== • Bagby <hr> == Language == The language of [https://lis.virginia.gov/bill-details/20261/HB35/text/HB35 HB35] can be viewed here. <hr> == Proposed Amendment == === Amendment Offered for Consideration (requested for subcommittee) === ==== Add “Lockdown” throughout relevant provisions ==== Amend the bill to explicitly include “lockdown” alongside “solitary confinement/isolated confinement” and “restorative housing” in all relevant sections, to prevent facilities from using unit-wide lockdown practices as a functional substitute for individual isolated confinement. ==== Strengthen the time-limit clause (close the cumulative-days gap) ==== Replace the current time-limit phrasing with: “No individual shall be held in solitary confinement, lockdown, or restorative housing for more than 15 consecutive days, nor 15 days in any 60-day period.” <b>Purpose of the amendment:</b> The introduced text already uses “15 consecutive days…in any 60-day period,” but stakeholders have raised concerns that “consecutive” language can be worked around by cycling people in and out (or shifting to lockdown practices) without ever hitting a “consecutive” threshold. The amendment makes the limit explicitly <i>both</i> consecutive and cumulative. <hr> == Opening Statement == === House Subcommittee Statement === Mister Chair, members of the subcommittee— <i>This is not our first time here.</i> For <b>two straight years</b>, the General Assembly has passed this reform. <b>In 2024</b>, I gave you a sermon—and we passed HB 1244. <b>In 2025</b>, my sister, my friend, and my colleague, <b>Delegate Keys-Gamarra</b>, took up the torch—and we passed HB 2647. Twice, this body has said—clearly—that we are ready to turn the page on solitary. And after two straight years, nobody can pretend this is new. • You know this bill. • You know this issue. • And you know how overdue this change is. Mister Chair, members of the committee, this is not our first time here, <b>BUT it will be our last time here</b>—because this year we will make history. And what is so great about this year is that we all have a chance—a chance to be part of making history— • Because when we look back in 25 years, <b>we will know this legislation was the right thing to do.</b> • Because when we look back in 50 years, <b>we will know this legislation was the right thing to do.</b> • Because when we look back in <b>one-hundred</b> years, <i><b>we will know this legislation was the right thing to do!</b></i> Today—I hope everyone in this room joins us in doing the <i><b>right thing.</b></i> I’ll keep my remarks brief; we know the questions, and we'll answer them if asked. But I encourage us to listen to <i><b>testimonies</b></i>, to listen to the voices who are ready for change, so that we may be reminded—again—just how overdue this legislation is. - Thank you, Mister Chair and members of the committee. + Thank you, Mister Chair and members of the committee. I hope you report this bill favorably to full committee. <hr> == Support and Opposition == === Support === • ACLU People Power Fairfax • Bridging The Gap In Virginia • Charlottesville Chapter National Organization for Women • Coalition for Justice • EJUSA Evangelical Network • Fighting 4 Freedom • Greater Washington (JCRC) • Inmate Support Virginia • Interfaith Action for Human Rights (IAHR) • HALT Solitary • Jewish Community Relations Council of Just Future Project • Justice & Witness Action Network- VA • United Church of Christ Central Atlantic Conference • LatinoJustice PRLDEF • NAACP Loudoun • National Association of Social Workers • National Association of Social Workers, Virginia Chapter • National Religious Campaign Against Torture • No Left Turns • Resource Information Help for the Disadvantaged and Disenfranchised (RIHD) • RISE for Youth • RVA Health Alliance for Social Justice and Equity • Social Action Linking Together (SALT) • Social Workers and Allies Against Solitary Confinement • The Humanization Project • The Sentencing Project • Unitarian Universalist Legislative Ministry of Virginia • Unlock the Box Campaign • Virginia CURE • Virginia Defenders for Freedom, Justice & Equality • Virginia Justice Democrats • Virginia Justice for Life • Virginia Justice Alliance • Virginia Prisons Accountability Committee • Virginia Prisoner Of Conscience • Virginia Prison Justice Network • WJCC Coalition for Community Justice • 40 Strong === Opposition === • (to be updated) === No Recommendation / Neutral === • (to be updated) <hr> == Fiscal Impact == No fiscal impact statement is posted for HB35. <hr> == Possible Questions == === TL;DR === <b>Q1: “Does this end solitary confinement in Virginia?”</b> TL;DR: No—it ends <i>prolonged</i> solitary confinement and sets clear limits, oversight, and due-process rules for any use. <br> <b>Q2: “Does this make prisons less safe for staff?”</b> TL;DR: No—HB35 keeps exceptions for imminent threats and requires documentation; it’s about targeted use, not “never.” <br> <b>Q3: “What changes day-to-day?”</b> TL;DR: Frequent reviews, rapid medical/mental health checks, real programming/out-of-cell time, and written accountability when isolation is used. <br> <b>Q4: “Can DOC just use ‘lockdowns’ instead?”</b> TL;DR: The bill defines lockdown and regulates it, and the requested amendment strengthens this further by applying the same time limits to lockdown explicitly. <br> === Q1: “What does the bill aim to accomplish?” === <b>Answer you can use:</b> HB35 ends prolonged solitary confinement by setting clear time limits and requiring real oversight—regular reviews, rapid medical and mental health evaluations, documentation, and in-person due process when isolation continues. <br> === Q2: “How often is placement reviewed?” === <b>Answer you can use:</b> Placement is reviewed frequently, including a required 48-hour review cycle with written documentation explaining why less restrictive settings were not used. <br> === Q3: “What health protections are required?” === <b>Answer you can use:</b> HB35 requires medical and mental health evaluations by certified professionals within one working day of placement in restorative housing or isolated confinement (with limited exceptions). <br> === Q4: “Does this stop people from getting programming or recreation?” === <b>Answer you can use:</b> No—the bill requires at least four hours of out-of-cell programming or congregate activity daily, plus at least one hour of congregate recreation unless exceptional safety circumstances apply. <br> === Q5: “What stops indefinite ‘lockdowns’?” === <b>Answer you can use:</b> Lockdowns that interrupt programming must have a specific documented security purpose, must end as soon as the purpose is served, are time-limited, require approvals to extend or repeat, and must be documented and published. <hr> == Additional Information == <b>1. Definitions are the enforcement backbone</b> • The bill defines isolated confinement and lockdown by hours-per-day and loss of programming, so policy can’t be evaded by unit names. <b>Policy implication:</b> Regulates conditions, not labels. <br> <b>2. The “less restrictive first” rule targets protective-custody misuse</b> • For “own protection” placements, the facility must use less restrictive options first, including transfers or special-purpose housing for similarly threatened individuals, unless infeasible. <b>Policy implication:</b> Safety without defaulting to isolation. <br> <b>3. Reviews + documentation create accountability</b> • Requires regular reviews, documentation in the institutional file, notice up the chain, and formal in-person reviews with appeal rights. <b>Policy implication:</b> Isolation becomes a documented exception, not a routine. <br> <b>4. Lockdown limits matter because lockdown can function like solitary</b> • The bill regulates lockdowns that interrupt programming and requires publication of documentation. <b>Policy implication:</b> Prevents “unit-wide solitary” from becoming the workaround. [[Category:2026 Session]]
2026-01-22 06:17:30
Edited by: 74.110.183.75
Edited by: 74.110.183.75
= HB35 Restorative housing and isolated confinement; restrictions on use. = == Status == [https://house.vga.virginia.gov/subcommittees/H15002/agendas/5187 Public Safety | Subcommittee #2 — agenda] <hr> == Overview == === Summary as Introduced === <b>Restorative housing and isolated confinement; restrictions on use.</b> Prohibits the use of isolated confinement, defined in the bill, in state correctional facilities, subject to certain exceptions. The bill requires that before placing an incarcerated person in restorative housing or isolated confinement for his own protection, the facility administrator shall place an incarcerated person in a less-restrictive setting, including by transferring such person to another institution or to a special-purpose housing unit for incarcerated persons who face similar threats. The bill requires that if an incarcerated person is placed in restorative housing or isolated confinement, such placement shall be reviewed every 48 hours and the facility administrator shall ensure that the incarcerated person receives a medical and mental health evaluation from certified medical and mental health professionals within one working day of placement in restorative housing or any form of isolated confinement. The bill also requires the facility administrator to notify the regional administrator in writing that an incarcerated person was placed in restorative housing or isolated confinement within 24 hours of such placement. Finally, the bill requires that formal reviews of an incarcerated person's placement in any form of isolated confinement shall be held in such person's presence, inform him of any reasons administrative officials believe isolated confinement remains necessary, and give the incarcerated person an opportunity to respond to those reasons, and a formal ruling shall be provided to the incarcerated individual within 24 hours. <hr> === Patrons === ==== House Patrons ==== • Joshua G. Cole (chief patron) • Patrick A. Hope • Sam Rasoul • Holly Seibold ==== Senate Patrons ==== • Bagby <hr> == Language == The language of [https://lis.virginia.gov/bill-details/20261/HB35/text/HB35 HB35] can be viewed here. <hr> == Proposed Amendment == === Amendment Offered for Consideration (requested for subcommittee) === ==== Add “Lockdown” throughout relevant provisions ==== Amend the bill to explicitly include “lockdown” alongside “solitary confinement/isolated confinement” and “restorative housing” in all relevant sections, to prevent facilities from using unit-wide lockdown practices as a functional substitute for individual isolated confinement. ==== Strengthen the time-limit clause (close the cumulative-days gap) ==== Replace the current time-limit phrasing with: “No individual shall be held in solitary confinement, lockdown, or restorative housing for more than 15 consecutive days, nor 15 days in any 60-day period.” <b>Purpose of the amendment:</b> The introduced text already uses “15 consecutive days…in any 60-day period,” but stakeholders have raised concerns that “consecutive” language can be worked around by cycling people in and out (or shifting to lockdown practices) without ever hitting a “consecutive” threshold. The amendment makes the limit explicitly <i>both</i> consecutive and cumulative. <hr> == Opening Statement == === House Subcommittee Statement === Mister Chair, members of the subcommittee— <i>This is not our first time here.</i> For <b>two straight years</b>, the General Assembly has passed this reform. <b>In 2024</b>, I gave you a sermon—and we passed HB 1244. <b>In 2025</b>, my sister, my friend, and my colleague, <b>Delegate Keys-Gamarra</b>, took up the torch—and we passed HB 2647. Twice, this body has said—clearly—that we are ready to turn the page on solitary. And after two straight years, nobody can pretend this is new. • You know this bill. • You know this issue. • And you know how overdue this change is. Mister Chair, members of the committee, this is not our first time here, <b>BUT it will be our last time here</b>—because this year we will make history. And what is so great about this year is that we all have a chance—a chance to be part of making history— • Because when we look back in 25 years, <b>we will know this legislation was the right thing to do.</b> • Because when we look back in 50 years, <b>we will know this legislation was the right thing to do.</b> • Because when we look back in <b>one-hundred</b> years, <i><b>we will know this legislation was the right thing to do!</b></i> Today—I hope everyone in this room joins us in doing the <i><b>right thing.</b></i> - I’ll keep my remarks brief so we can get to hearing the supporters remind us—again—just how overdue this legislation is. + I’ll keep my remarks brief; we know the questions, and we'll answer them if asked. But I encourage us to listen to <i><b>testimonies</b></i>, to listen to the voices who are ready for change, so that we may be reminded—again—just how overdue this legislation is. Thank you, Mister Chair and members of the committee. <hr> == Support and Opposition == === Support === • ACLU People Power Fairfax • Bridging The Gap In Virginia • Charlottesville Chapter National Organization for Women • Coalition for Justice • EJUSA Evangelical Network • Fighting 4 Freedom • Greater Washington (JCRC) • Inmate Support Virginia • Interfaith Action for Human Rights (IAHR) • HALT Solitary • Jewish Community Relations Council of Just Future Project • Justice & Witness Action Network- VA • United Church of Christ Central Atlantic Conference • LatinoJustice PRLDEF • NAACP Loudoun • National Association of Social Workers • National Association of Social Workers, Virginia Chapter • National Religious Campaign Against Torture • No Left Turns • Resource Information Help for the Disadvantaged and Disenfranchised (RIHD) • RISE for Youth • RVA Health Alliance for Social Justice and Equity • Social Action Linking Together (SALT) • Social Workers and Allies Against Solitary Confinement • The Humanization Project • The Sentencing Project • Unitarian Universalist Legislative Ministry of Virginia • Unlock the Box Campaign • Virginia CURE • Virginia Defenders for Freedom, Justice & Equality • Virginia Justice Democrats • Virginia Justice for Life • Virginia Justice Alliance • Virginia Prisons Accountability Committee • Virginia Prisoner Of Conscience • Virginia Prison Justice Network • WJCC Coalition for Community Justice • 40 Strong === Opposition === • (to be updated) === No Recommendation / Neutral === • (to be updated) <hr> == Fiscal Impact == No fiscal impact statement is posted for HB35. <hr> == Possible Questions == === TL;DR === <b>Q1: “Does this end solitary confinement in Virginia?”</b> TL;DR: No—it ends <i>prolonged</i> solitary confinement and sets clear limits, oversight, and due-process rules for any use. <br> <b>Q2: “Does this make prisons less safe for staff?”</b> TL;DR: No—HB35 keeps exceptions for imminent threats and requires documentation; it’s about targeted use, not “never.” <br> <b>Q3: “What changes day-to-day?”</b> TL;DR: Frequent reviews, rapid medical/mental health checks, real programming/out-of-cell time, and written accountability when isolation is used. <br> <b>Q4: “Can DOC just use ‘lockdowns’ instead?”</b> TL;DR: The bill defines lockdown and regulates it, and the requested amendment strengthens this further by applying the same time limits to lockdown explicitly. <br> === Q1: “What does the bill aim to accomplish?” === <b>Answer you can use:</b> HB35 ends prolonged solitary confinement by setting clear time limits and requiring real oversight—regular reviews, rapid medical and mental health evaluations, documentation, and in-person due process when isolation continues. <br> === Q2: “How often is placement reviewed?” === <b>Answer you can use:</b> Placement is reviewed frequently, including a required 48-hour review cycle with written documentation explaining why less restrictive settings were not used. <br> === Q3: “What health protections are required?” === <b>Answer you can use:</b> HB35 requires medical and mental health evaluations by certified professionals within one working day of placement in restorative housing or isolated confinement (with limited exceptions). <br> === Q4: “Does this stop people from getting programming or recreation?” === <b>Answer you can use:</b> No—the bill requires at least four hours of out-of-cell programming or congregate activity daily, plus at least one hour of congregate recreation unless exceptional safety circumstances apply. <br> === Q5: “What stops indefinite ‘lockdowns’?” === <b>Answer you can use:</b> Lockdowns that interrupt programming must have a specific documented security purpose, must end as soon as the purpose is served, are time-limited, require approvals to extend or repeat, and must be documented and published. <hr> == Additional Information == <b>1. Definitions are the enforcement backbone</b> • The bill defines isolated confinement and lockdown by hours-per-day and loss of programming, so policy can’t be evaded by unit names. <b>Policy implication:</b> Regulates conditions, not labels. <br> <b>2. The “less restrictive first” rule targets protective-custody misuse</b> • For “own protection” placements, the facility must use less restrictive options first, including transfers or special-purpose housing for similarly threatened individuals, unless infeasible. <b>Policy implication:</b> Safety without defaulting to isolation. <br> <b>3. Reviews + documentation create accountability</b> • Requires regular reviews, documentation in the institutional file, notice up the chain, and formal in-person reviews with appeal rights. <b>Policy implication:</b> Isolation becomes a documented exception, not a routine. <br> <b>4. Lockdown limits matter because lockdown can function like solitary</b> • The bill regulates lockdowns that interrupt programming and requires publication of documentation. <b>Policy implication:</b> Prevents “unit-wide solitary” from becoming the workaround. [[Category:2026 Session]]
2026-01-22 06:16:56
Edited by: 74.110.183.75
Edited by: 74.110.183.75
= HB35 Restorative housing and isolated confinement; restrictions on use. = == Status == [https://house.vga.virginia.gov/subcommittees/H15002/agendas/5187 Public Safety | Subcommittee #2 — agenda] <hr> == Overview == === Summary as Introduced === <b>Restorative housing and isolated confinement; restrictions on use.</b> Prohibits the use of isolated confinement, defined in the bill, in state correctional facilities, subject to certain exceptions. The bill requires that before placing an incarcerated person in restorative housing or isolated confinement for his own protection, the facility administrator shall place an incarcerated person in a less-restrictive setting, including by transferring such person to another institution or to a special-purpose housing unit for incarcerated persons who face similar threats. The bill requires that if an incarcerated person is placed in restorative housing or isolated confinement, such placement shall be reviewed every 48 hours and the facility administrator shall ensure that the incarcerated person receives a medical and mental health evaluation from certified medical and mental health professionals within one working day of placement in restorative housing or any form of isolated confinement. The bill also requires the facility administrator to notify the regional administrator in writing that an incarcerated person was placed in restorative housing or isolated confinement within 24 hours of such placement. Finally, the bill requires that formal reviews of an incarcerated person's placement in any form of isolated confinement shall be held in such person's presence, inform him of any reasons administrative officials believe isolated confinement remains necessary, and give the incarcerated person an opportunity to respond to those reasons, and a formal ruling shall be provided to the incarcerated individual within 24 hours. <hr> === Patrons === ==== House Patrons ==== • Joshua G. Cole (chief patron) • Patrick A. Hope • Sam Rasoul • Holly Seibold ==== Senate Patrons ==== • Bagby <hr> == Language == The language of [https://lis.virginia.gov/bill-details/20261/HB35/text/HB35 HB35] can be viewed here. <hr> == Proposed Amendment == === Amendment Offered for Consideration (requested for subcommittee) === ==== Add “Lockdown” throughout relevant provisions ==== Amend the bill to explicitly include “lockdown” alongside “solitary confinement/isolated confinement” and “restorative housing” in all relevant sections, to prevent facilities from using unit-wide lockdown practices as a functional substitute for individual isolated confinement. ==== Strengthen the time-limit clause (close the cumulative-days gap) ==== Replace the current time-limit phrasing with: “No individual shall be held in solitary confinement, lockdown, or restorative housing for more than 15 consecutive days, nor 15 days in any 60-day period.” <b>Purpose of the amendment:</b> The introduced text already uses “15 consecutive days…in any 60-day period,” but stakeholders have raised concerns that “consecutive” language can be worked around by cycling people in and out (or shifting to lockdown practices) without ever hitting a “consecutive” threshold. The amendment makes the limit explicitly <i>both</i> consecutive and cumulative. <hr> == Opening Statement == === House Subcommittee Statement === Mister Chair, members of the subcommittee— <i>This is not our first time here.</i> For <b>two straight years</b>, the General Assembly has passed this reform. <b>In 2024</b>, I gave you a sermon—and we passed HB 1244. <b>In 2025</b>, my sister, my friend, and my colleague, <b>Delegate Keys-Gamarra</b>, took up the torch—and we passed HB 2647. Twice, this body has said—clearly—that we are ready to turn the page on solitary. And after two straight years, nobody can pretend this is new. • You know this bill. • You know this issue. • And you know how overdue this change is. Mister Chair, members of the committee, this is not our first time here, <b>BUT it will be our last time here</b>—because this year we will make history. And what is so great about this year is that we all have a chance—a chance to be part of making history— • Because when we look back in 25 years, <b>we will know this legislation was the right thing to do.</b> • Because when we look back in 50 years, <b>we will know this legislation was the right thing to do.</b> - • Because when we look back in <b>one-hundred</b> years, <b>we will know this legislation was the right thing to do!</b> + • Because when we look back in <b>one-hundred</b> years, <i><b>we will know this legislation was the right thing to do!</b></i> Today—I hope everyone in this room joins us in doing the <i><b>right thing.</b></i> I’ll keep my remarks brief so we can get to hearing the supporters remind us—again—just how overdue this legislation is. Thank you, Mister Chair and members of the committee. <hr> == Support and Opposition == === Support === • ACLU People Power Fairfax • Bridging The Gap In Virginia • Charlottesville Chapter National Organization for Women • Coalition for Justice • EJUSA Evangelical Network • Fighting 4 Freedom • Greater Washington (JCRC) • Inmate Support Virginia • Interfaith Action for Human Rights (IAHR) • HALT Solitary • Jewish Community Relations Council of Just Future Project • Justice & Witness Action Network- VA • United Church of Christ Central Atlantic Conference • LatinoJustice PRLDEF • NAACP Loudoun • National Association of Social Workers • National Association of Social Workers, Virginia Chapter • National Religious Campaign Against Torture • No Left Turns • Resource Information Help for the Disadvantaged and Disenfranchised (RIHD) • RISE for Youth • RVA Health Alliance for Social Justice and Equity • Social Action Linking Together (SALT) • Social Workers and Allies Against Solitary Confinement • The Humanization Project • The Sentencing Project • Unitarian Universalist Legislative Ministry of Virginia • Unlock the Box Campaign • Virginia CURE • Virginia Defenders for Freedom, Justice & Equality • Virginia Justice Democrats • Virginia Justice for Life • Virginia Justice Alliance • Virginia Prisons Accountability Committee • Virginia Prisoner Of Conscience • Virginia Prison Justice Network • WJCC Coalition for Community Justice • 40 Strong === Opposition === • (to be updated) === No Recommendation / Neutral === • (to be updated) <hr> == Fiscal Impact == No fiscal impact statement is posted for HB35. <hr> == Possible Questions == === TL;DR === <b>Q1: “Does this end solitary confinement in Virginia?”</b> TL;DR: No—it ends <i>prolonged</i> solitary confinement and sets clear limits, oversight, and due-process rules for any use. <br> <b>Q2: “Does this make prisons less safe for staff?”</b> TL;DR: No—HB35 keeps exceptions for imminent threats and requires documentation; it’s about targeted use, not “never.” <br> <b>Q3: “What changes day-to-day?”</b> TL;DR: Frequent reviews, rapid medical/mental health checks, real programming/out-of-cell time, and written accountability when isolation is used. <br> <b>Q4: “Can DOC just use ‘lockdowns’ instead?”</b> TL;DR: The bill defines lockdown and regulates it, and the requested amendment strengthens this further by applying the same time limits to lockdown explicitly. <br> === Q1: “What does the bill aim to accomplish?” === <b>Answer you can use:</b> HB35 ends prolonged solitary confinement by setting clear time limits and requiring real oversight—regular reviews, rapid medical and mental health evaluations, documentation, and in-person due process when isolation continues. <br> === Q2: “How often is placement reviewed?” === <b>Answer you can use:</b> Placement is reviewed frequently, including a required 48-hour review cycle with written documentation explaining why less restrictive settings were not used. <br> === Q3: “What health protections are required?” === <b>Answer you can use:</b> HB35 requires medical and mental health evaluations by certified professionals within one working day of placement in restorative housing or isolated confinement (with limited exceptions). <br> === Q4: “Does this stop people from getting programming or recreation?” === <b>Answer you can use:</b> No—the bill requires at least four hours of out-of-cell programming or congregate activity daily, plus at least one hour of congregate recreation unless exceptional safety circumstances apply. <br> === Q5: “What stops indefinite ‘lockdowns’?” === <b>Answer you can use:</b> Lockdowns that interrupt programming must have a specific documented security purpose, must end as soon as the purpose is served, are time-limited, require approvals to extend or repeat, and must be documented and published. <hr> == Additional Information == <b>1. Definitions are the enforcement backbone</b> • The bill defines isolated confinement and lockdown by hours-per-day and loss of programming, so policy can’t be evaded by unit names. <b>Policy implication:</b> Regulates conditions, not labels. <br> <b>2. The “less restrictive first” rule targets protective-custody misuse</b> • For “own protection” placements, the facility must use less restrictive options first, including transfers or special-purpose housing for similarly threatened individuals, unless infeasible. <b>Policy implication:</b> Safety without defaulting to isolation. <br> <b>3. Reviews + documentation create accountability</b> • Requires regular reviews, documentation in the institutional file, notice up the chain, and formal in-person reviews with appeal rights. <b>Policy implication:</b> Isolation becomes a documented exception, not a routine. <br> <b>4. Lockdown limits matter because lockdown can function like solitary</b> • The bill regulates lockdowns that interrupt programming and requires publication of documentation. <b>Policy implication:</b> Prevents “unit-wide solitary” from becoming the workaround. [[Category:2026 Session]]
2026-01-22 06:13:16
Edited by: 74.110.183.75
Edited by: 74.110.183.75
= HB35 Restorative housing and isolated confinement; restrictions on use. = == Status == [https://house.vga.virginia.gov/subcommittees/H15002/agendas/5187 Public Safety | Subcommittee #2 — agenda] <hr> == Overview == === Summary as Introduced === <b>Restorative housing and isolated confinement; restrictions on use.</b> Prohibits the use of isolated confinement, defined in the bill, in state correctional facilities, subject to certain exceptions. The bill requires that before placing an incarcerated person in restorative housing or isolated confinement for his own protection, the facility administrator shall place an incarcerated person in a less-restrictive setting, including by transferring such person to another institution or to a special-purpose housing unit for incarcerated persons who face similar threats. The bill requires that if an incarcerated person is placed in restorative housing or isolated confinement, such placement shall be reviewed every 48 hours and the facility administrator shall ensure that the incarcerated person receives a medical and mental health evaluation from certified medical and mental health professionals within one working day of placement in restorative housing or any form of isolated confinement. The bill also requires the facility administrator to notify the regional administrator in writing that an incarcerated person was placed in restorative housing or isolated confinement within 24 hours of such placement. Finally, the bill requires that formal reviews of an incarcerated person's placement in any form of isolated confinement shall be held in such person's presence, inform him of any reasons administrative officials believe isolated confinement remains necessary, and give the incarcerated person an opportunity to respond to those reasons, and a formal ruling shall be provided to the incarcerated individual within 24 hours. <hr> === Patrons === ==== House Patrons ==== • Joshua G. Cole (chief patron) • Patrick A. Hope • Sam Rasoul • Holly Seibold ==== Senate Patrons ==== • Bagby <hr> == Language == The language of [https://lis.virginia.gov/bill-details/20261/HB35/text/HB35 HB35] can be viewed here. <hr> == Proposed Amendment == === Amendment Offered for Consideration (requested for subcommittee) === ==== Add “Lockdown” throughout relevant provisions ==== Amend the bill to explicitly include “lockdown” alongside “solitary confinement/isolated confinement” and “restorative housing” in all relevant sections, to prevent facilities from using unit-wide lockdown practices as a functional substitute for individual isolated confinement. ==== Strengthen the time-limit clause (close the cumulative-days gap) ==== Replace the current time-limit phrasing with: “No individual shall be held in solitary confinement, lockdown, or restorative housing for more than 15 consecutive days, nor 15 days in any 60-day period.” <b>Purpose of the amendment:</b> The introduced text already uses “15 consecutive days…in any 60-day period,” but stakeholders have raised concerns that “consecutive” language can be worked around by cycling people in and out (or shifting to lockdown practices) without ever hitting a “consecutive” threshold. The amendment makes the limit explicitly <i>both</i> consecutive and cumulative. <hr> == Opening Statement == === House Subcommittee Statement === Mister Chair, members of the subcommittee— <i>This is not our first time here.</i> For <b>two straight years</b>, the General Assembly has passed this reform. <b>In 2024</b>, I gave you a sermon—and we passed HB 1244. <b>In 2025</b>, my sister, my friend, and my colleague, <b>Delegate Keys-Gamarra</b>, took up the torch—and we passed HB 2647. Twice, this body has said—clearly—that we are ready to turn the page on solitary. And after two straight years, nobody can pretend this is new. • You know this bill. • You know this issue. • And you know how overdue this change is. Mister Chair, members of the committee, this is not our first time here, <b>BUT it will be our last time here</b>—because this year we will make history. And what is so great about this year is that we all have a chance—a chance to be part of making history— - • Because when we look back in 25 years, we will know this legislation was the right thing to do! + • Because when we look back in 25 years, <b>we will know this legislation was the right thing to do.</b> - • Because when we look back in 50 years, we will know this legislation was the right thing to do! + • Because when we look back in 50 years, <b>we will know this legislation was the right thing to do.</b> - • Because when we look back in <b>one-hundred</b> years, we will know this legislation was the right thing to do! + • Because when we look back in <b>one-hundred</b> years, <b>we will know this legislation was the right thing to do!</b> Today—I hope everyone in this room joins us in doing the <i><b>right thing.</b></i> I’ll keep my remarks brief so we can get to hearing the supporters remind us—again—just how overdue this legislation is. Thank you, Mister Chair and members of the committee. <hr> == Support and Opposition == === Support === • ACLU People Power Fairfax • Bridging The Gap In Virginia • Charlottesville Chapter National Organization for Women • Coalition for Justice • EJUSA Evangelical Network • Fighting 4 Freedom • Greater Washington (JCRC) • Inmate Support Virginia • Interfaith Action for Human Rights (IAHR) • HALT Solitary • Jewish Community Relations Council of Just Future Project • Justice & Witness Action Network- VA • United Church of Christ Central Atlantic Conference • LatinoJustice PRLDEF • NAACP Loudoun • National Association of Social Workers • National Association of Social Workers, Virginia Chapter • National Religious Campaign Against Torture • No Left Turns • Resource Information Help for the Disadvantaged and Disenfranchised (RIHD) • RISE for Youth • RVA Health Alliance for Social Justice and Equity • Social Action Linking Together (SALT) • Social Workers and Allies Against Solitary Confinement • The Humanization Project • The Sentencing Project • Unitarian Universalist Legislative Ministry of Virginia • Unlock the Box Campaign • Virginia CURE • Virginia Defenders for Freedom, Justice & Equality • Virginia Justice Democrats • Virginia Justice for Life • Virginia Justice Alliance • Virginia Prisons Accountability Committee • Virginia Prisoner Of Conscience • Virginia Prison Justice Network • WJCC Coalition for Community Justice • 40 Strong === Opposition === • (to be updated) === No Recommendation / Neutral === • (to be updated) <hr> == Fiscal Impact == No fiscal impact statement is posted for HB35. <hr> == Possible Questions == === TL;DR === <b>Q1: “Does this end solitary confinement in Virginia?”</b> TL;DR: No—it ends <i>prolonged</i> solitary confinement and sets clear limits, oversight, and due-process rules for any use. <br> <b>Q2: “Does this make prisons less safe for staff?”</b> TL;DR: No—HB35 keeps exceptions for imminent threats and requires documentation; it’s about targeted use, not “never.” <br> <b>Q3: “What changes day-to-day?”</b> TL;DR: Frequent reviews, rapid medical/mental health checks, real programming/out-of-cell time, and written accountability when isolation is used. <br> <b>Q4: “Can DOC just use ‘lockdowns’ instead?”</b> TL;DR: The bill defines lockdown and regulates it, and the requested amendment strengthens this further by applying the same time limits to lockdown explicitly. <br> === Q1: “What does the bill aim to accomplish?” === <b>Answer you can use:</b> HB35 ends prolonged solitary confinement by setting clear time limits and requiring real oversight—regular reviews, rapid medical and mental health evaluations, documentation, and in-person due process when isolation continues. <br> === Q2: “How often is placement reviewed?” === <b>Answer you can use:</b> Placement is reviewed frequently, including a required 48-hour review cycle with written documentation explaining why less restrictive settings were not used. <br> === Q3: “What health protections are required?” === <b>Answer you can use:</b> HB35 requires medical and mental health evaluations by certified professionals within one working day of placement in restorative housing or isolated confinement (with limited exceptions). <br> === Q4: “Does this stop people from getting programming or recreation?” === <b>Answer you can use:</b> No—the bill requires at least four hours of out-of-cell programming or congregate activity daily, plus at least one hour of congregate recreation unless exceptional safety circumstances apply. <br> === Q5: “What stops indefinite ‘lockdowns’?” === <b>Answer you can use:</b> Lockdowns that interrupt programming must have a specific documented security purpose, must end as soon as the purpose is served, are time-limited, require approvals to extend or repeat, and must be documented and published. <hr> == Additional Information == <b>1. Definitions are the enforcement backbone</b> • The bill defines isolated confinement and lockdown by hours-per-day and loss of programming, so policy can’t be evaded by unit names. <b>Policy implication:</b> Regulates conditions, not labels. <br> <b>2. The “less restrictive first” rule targets protective-custody misuse</b> • For “own protection” placements, the facility must use less restrictive options first, including transfers or special-purpose housing for similarly threatened individuals, unless infeasible. <b>Policy implication:</b> Safety without defaulting to isolation. <br> <b>3. Reviews + documentation create accountability</b> • Requires regular reviews, documentation in the institutional file, notice up the chain, and formal in-person reviews with appeal rights. <b>Policy implication:</b> Isolation becomes a documented exception, not a routine. <br> <b>4. Lockdown limits matter because lockdown can function like solitary</b> • The bill regulates lockdowns that interrupt programming and requires publication of documentation. <b>Policy implication:</b> Prevents “unit-wide solitary” from becoming the workaround. [[Category:2026 Session]]
2026-01-22 06:13:02
Edited by: 74.110.183.75
Edited by: 74.110.183.75
= HB35 Restorative housing and isolated confinement; restrictions on use. = == Status == [https://house.vga.virginia.gov/subcommittees/H15002/agendas/5187 Public Safety | Subcommittee #2 — agenda] <hr> == Overview == === Summary as Introduced === <b>Restorative housing and isolated confinement; restrictions on use.</b> Prohibits the use of isolated confinement, defined in the bill, in state correctional facilities, subject to certain exceptions. The bill requires that before placing an incarcerated person in restorative housing or isolated confinement for his own protection, the facility administrator shall place an incarcerated person in a less-restrictive setting, including by transferring such person to another institution or to a special-purpose housing unit for incarcerated persons who face similar threats. The bill requires that if an incarcerated person is placed in restorative housing or isolated confinement, such placement shall be reviewed every 48 hours and the facility administrator shall ensure that the incarcerated person receives a medical and mental health evaluation from certified medical and mental health professionals within one working day of placement in restorative housing or any form of isolated confinement. The bill also requires the facility administrator to notify the regional administrator in writing that an incarcerated person was placed in restorative housing or isolated confinement within 24 hours of such placement. Finally, the bill requires that formal reviews of an incarcerated person's placement in any form of isolated confinement shall be held in such person's presence, inform him of any reasons administrative officials believe isolated confinement remains necessary, and give the incarcerated person an opportunity to respond to those reasons, and a formal ruling shall be provided to the incarcerated individual within 24 hours. <hr> === Patrons === ==== House Patrons ==== • Joshua G. Cole (chief patron) • Patrick A. Hope • Sam Rasoul • Holly Seibold ==== Senate Patrons ==== • Bagby <hr> == Language == The language of [https://lis.virginia.gov/bill-details/20261/HB35/text/HB35 HB35] can be viewed here. <hr> == Proposed Amendment == === Amendment Offered for Consideration (requested for subcommittee) === ==== Add “Lockdown” throughout relevant provisions ==== Amend the bill to explicitly include “lockdown” alongside “solitary confinement/isolated confinement” and “restorative housing” in all relevant sections, to prevent facilities from using unit-wide lockdown practices as a functional substitute for individual isolated confinement. ==== Strengthen the time-limit clause (close the cumulative-days gap) ==== Replace the current time-limit phrasing with: “No individual shall be held in solitary confinement, lockdown, or restorative housing for more than 15 consecutive days, nor 15 days in any 60-day period.” <b>Purpose of the amendment:</b> The introduced text already uses “15 consecutive days…in any 60-day period,” but stakeholders have raised concerns that “consecutive” language can be worked around by cycling people in and out (or shifting to lockdown practices) without ever hitting a “consecutive” threshold. The amendment makes the limit explicitly <i>both</i> consecutive and cumulative. <hr> == Opening Statement == === House Subcommittee Statement === Mister Chair, members of the subcommittee— <i>This is not our first time here.</i> For <b>two straight years</b>, the General Assembly has passed this reform. - <b>In 2024</b>, I gave you a sermon—and we passed HB1244. + <b>In 2024</b>, I gave you a sermon—and we passed HB 1244. - <b>In 2025</b>, my sister, my friend, and my colleague, <b>Delegate Keys-Gamarra</b>, took up the torch—and we passed HB2647. + <b>In 2025</b>, my sister, my friend, and my colleague, <b>Delegate Keys-Gamarra</b>, took up the torch—and we passed HB 2647. Twice, this body has said—clearly—that we are ready to turn the page on solitary. And after two straight years, nobody can pretend this is new. • You know this bill. • You know this issue. • And you know how overdue this change is. Mister Chair, members of the committee, this is not our first time here, <b>BUT it will be our last time here</b>—because this year we will make history. And what is so great about this year is that we all have a chance—a chance to be part of making history— • Because when we look back in 25 years, we will know this legislation was the right thing to do! • Because when we look back in 50 years, we will know this legislation was the right thing to do! • Because when we look back in <b>one-hundred</b> years, we will know this legislation was the right thing to do! Today—I hope everyone in this room joins us in doing the <i><b>right thing.</b></i> I’ll keep my remarks brief so we can get to hearing the supporters remind us—again—just how overdue this legislation is. Thank you, Mister Chair and members of the committee. <hr> == Support and Opposition == === Support === • ACLU People Power Fairfax • Bridging The Gap In Virginia • Charlottesville Chapter National Organization for Women • Coalition for Justice • EJUSA Evangelical Network • Fighting 4 Freedom • Greater Washington (JCRC) • Inmate Support Virginia • Interfaith Action for Human Rights (IAHR) • HALT Solitary • Jewish Community Relations Council of Just Future Project • Justice & Witness Action Network- VA • United Church of Christ Central Atlantic Conference • LatinoJustice PRLDEF • NAACP Loudoun • National Association of Social Workers • National Association of Social Workers, Virginia Chapter • National Religious Campaign Against Torture • No Left Turns • Resource Information Help for the Disadvantaged and Disenfranchised (RIHD) • RISE for Youth • RVA Health Alliance for Social Justice and Equity • Social Action Linking Together (SALT) • Social Workers and Allies Against Solitary Confinement • The Humanization Project • The Sentencing Project • Unitarian Universalist Legislative Ministry of Virginia • Unlock the Box Campaign • Virginia CURE • Virginia Defenders for Freedom, Justice & Equality • Virginia Justice Democrats • Virginia Justice for Life • Virginia Justice Alliance • Virginia Prisons Accountability Committee • Virginia Prisoner Of Conscience • Virginia Prison Justice Network • WJCC Coalition for Community Justice • 40 Strong === Opposition === • (to be updated) === No Recommendation / Neutral === • (to be updated) <hr> == Fiscal Impact == No fiscal impact statement is posted for HB35. <hr> == Possible Questions == === TL;DR === <b>Q1: “Does this end solitary confinement in Virginia?”</b> TL;DR: No—it ends <i>prolonged</i> solitary confinement and sets clear limits, oversight, and due-process rules for any use. <br> <b>Q2: “Does this make prisons less safe for staff?”</b> TL;DR: No—HB35 keeps exceptions for imminent threats and requires documentation; it’s about targeted use, not “never.” <br> <b>Q3: “What changes day-to-day?”</b> TL;DR: Frequent reviews, rapid medical/mental health checks, real programming/out-of-cell time, and written accountability when isolation is used. <br> <b>Q4: “Can DOC just use ‘lockdowns’ instead?”</b> TL;DR: The bill defines lockdown and regulates it, and the requested amendment strengthens this further by applying the same time limits to lockdown explicitly. <br> === Q1: “What does the bill aim to accomplish?” === <b>Answer you can use:</b> HB35 ends prolonged solitary confinement by setting clear time limits and requiring real oversight—regular reviews, rapid medical and mental health evaluations, documentation, and in-person due process when isolation continues. <br> === Q2: “How often is placement reviewed?” === <b>Answer you can use:</b> Placement is reviewed frequently, including a required 48-hour review cycle with written documentation explaining why less restrictive settings were not used. <br> === Q3: “What health protections are required?” === <b>Answer you can use:</b> HB35 requires medical and mental health evaluations by certified professionals within one working day of placement in restorative housing or isolated confinement (with limited exceptions). <br> === Q4: “Does this stop people from getting programming or recreation?” === <b>Answer you can use:</b> No—the bill requires at least four hours of out-of-cell programming or congregate activity daily, plus at least one hour of congregate recreation unless exceptional safety circumstances apply. <br> === Q5: “What stops indefinite ‘lockdowns’?” === <b>Answer you can use:</b> Lockdowns that interrupt programming must have a specific documented security purpose, must end as soon as the purpose is served, are time-limited, require approvals to extend or repeat, and must be documented and published. <hr> == Additional Information == <b>1. Definitions are the enforcement backbone</b> • The bill defines isolated confinement and lockdown by hours-per-day and loss of programming, so policy can’t be evaded by unit names. <b>Policy implication:</b> Regulates conditions, not labels. <br> <b>2. The “less restrictive first” rule targets protective-custody misuse</b> • For “own protection” placements, the facility must use less restrictive options first, including transfers or special-purpose housing for similarly threatened individuals, unless infeasible. <b>Policy implication:</b> Safety without defaulting to isolation. <br> <b>3. Reviews + documentation create accountability</b> • Requires regular reviews, documentation in the institutional file, notice up the chain, and formal in-person reviews with appeal rights. <b>Policy implication:</b> Isolation becomes a documented exception, not a routine. <br> <b>4. Lockdown limits matter because lockdown can function like solitary</b> • The bill regulates lockdowns that interrupt programming and requires publication of documentation. <b>Policy implication:</b> Prevents “unit-wide solitary” from becoming the workaround. [[Category:2026 Session]]
2026-01-22 06:12:04
Edited by: 74.110.183.75
Edited by: 74.110.183.75
= HB35 Restorative housing and isolated confinement; restrictions on use. = == Status == [https://house.vga.virginia.gov/subcommittees/H15002/agendas/5187 Public Safety | Subcommittee #2 — agenda] <hr> == Overview == === Summary as Introduced === <b>Restorative housing and isolated confinement; restrictions on use.</b> Prohibits the use of isolated confinement, defined in the bill, in state correctional facilities, subject to certain exceptions. The bill requires that before placing an incarcerated person in restorative housing or isolated confinement for his own protection, the facility administrator shall place an incarcerated person in a less-restrictive setting, including by transferring such person to another institution or to a special-purpose housing unit for incarcerated persons who face similar threats. The bill requires that if an incarcerated person is placed in restorative housing or isolated confinement, such placement shall be reviewed every 48 hours and the facility administrator shall ensure that the incarcerated person receives a medical and mental health evaluation from certified medical and mental health professionals within one working day of placement in restorative housing or any form of isolated confinement. The bill also requires the facility administrator to notify the regional administrator in writing that an incarcerated person was placed in restorative housing or isolated confinement within 24 hours of such placement. Finally, the bill requires that formal reviews of an incarcerated person's placement in any form of isolated confinement shall be held in such person's presence, inform him of any reasons administrative officials believe isolated confinement remains necessary, and give the incarcerated person an opportunity to respond to those reasons, and a formal ruling shall be provided to the incarcerated individual within 24 hours. <hr> === Patrons === ==== House Patrons ==== • Joshua G. Cole (chief patron) • Patrick A. Hope • Sam Rasoul • Holly Seibold ==== Senate Patrons ==== • Bagby <hr> == Language == The language of [https://lis.virginia.gov/bill-details/20261/HB35/text/HB35 HB35] can be viewed here. <hr> == Proposed Amendment == === Amendment Offered for Consideration (requested for subcommittee) === ==== Add “Lockdown” throughout relevant provisions ==== Amend the bill to explicitly include “lockdown” alongside “solitary confinement/isolated confinement” and “restorative housing” in all relevant sections, to prevent facilities from using unit-wide lockdown practices as a functional substitute for individual isolated confinement. ==== Strengthen the time-limit clause (close the cumulative-days gap) ==== Replace the current time-limit phrasing with: “No individual shall be held in solitary confinement, lockdown, or restorative housing for more than 15 consecutive days, nor 15 days in any 60-day period.” <b>Purpose of the amendment:</b> The introduced text already uses “15 consecutive days…in any 60-day period,” but stakeholders have raised concerns that “consecutive” language can be worked around by cycling people in and out (or shifting to lockdown practices) without ever hitting a “consecutive” threshold. The amendment makes the limit explicitly <i>both</i> consecutive and cumulative. <hr> == Opening Statement == === House Subcommittee Statement === Mister Chair, members of the subcommittee— <i>This is not our first time here.</i> For <b>two straight years</b>, the General Assembly has passed this reform. <b>In 2024</b>, I gave you a sermon—and we passed HB1244. - <b>In 2025</b>, my sister, my friend, and my colleague, Delegate Keys-Gamarra, took up the torch—and we passed HB2647. + <b>In 2025</b>, my sister, my friend, and my colleague, <b>Delegate Keys-Gamarra</b>, took up the torch—and we passed HB2647. Twice, this body has said—clearly—that we are ready to turn the page on solitary. And after two straight years, nobody can pretend this is new. • You know this bill. • You know this issue. • And you know how overdue this change is. Mister Chair, members of the committee, this is not our first time here, <b>BUT it will be our last time here</b>—because this year we will make history. And what is so great about this year is that we all have a chance—a chance to be part of making history— • Because when we look back in 25 years, we will know this legislation was the right thing to do! • Because when we look back in 50 years, we will know this legislation was the right thing to do! • Because when we look back in <b>one-hundred</b> years, we will know this legislation was the right thing to do! Today—I hope everyone in this room joins us in doing the <i><b>right thing.</b></i> I’ll keep my remarks brief so we can get to hearing the supporters remind us—again—just how overdue this legislation is. Thank you, Mister Chair and members of the committee. <hr> == Support and Opposition == === Support === • ACLU People Power Fairfax • Bridging The Gap In Virginia • Charlottesville Chapter National Organization for Women • Coalition for Justice • EJUSA Evangelical Network • Fighting 4 Freedom • Greater Washington (JCRC) • Inmate Support Virginia • Interfaith Action for Human Rights (IAHR) • HALT Solitary • Jewish Community Relations Council of Just Future Project • Justice & Witness Action Network- VA • United Church of Christ Central Atlantic Conference • LatinoJustice PRLDEF • NAACP Loudoun • National Association of Social Workers • National Association of Social Workers, Virginia Chapter • National Religious Campaign Against Torture • No Left Turns • Resource Information Help for the Disadvantaged and Disenfranchised (RIHD) • RISE for Youth • RVA Health Alliance for Social Justice and Equity • Social Action Linking Together (SALT) • Social Workers and Allies Against Solitary Confinement • The Humanization Project • The Sentencing Project • Unitarian Universalist Legislative Ministry of Virginia • Unlock the Box Campaign • Virginia CURE • Virginia Defenders for Freedom, Justice & Equality • Virginia Justice Democrats • Virginia Justice for Life • Virginia Justice Alliance • Virginia Prisons Accountability Committee • Virginia Prisoner Of Conscience • Virginia Prison Justice Network • WJCC Coalition for Community Justice • 40 Strong === Opposition === • (to be updated) === No Recommendation / Neutral === • (to be updated) <hr> == Fiscal Impact == No fiscal impact statement is posted for HB35. <hr> == Possible Questions == === TL;DR === <b>Q1: “Does this end solitary confinement in Virginia?”</b> TL;DR: No—it ends <i>prolonged</i> solitary confinement and sets clear limits, oversight, and due-process rules for any use. <br> <b>Q2: “Does this make prisons less safe for staff?”</b> TL;DR: No—HB35 keeps exceptions for imminent threats and requires documentation; it’s about targeted use, not “never.” <br> <b>Q3: “What changes day-to-day?”</b> TL;DR: Frequent reviews, rapid medical/mental health checks, real programming/out-of-cell time, and written accountability when isolation is used. <br> <b>Q4: “Can DOC just use ‘lockdowns’ instead?”</b> TL;DR: The bill defines lockdown and regulates it, and the requested amendment strengthens this further by applying the same time limits to lockdown explicitly. <br> === Q1: “What does the bill aim to accomplish?” === <b>Answer you can use:</b> HB35 ends prolonged solitary confinement by setting clear time limits and requiring real oversight—regular reviews, rapid medical and mental health evaluations, documentation, and in-person due process when isolation continues. <br> === Q2: “How often is placement reviewed?” === <b>Answer you can use:</b> Placement is reviewed frequently, including a required 48-hour review cycle with written documentation explaining why less restrictive settings were not used. <br> === Q3: “What health protections are required?” === <b>Answer you can use:</b> HB35 requires medical and mental health evaluations by certified professionals within one working day of placement in restorative housing or isolated confinement (with limited exceptions). <br> === Q4: “Does this stop people from getting programming or recreation?” === <b>Answer you can use:</b> No—the bill requires at least four hours of out-of-cell programming or congregate activity daily, plus at least one hour of congregate recreation unless exceptional safety circumstances apply. <br> === Q5: “What stops indefinite ‘lockdowns’?” === <b>Answer you can use:</b> Lockdowns that interrupt programming must have a specific documented security purpose, must end as soon as the purpose is served, are time-limited, require approvals to extend or repeat, and must be documented and published. <hr> == Additional Information == <b>1. Definitions are the enforcement backbone</b> • The bill defines isolated confinement and lockdown by hours-per-day and loss of programming, so policy can’t be evaded by unit names. <b>Policy implication:</b> Regulates conditions, not labels. <br> <b>2. The “less restrictive first” rule targets protective-custody misuse</b> • For “own protection” placements, the facility must use less restrictive options first, including transfers or special-purpose housing for similarly threatened individuals, unless infeasible. <b>Policy implication:</b> Safety without defaulting to isolation. <br> <b>3. Reviews + documentation create accountability</b> • Requires regular reviews, documentation in the institutional file, notice up the chain, and formal in-person reviews with appeal rights. <b>Policy implication:</b> Isolation becomes a documented exception, not a routine. <br> <b>4. Lockdown limits matter because lockdown can function like solitary</b> • The bill regulates lockdowns that interrupt programming and requires publication of documentation. <b>Policy implication:</b> Prevents “unit-wide solitary” from becoming the workaround. [[Category:2026 Session]]
2026-01-22 06:11:36
Edited by: 74.110.183.75
Edited by: 74.110.183.75
= HB35 Restorative housing and isolated confinement; restrictions on use. = == Status == [https://house.vga.virginia.gov/subcommittees/H15002/agendas/5187 Public Safety | Subcommittee #2 — agenda] <hr> == Overview == === Summary as Introduced === <b>Restorative housing and isolated confinement; restrictions on use.</b> Prohibits the use of isolated confinement, defined in the bill, in state correctional facilities, subject to certain exceptions. The bill requires that before placing an incarcerated person in restorative housing or isolated confinement for his own protection, the facility administrator shall place an incarcerated person in a less-restrictive setting, including by transferring such person to another institution or to a special-purpose housing unit for incarcerated persons who face similar threats. The bill requires that if an incarcerated person is placed in restorative housing or isolated confinement, such placement shall be reviewed every 48 hours and the facility administrator shall ensure that the incarcerated person receives a medical and mental health evaluation from certified medical and mental health professionals within one working day of placement in restorative housing or any form of isolated confinement. The bill also requires the facility administrator to notify the regional administrator in writing that an incarcerated person was placed in restorative housing or isolated confinement within 24 hours of such placement. Finally, the bill requires that formal reviews of an incarcerated person's placement in any form of isolated confinement shall be held in such person's presence, inform him of any reasons administrative officials believe isolated confinement remains necessary, and give the incarcerated person an opportunity to respond to those reasons, and a formal ruling shall be provided to the incarcerated individual within 24 hours. <hr> === Patrons === ==== House Patrons ==== • Joshua G. Cole (chief patron) • Patrick A. Hope • Sam Rasoul • Holly Seibold ==== Senate Patrons ==== • Bagby <hr> == Language == The language of [https://lis.virginia.gov/bill-details/20261/HB35/text/HB35 HB35] can be viewed here. <hr> == Proposed Amendment == === Amendment Offered for Consideration (requested for subcommittee) === ==== Add “Lockdown” throughout relevant provisions ==== Amend the bill to explicitly include “lockdown” alongside “solitary confinement/isolated confinement” and “restorative housing” in all relevant sections, to prevent facilities from using unit-wide lockdown practices as a functional substitute for individual isolated confinement. ==== Strengthen the time-limit clause (close the cumulative-days gap) ==== Replace the current time-limit phrasing with: “No individual shall be held in solitary confinement, lockdown, or restorative housing for more than 15 consecutive days, nor 15 days in any 60-day period.” <b>Purpose of the amendment:</b> The introduced text already uses “15 consecutive days…in any 60-day period,” but stakeholders have raised concerns that “consecutive” language can be worked around by cycling people in and out (or shifting to lockdown practices) without ever hitting a “consecutive” threshold. The amendment makes the limit explicitly <i>both</i> consecutive and cumulative. <hr> == Opening Statement == === House Subcommittee Statement === Mister Chair, members of the subcommittee— <i>This is not our first time here.</i> For <b>two straight years</b>, the General Assembly has passed this reform. <b>In 2024</b>, I gave you a sermon—and we passed HB1244. <b>In 2025</b>, my sister, my friend, and my colleague, Delegate Keys-Gamarra, took up the torch—and we passed HB2647. Twice, this body has said—clearly—that we are ready to turn the page on solitary. And after two straight years, nobody can pretend this is new. • You know this bill. • You know this issue. • And you know how overdue this change is. Mister Chair, members of the committee, this is not our first time here, <b>BUT it will be our last time here</b>—because this year we will make history. And what is so great about this year is that we all have a chance—a chance to be part of making history— • Because when we look back in 25 years, we will know this legislation was the right thing to do! • Because when we look back in 50 years, we will know this legislation was the right thing to do! • Because when we look back in <b>one-hundred</b> years, we will know this legislation was the right thing to do! - Today—I hope everyone in this room joins us in doing the <b>right thing.</b> + Today—I hope everyone in this room joins us in doing the <i><b>right thing.</b></i> I’ll keep my remarks brief so we can get to hearing the supporters remind us—again—just how overdue this legislation is. Thank you, Mister Chair and members of the committee. <hr> == Support and Opposition == === Support === • ACLU People Power Fairfax • Bridging The Gap In Virginia • Charlottesville Chapter National Organization for Women • Coalition for Justice • EJUSA Evangelical Network • Fighting 4 Freedom • Greater Washington (JCRC) • Inmate Support Virginia • Interfaith Action for Human Rights (IAHR) • HALT Solitary • Jewish Community Relations Council of Just Future Project • Justice & Witness Action Network- VA • United Church of Christ Central Atlantic Conference • LatinoJustice PRLDEF • NAACP Loudoun • National Association of Social Workers • National Association of Social Workers, Virginia Chapter • National Religious Campaign Against Torture • No Left Turns • Resource Information Help for the Disadvantaged and Disenfranchised (RIHD) • RISE for Youth • RVA Health Alliance for Social Justice and Equity • Social Action Linking Together (SALT) • Social Workers and Allies Against Solitary Confinement • The Humanization Project • The Sentencing Project • Unitarian Universalist Legislative Ministry of Virginia • Unlock the Box Campaign • Virginia CURE • Virginia Defenders for Freedom, Justice & Equality • Virginia Justice Democrats • Virginia Justice for Life • Virginia Justice Alliance • Virginia Prisons Accountability Committee • Virginia Prisoner Of Conscience • Virginia Prison Justice Network • WJCC Coalition for Community Justice • 40 Strong === Opposition === • (to be updated) === No Recommendation / Neutral === • (to be updated) <hr> == Fiscal Impact == No fiscal impact statement is posted for HB35. <hr> == Possible Questions == === TL;DR === <b>Q1: “Does this end solitary confinement in Virginia?”</b> TL;DR: No—it ends <i>prolonged</i> solitary confinement and sets clear limits, oversight, and due-process rules for any use. <br> <b>Q2: “Does this make prisons less safe for staff?”</b> TL;DR: No—HB35 keeps exceptions for imminent threats and requires documentation; it’s about targeted use, not “never.” <br> <b>Q3: “What changes day-to-day?”</b> TL;DR: Frequent reviews, rapid medical/mental health checks, real programming/out-of-cell time, and written accountability when isolation is used. <br> <b>Q4: “Can DOC just use ‘lockdowns’ instead?”</b> TL;DR: The bill defines lockdown and regulates it, and the requested amendment strengthens this further by applying the same time limits to lockdown explicitly. <br> === Q1: “What does the bill aim to accomplish?” === <b>Answer you can use:</b> HB35 ends prolonged solitary confinement by setting clear time limits and requiring real oversight—regular reviews, rapid medical and mental health evaluations, documentation, and in-person due process when isolation continues. <br> === Q2: “How often is placement reviewed?” === <b>Answer you can use:</b> Placement is reviewed frequently, including a required 48-hour review cycle with written documentation explaining why less restrictive settings were not used. <br> === Q3: “What health protections are required?” === <b>Answer you can use:</b> HB35 requires medical and mental health evaluations by certified professionals within one working day of placement in restorative housing or isolated confinement (with limited exceptions). <br> === Q4: “Does this stop people from getting programming or recreation?” === <b>Answer you can use:</b> No—the bill requires at least four hours of out-of-cell programming or congregate activity daily, plus at least one hour of congregate recreation unless exceptional safety circumstances apply. <br> === Q5: “What stops indefinite ‘lockdowns’?” === <b>Answer you can use:</b> Lockdowns that interrupt programming must have a specific documented security purpose, must end as soon as the purpose is served, are time-limited, require approvals to extend or repeat, and must be documented and published. <hr> == Additional Information == <b>1. Definitions are the enforcement backbone</b> • The bill defines isolated confinement and lockdown by hours-per-day and loss of programming, so policy can’t be evaded by unit names. <b>Policy implication:</b> Regulates conditions, not labels. <br> <b>2. The “less restrictive first” rule targets protective-custody misuse</b> • For “own protection” placements, the facility must use less restrictive options first, including transfers or special-purpose housing for similarly threatened individuals, unless infeasible. <b>Policy implication:</b> Safety without defaulting to isolation. <br> <b>3. Reviews + documentation create accountability</b> • Requires regular reviews, documentation in the institutional file, notice up the chain, and formal in-person reviews with appeal rights. <b>Policy implication:</b> Isolation becomes a documented exception, not a routine. <br> <b>4. Lockdown limits matter because lockdown can function like solitary</b> • The bill regulates lockdowns that interrupt programming and requires publication of documentation. <b>Policy implication:</b> Prevents “unit-wide solitary” from becoming the workaround. [[Category:2026 Session]]
2026-01-22 06:11:11
Edited by: 74.110.183.75
Edited by: 74.110.183.75
= HB35 Restorative housing and isolated confinement; restrictions on use. = == Status == [https://house.vga.virginia.gov/subcommittees/H15002/agendas/5187 Public Safety | Subcommittee #2 — agenda] <hr> == Overview == === Summary as Introduced === <b>Restorative housing and isolated confinement; restrictions on use.</b> Prohibits the use of isolated confinement, defined in the bill, in state correctional facilities, subject to certain exceptions. The bill requires that before placing an incarcerated person in restorative housing or isolated confinement for his own protection, the facility administrator shall place an incarcerated person in a less-restrictive setting, including by transferring such person to another institution or to a special-purpose housing unit for incarcerated persons who face similar threats. The bill requires that if an incarcerated person is placed in restorative housing or isolated confinement, such placement shall be reviewed every 48 hours and the facility administrator shall ensure that the incarcerated person receives a medical and mental health evaluation from certified medical and mental health professionals within one working day of placement in restorative housing or any form of isolated confinement. The bill also requires the facility administrator to notify the regional administrator in writing that an incarcerated person was placed in restorative housing or isolated confinement within 24 hours of such placement. Finally, the bill requires that formal reviews of an incarcerated person's placement in any form of isolated confinement shall be held in such person's presence, inform him of any reasons administrative officials believe isolated confinement remains necessary, and give the incarcerated person an opportunity to respond to those reasons, and a formal ruling shall be provided to the incarcerated individual within 24 hours. <hr> === Patrons === ==== House Patrons ==== • Joshua G. Cole (chief patron) • Patrick A. Hope • Sam Rasoul • Holly Seibold ==== Senate Patrons ==== • Bagby <hr> == Language == The language of [https://lis.virginia.gov/bill-details/20261/HB35/text/HB35 HB35] can be viewed here. <hr> == Proposed Amendment == === Amendment Offered for Consideration (requested for subcommittee) === ==== Add “Lockdown” throughout relevant provisions ==== Amend the bill to explicitly include “lockdown” alongside “solitary confinement/isolated confinement” and “restorative housing” in all relevant sections, to prevent facilities from using unit-wide lockdown practices as a functional substitute for individual isolated confinement. ==== Strengthen the time-limit clause (close the cumulative-days gap) ==== Replace the current time-limit phrasing with: “No individual shall be held in solitary confinement, lockdown, or restorative housing for more than 15 consecutive days, nor 15 days in any 60-day period.” <b>Purpose of the amendment:</b> The introduced text already uses “15 consecutive days…in any 60-day period,” but stakeholders have raised concerns that “consecutive” language can be worked around by cycling people in and out (or shifting to lockdown practices) without ever hitting a “consecutive” threshold. The amendment makes the limit explicitly <i>both</i> consecutive and cumulative. <hr> == Opening Statement == === House Subcommittee Statement === Mister Chair, members of the subcommittee— <i>This is not our first time here.</i> For <b>two straight years</b>, the General Assembly has passed this reform. <b>In 2024</b>, I gave you a sermon—and we passed HB1244. <b>In 2025</b>, my sister, my friend, and my colleague, Delegate Keys-Gamarra, took up the torch—and we passed HB2647. Twice, this body has said—clearly—that we are ready to turn the page on solitary. And after two straight years, nobody can pretend this is new. - You know this bill. You know this issue. And you know how overdue this change is. + • You know this bill. - + • You know this issue. - Mister Chair, members of the committee, this is not our first time here, <b>BUT it will be our last time here</b>—because this year we will make history. + • And you know how overdue this change is. - This year, we all have a chance—a chance to be part of making history— + Mister Chair, members of the committee, this is not our first time here, <b>BUT it will be our last time here</b>—because this year we will make history. - Because when we look back in 25 years, we will know this legislation was the right thing to do! + And what is so great about this year is that we all have a chance—a chance to be part of making history— - Because when we look back in 50 years, we will know this legislation was the right thing to do! + • Because when we look back in 25 years, we will know this legislation was the right thing to do! - Because when we look back in <b>one-hundred</b> years, we will know this legislation was the right thing to do! + • Because when we look back in 50 years, we will know this legislation was the right thing to do! - Today—I hope everyone in this room joins us in doing the <b>right thing.</b> + • Because when we look back in <b>one-hundred</b> years, we will know this legislation was the right thing to do! - I’ll keep my remarks brief so we can get to hearing the supporters remind us—again—just how overdue this legislation is. + Today—I hope everyone in this room joins us in doing the <b>right thing.</b> - Thank you, Mister Chair and members of the committee. + I’ll keep my remarks brief so we can get to hearing the supporters remind us—again—just how overdue this legislation is. - <hr> + Thank you, Mister Chair and members of the committee. - == Support and Opposition == + <hr> - === Support === + == Support and Opposition == - • ACLU People Power Fairfax + - • Bridging The Gap In Virginia + === Support === - • Charlottesville Chapter National Organization for Women + • ACLU People Power Fairfax - • Coalition for Justice + • Bridging The Gap In Virginia - • EJUSA Evangelical Network + • Charlottesville Chapter National Organization for Women - • Fighting 4 Freedom + • Coalition for Justice - • Greater Washington (JCRC) + • EJUSA Evangelical Network - • Inmate Support Virginia + • Fighting 4 Freedom - • Interfaith Action for Human Rights (IAHR) + • Greater Washington (JCRC) - • HALT Solitary + • Inmate Support Virginia - • Jewish Community Relations Council of Just Future Project + • Interfaith Action for Human Rights (IAHR) - • Justice & Witness Action Network- VA + • HALT Solitary - • United Church of Christ Central Atlantic Conference + • Jewish Community Relations Council of Just Future Project - • LatinoJustice PRLDEF + • Justice & Witness Action Network- VA - • NAACP Loudoun + • United Church of Christ Central Atlantic Conference - • National Association of Social Workers + • LatinoJustice PRLDEF - • National Association of Social Workers, Virginia Chapter + • NAACP Loudoun - • National Religious Campaign Against Torture + • National Association of Social Workers - • No Left Turns + • National Association of Social Workers, Virginia Chapter - • Resource Information Help for the Disadvantaged and Disenfranchised (RIHD) + • National Religious Campaign Against Torture - • RISE for Youth + • No Left Turns - • RVA Health Alliance for Social Justice and Equity + • Resource Information Help for the Disadvantaged and Disenfranchised (RIHD) - • Social Action Linking Together (SALT) + • RISE for Youth - • Social Workers and Allies Against Solitary Confinement + • RVA Health Alliance for Social Justice and Equity - • The Humanization Project + • Social Action Linking Together (SALT) - • The Sentencing Project + • Social Workers and Allies Against Solitary Confinement - • Unitarian Universalist Legislative Ministry of Virginia + • The Humanization Project - • Unlock the Box Campaign + • The Sentencing Project - • Virginia CURE + • Unitarian Universalist Legislative Ministry of Virginia - • Virginia Defenders for Freedom, Justice & Equality + • Unlock the Box Campaign - • Virginia Justice Democrats + • Virginia CURE - • Virginia Justice for Life + • Virginia Defenders for Freedom, Justice & Equality - • Virginia Justice Alliance + • Virginia Justice Democrats - • Virginia Prisons Accountability Committee + • Virginia Justice for Life - • Virginia Prisoner Of Conscience + • Virginia Justice Alliance - • Virginia Prison Justice Network + • Virginia Prisons Accountability Committee - • WJCC Coalition for Community Justice + • Virginia Prisoner Of Conscience - • 40 Strong + • Virginia Prison Justice Network - + • WJCC Coalition for Community Justice - === Opposition === + • 40 Strong - • (to be updated) + - + === Opposition === - === No Recommendation / Neutral === + • (to be updated) - • (to be updated) + - + === No Recommendation / Neutral === - <hr> + • (to be updated) - == Fiscal Impact == + <hr> - No fiscal impact statement is posted for HB35. + - + == Fiscal Impact == - <hr> + No fiscal impact statement is posted for HB35. - == Possible Questions == + <hr> - === TL;DR === + == Possible Questions == - <b>Q1: “Does this end solitary confinement in Virginia?”</b> TL;DR: No—it ends <i>prolonged</i> solitary confinement and sets clear limits, oversight, and due-process rules for any use. <br> + - <b>Q2: “Does this make prisons less safe for staff?”</b> TL;DR: No—HB35 keeps exceptions for imminent threats and requires documentation; it’s about targeted use, not “never.” + === TL;DR === - + <b>Q1: “Does this end solitary confinement in Virginia?”</b> TL;DR: No—it ends <i>prolonged</i> solitary confinement and sets clear limits, oversight, and due-process rules for any use. <br> - <br> + <b>Q2: “Does this make prisons less safe for staff?”</b> TL;DR: No—HB35 keeps exceptions for imminent threats and requires documentation; it’s about targeted use, not “never.” - <b>Q3: “What changes day-to-day?”</b> TL;DR: Frequent reviews, rapid medical/mental health checks, real programming/out-of-cell time, and written accountability when isolation is used. + - + <br> - <br> + <b>Q3: “What changes day-to-day?”</b> TL;DR: Frequent reviews, rapid medical/mental health checks, real programming/out-of-cell time, and written accountability when isolation is used. - <b>Q4: “Can DOC just use ‘lockdowns’ instead?”</b> TL;DR: The bill defines lockdown and regulates it, and the requested amendment strengthens this further by applying the same time limits to lockdown explicitly. + - + <br> - <br> + <b>Q4: “Can DOC just use ‘lockdowns’ instead?”</b> TL;DR: The bill defines lockdown and regulates it, and the requested amendment strengthens this further by applying the same time limits to lockdown explicitly. - === Q1: “What does the bill aim to accomplish?” === + <br> - <b>Answer you can use:</b> HB35 ends prolonged solitary confinement by setting clear time limits and requiring real oversight—regular reviews, rapid medical and mental health evaluations, documentation, and in-person due process when isolation continues. + - + === Q1: “What does the bill aim to accomplish?” === - <br> + <b>Answer you can use:</b> HB35 ends prolonged solitary confinement by setting clear time limits and requiring real oversight—regular reviews, rapid medical and mental health evaluations, documentation, and in-person due process when isolation continues. - === Q2: “How often is placement reviewed?” === + <br> - <b>Answer you can use:</b> Placement is reviewed frequently, including a required 48-hour review cycle with written documentation explaining why less restrictive settings were not used. + - + === Q2: “How often is placement reviewed?” === - <br> + <b>Answer you can use:</b> Placement is reviewed frequently, including a required 48-hour review cycle with written documentation explaining why less restrictive settings were not used. - === Q3: “What health protections are required?” === + <br> - <b>Answer you can use:</b> HB35 requires medical and mental health evaluations by certified professionals within one working day of placement in restorative housing or isolated confinement (with limited exceptions). + - + === Q3: “What health protections are required?” === - <br> + <b>Answer you can use:</b> HB35 requires medical and mental health evaluations by certified professionals within one working day of placement in restorative housing or isolated confinement (with limited exceptions). - === Q4: “Does this stop people from getting programming or recreation?” === + <br> - <b>Answer you can use:</b> No—the bill requires at least four hours of out-of-cell programming or congregate activity daily, plus at least one hour of congregate recreation unless exceptional safety circumstances apply. + - + === Q4: “Does this stop people from getting programming or recreation?” === - <br> + <b>Answer you can use:</b> No—the bill requires at least four hours of out-of-cell programming or congregate activity daily, plus at least one hour of congregate recreation unless exceptional safety circumstances apply. - === Q5: “What stops indefinite ‘lockdowns’?” === + <br> - <b>Answer you can use:</b> Lockdowns that interrupt programming must have a specific documented security purpose, must end as soon as the purpose is served, are time-limited, require approvals to extend or repeat, and must be documented and published. + - + === Q5: “What stops indefinite ‘lockdowns’?” === - <hr> + <b>Answer you can use:</b> Lockdowns that interrupt programming must have a specific documented security purpose, must end as soon as the purpose is served, are time-limited, require approvals to extend or repeat, and must be documented and published. - == Additional Information == + <hr> - <b>1. Definitions are the enforcement backbone</b> + - • The bill defines isolated confinement and lockdown by hours-per-day and loss of programming, so policy can’t be evaded by unit names. + == Additional Information == - + <b>1. Definitions are the enforcement backbone</b> - + • The bill defines isolated confinement and lockdown by hours-per-day and loss of programming, so policy can’t be evaded by unit names. - <b>Policy implication:</b> Regulates conditions, not labels. + - <br> + <b>Policy implication:</b> Regulates conditions, not labels. - <b>2. The “less restrictive first” rule targets protective-custody misuse</b> + <br> - • For “own protection” placements, the facility must use less restrictive options first, including transfers or special-purpose housing for similarly threatened individuals, unless infeasible. + - + <b>2. The “less restrictive first” rule targets protective-custody misuse</b> - <b>Policy implication:</b> Safety without defaulting to isolation. + • For “own protection” placements, the facility must use less restrictive options first, including transfers or special-purpose housing for similarly threatened individuals, unless infeasible. - <br> + <b>Policy implication:</b> Safety without defaulting to isolation. - <b>3. Reviews + documentation create accountability</b> + <br> - • Requires regular reviews, documentation in the institutional file, notice up the chain, and formal in-person reviews with appeal rights. + - + <b>3. Reviews + documentation create accountability</b> - <b>Policy implication:</b> Isolation becomes a documented exception, not a routine. + • Requires regular reviews, documentation in the institutional file, notice up the chain, and formal in-person reviews with appeal rights. - <br> + <b>Policy implication:</b> Isolation becomes a documented exception, not a routine. - <b>4. Lockdown limits matter because lockdown can function like solitary</b> + <br> - • The bill regulates lockdowns that interrupt programming and requires publication of documentation. + - + <b>4. Lockdown limits matter because lockdown can function like solitary</b> - + • The bill regulates lockdowns that interrupt programming and requires publication of documentation. - <b>Policy implication:</b> Prevents “unit-wide solitary” from becoming the workaround. + - [[Category:2026 Session]] + <b>Policy implication:</b> Prevents “unit-wide solitary” from becoming the workaround. + + [[Category:2026 Session]]
2026-01-22 06:10:39
Edited by: 74.110.183.75
Edited by: 74.110.183.75
= HB35 Restorative housing and isolated confinement; restrictions on use. = == Status == [https://house.vga.virginia.gov/subcommittees/H15002/agendas/5187 Public Safety | Subcommittee #2 — agenda] <hr> == Overview == === Summary as Introduced === <b>Restorative housing and isolated confinement; restrictions on use.</b> Prohibits the use of isolated confinement, defined in the bill, in state correctional facilities, subject to certain exceptions. The bill requires that before placing an incarcerated person in restorative housing or isolated confinement for his own protection, the facility administrator shall place an incarcerated person in a less-restrictive setting, including by transferring such person to another institution or to a special-purpose housing unit for incarcerated persons who face similar threats. The bill requires that if an incarcerated person is placed in restorative housing or isolated confinement, such placement shall be reviewed every 48 hours and the facility administrator shall ensure that the incarcerated person receives a medical and mental health evaluation from certified medical and mental health professionals within one working day of placement in restorative housing or any form of isolated confinement. The bill also requires the facility administrator to notify the regional administrator in writing that an incarcerated person was placed in restorative housing or isolated confinement within 24 hours of such placement. Finally, the bill requires that formal reviews of an incarcerated person's placement in any form of isolated confinement shall be held in such person's presence, inform him of any reasons administrative officials believe isolated confinement remains necessary, and give the incarcerated person an opportunity to respond to those reasons, and a formal ruling shall be provided to the incarcerated individual within 24 hours. <hr> === Patrons === ==== House Patrons ==== • Joshua G. Cole (chief patron) • Patrick A. Hope • Sam Rasoul • Holly Seibold ==== Senate Patrons ==== • Bagby <hr> == Language == The language of [https://lis.virginia.gov/bill-details/20261/HB35/text/HB35 HB35] can be viewed here. <hr> == Proposed Amendment == === Amendment Offered for Consideration (requested for subcommittee) === ==== Add “Lockdown” throughout relevant provisions ==== Amend the bill to explicitly include “lockdown” alongside “solitary confinement/isolated confinement” and “restorative housing” in all relevant sections, to prevent facilities from using unit-wide lockdown practices as a functional substitute for individual isolated confinement. ==== Strengthen the time-limit clause (close the cumulative-days gap) ==== Replace the current time-limit phrasing with: “No individual shall be held in solitary confinement, lockdown, or restorative housing for more than 15 consecutive days, nor 15 days in any 60-day period.” <b>Purpose of the amendment:</b> The introduced text already uses “15 consecutive days…in any 60-day period,” but stakeholders have raised concerns that “consecutive” language can be worked around by cycling people in and out (or shifting to lockdown practices) without ever hitting a “consecutive” threshold. The amendment makes the limit explicitly <i>both</i> consecutive and cumulative. <hr> == Opening Statement == === House Subcommittee Statement === Mister Chair, members of the subcommittee— - This is not our first time here. + <i>This is not our first time here.</i> - For two straight years, the General Assembly has passed this reform. + For <b>two straight years</b>, the General Assembly has passed this reform. - In 2024, I gave you a sermon—and we passed HB1244. + <b>In 2024</b>, I gave you a sermon—and we passed HB1244. - In 2025, my sister, friend, and colleague, Delegate Keys-Gamarra, took up the torch—and we passed HB2647. + <b>In 2025</b>, my sister, my friend, and my colleague, Delegate Keys-Gamarra, took up the torch—and we passed HB2647. Twice, this body has said—clearly—that we are ready to turn the page on solitary. And after two straight years, nobody can pretend this is new. You know this bill. You know this issue. And you know how overdue this change is. Mister Chair, members of the committee, this is not our first time here, <b>BUT it will be our last time here</b>—because this year we will make history. This year, we all have a chance—a chance to be part of making history— Because when we look back in 25 years, we will know this legislation was the right thing to do! Because when we look back in 50 years, we will know this legislation was the right thing to do! Because when we look back in <b>one-hundred</b> years, we will know this legislation was the right thing to do! Today—I hope everyone in this room joins us in doing the <b>right thing.</b> I’ll keep my remarks brief so we can get to hearing the supporters remind us—again—just how overdue this legislation is. Thank you, Mister Chair and members of the committee. <hr> == Support and Opposition == === Support === • ACLU People Power Fairfax • Bridging The Gap In Virginia • Charlottesville Chapter National Organization for Women • Coalition for Justice • EJUSA Evangelical Network • Fighting 4 Freedom • Greater Washington (JCRC) • Inmate Support Virginia • Interfaith Action for Human Rights (IAHR) • HALT Solitary • Jewish Community Relations Council of Just Future Project • Justice & Witness Action Network- VA • United Church of Christ Central Atlantic Conference • LatinoJustice PRLDEF • NAACP Loudoun • National Association of Social Workers • National Association of Social Workers, Virginia Chapter • National Religious Campaign Against Torture • No Left Turns • Resource Information Help for the Disadvantaged and Disenfranchised (RIHD) • RISE for Youth • RVA Health Alliance for Social Justice and Equity • Social Action Linking Together (SALT) • Social Workers and Allies Against Solitary Confinement • The Humanization Project • The Sentencing Project • Unitarian Universalist Legislative Ministry of Virginia • Unlock the Box Campaign • Virginia CURE • Virginia Defenders for Freedom, Justice & Equality • Virginia Justice Democrats • Virginia Justice for Life • Virginia Justice Alliance • Virginia Prisons Accountability Committee • Virginia Prisoner Of Conscience • Virginia Prison Justice Network • WJCC Coalition for Community Justice • 40 Strong === Opposition === • (to be updated) === No Recommendation / Neutral === • (to be updated) <hr> == Fiscal Impact == No fiscal impact statement is posted for HB35. <hr> == Possible Questions == === TL;DR === <b>Q1: “Does this end solitary confinement in Virginia?”</b> TL;DR: No—it ends <i>prolonged</i> solitary confinement and sets clear limits, oversight, and due-process rules for any use. <br> <b>Q2: “Does this make prisons less safe for staff?”</b> TL;DR: No—HB35 keeps exceptions for imminent threats and requires documentation; it’s about targeted use, not “never.” <br> <b>Q3: “What changes day-to-day?”</b> TL;DR: Frequent reviews, rapid medical/mental health checks, real programming/out-of-cell time, and written accountability when isolation is used. <br> <b>Q4: “Can DOC just use ‘lockdowns’ instead?”</b> TL;DR: The bill defines lockdown and regulates it, and the requested amendment strengthens this further by applying the same time limits to lockdown explicitly. <br> === Q1: “What does the bill aim to accomplish?” === <b>Answer you can use:</b> HB35 ends prolonged solitary confinement by setting clear time limits and requiring real oversight—regular reviews, rapid medical and mental health evaluations, documentation, and in-person due process when isolation continues. <br> === Q2: “How often is placement reviewed?” === <b>Answer you can use:</b> Placement is reviewed frequently, including a required 48-hour review cycle with written documentation explaining why less restrictive settings were not used. <br> === Q3: “What health protections are required?” === <b>Answer you can use:</b> HB35 requires medical and mental health evaluations by certified professionals within one working day of placement in restorative housing or isolated confinement (with limited exceptions). <br> === Q4: “Does this stop people from getting programming or recreation?” === <b>Answer you can use:</b> No—the bill requires at least four hours of out-of-cell programming or congregate activity daily, plus at least one hour of congregate recreation unless exceptional safety circumstances apply. <br> === Q5: “What stops indefinite ‘lockdowns’?” === <b>Answer you can use:</b> Lockdowns that interrupt programming must have a specific documented security purpose, must end as soon as the purpose is served, are time-limited, require approvals to extend or repeat, and must be documented and published. <hr> == Additional Information == <b>1. Definitions are the enforcement backbone</b> • The bill defines isolated confinement and lockdown by hours-per-day and loss of programming, so policy can’t be evaded by unit names. <b>Policy implication:</b> Regulates conditions, not labels. <br> <b>2. The “less restrictive first” rule targets protective-custody misuse</b> • For “own protection” placements, the facility must use less restrictive options first, including transfers or special-purpose housing for similarly threatened individuals, unless infeasible. <b>Policy implication:</b> Safety without defaulting to isolation. <br> <b>3. Reviews + documentation create accountability</b> • Requires regular reviews, documentation in the institutional file, notice up the chain, and formal in-person reviews with appeal rights. <b>Policy implication:</b> Isolation becomes a documented exception, not a routine. <br> <b>4. Lockdown limits matter because lockdown can function like solitary</b> • The bill regulates lockdowns that interrupt programming and requires publication of documentation. <b>Policy implication:</b> Prevents “unit-wide solitary” from becoming the workaround. [[Category:2026 Session]]
2026-01-22 06:08:58
Edited by: 74.110.183.75
Edited by: 74.110.183.75
= HB35 Restorative housing and isolated confinement; restrictions on use. = == Status == [https://house.vga.virginia.gov/subcommittees/H15002/agendas/5187 Public Safety | Subcommittee #2 — agenda] <hr> == Overview == === Summary as Introduced === <b>Restorative housing and isolated confinement; restrictions on use.</b> Prohibits the use of isolated confinement, defined in the bill, in state correctional facilities, subject to certain exceptions. The bill requires that before placing an incarcerated person in restorative housing or isolated confinement for his own protection, the facility administrator shall place an incarcerated person in a less-restrictive setting, including by transferring such person to another institution or to a special-purpose housing unit for incarcerated persons who face similar threats. The bill requires that if an incarcerated person is placed in restorative housing or isolated confinement, such placement shall be reviewed every 48 hours and the facility administrator shall ensure that the incarcerated person receives a medical and mental health evaluation from certified medical and mental health professionals within one working day of placement in restorative housing or any form of isolated confinement. The bill also requires the facility administrator to notify the regional administrator in writing that an incarcerated person was placed in restorative housing or isolated confinement within 24 hours of such placement. Finally, the bill requires that formal reviews of an incarcerated person's placement in any form of isolated confinement shall be held in such person's presence, inform him of any reasons administrative officials believe isolated confinement remains necessary, and give the incarcerated person an opportunity to respond to those reasons, and a formal ruling shall be provided to the incarcerated individual within 24 hours. <hr> === Patrons === ==== House Patrons ==== • Joshua G. Cole (chief patron) • Patrick A. Hope • Sam Rasoul • Holly Seibold ==== Senate Patrons ==== • Bagby <hr> == Language == The language of [https://lis.virginia.gov/bill-details/20261/HB35/text/HB35 HB35] can be viewed here. <hr> == Proposed Amendment == === Amendment Offered for Consideration (requested for subcommittee) === ==== Add “Lockdown” throughout relevant provisions ==== Amend the bill to explicitly include “lockdown” alongside “solitary confinement/isolated confinement” and “restorative housing” in all relevant sections, to prevent facilities from using unit-wide lockdown practices as a functional substitute for individual isolated confinement. ==== Strengthen the time-limit clause (close the cumulative-days gap) ==== Replace the current time-limit phrasing with: “No individual shall be held in solitary confinement, lockdown, or restorative housing for more than 15 consecutive days, nor 15 days in any 60-day period.” <b>Purpose of the amendment:</b> The introduced text already uses “15 consecutive days…in any 60-day period,” but stakeholders have raised concerns that “consecutive” language can be worked around by cycling people in and out (or shifting to lockdown practices) without ever hitting a “consecutive” threshold. The amendment makes the limit explicitly <i>both</i> consecutive and cumulative. <hr> == Opening Statement == === House Subcommittee Statement === Mister Chair, members of the subcommittee— - HB35 ends <i>prolonged</i> solitary confinement in Virginia by putting clear, enforceable limits and oversight into statute—while still allowing short-term separation when safety truly requires it. + This is not our first time here. - The bill does four main things: + For two straight years, the General Assembly has passed this reform. - <b>Sets clear definitions and closes loopholes:</b> It defines isolated confinement and lockdown so we’re regulating what actually happens in practice—not just what a unit is called. + In 2024, I gave you a sermon—and we passed HB1244. - <b>Limits duration and requires justification:</b> It limits isolated confinement/restorative housing time and restricts continued use to specific, documented circumstances. + In 2025, my sister, friend, and colleague, Delegate Keys-Gamarra, took up the torch—and we passed HB2647. - + Twice, this body has said—clearly—that we are ready to turn the page on solitary. - <b>Requires out-of-cell time and programming:</b> It ensures meaningful out-of-cell interventions and recreation, because rehabilitation can’t happen in permanent deprivation. + - + And after two straight years, nobody can pretend this is new. - <b>Adds oversight, health checks, and due process:</b> It requires regular reviews, rapid medical and mental health evaluations, documentation, notice to regional leadership, and formal in-person reviews with a multidisciplinary team. + - + You know this bill. You know this issue. And you know how overdue this change is. - This legislation has been passed by the General Assembly twice and vetoed twice. We’re back because the core point is simple: Virginia can maintain safety without relying on prolonged isolation that breaks people down and undermines long-term security. + - + Mister Chair, members of the committee, this is not our first time here, <b>BUT it will be our last time here</b>—because this year we will make history. - I ask that the subcommittee favorably report HB35 to full committee. + - + This year, we all have a chance—a chance to be part of making history— - <hr> + - + Because when we look back in 25 years, we will know this legislation was the right thing to do! - == Support and Opposition == + - + Because when we look back in 50 years, we will know this legislation was the right thing to do! - === Support === + - • ACLU People Power Fairfax + Because when we look back in <b>one-hundred</b> years, we will know this legislation was the right thing to do! - • Bridging The Gap In Virginia + - • Charlottesville Chapter National Organization for Women + Today—I hope everyone in this room joins us in doing the <b>right thing.</b> - • Coalition for Justice + - • EJUSA Evangelical Network + I’ll keep my remarks brief so we can get to hearing the supporters remind us—again—just how overdue this legislation is. - • Fighting 4 Freedom + - • Greater Washington (JCRC) + Thank you, Mister Chair and members of the committee. - • Inmate Support Virginia + - • Interfaith Action for Human Rights (IAHR) + <hr> - • HALT Solitary + - • Jewish Community Relations Council of Just Future Project + == Support and Opposition == - • Justice & Witness Action Network- VA + - • United Church of Christ Central Atlantic Conference + === Support === - • LatinoJustice PRLDEF + • ACLU People Power Fairfax - • NAACP Loudoun + • Bridging The Gap In Virginia - • National Association of Social Workers + • Charlottesville Chapter National Organization for Women - • National Association of Social Workers, Virginia Chapter + • Coalition for Justice - • National Religious Campaign Against Torture + • EJUSA Evangelical Network - • No Left Turns + • Fighting 4 Freedom - • Resource Information Help for the Disadvantaged and Disenfranchised (RIHD) + • Greater Washington (JCRC) - • RISE for Youth + • Inmate Support Virginia - • RVA Health Alliance for Social Justice and Equity + • Interfaith Action for Human Rights (IAHR) - • Social Action Linking Together (SALT) + • HALT Solitary - • Social Workers and Allies Against Solitary Confinement + • Jewish Community Relations Council of Just Future Project - • The Humanization Project + • Justice & Witness Action Network- VA - • The Sentencing Project + • United Church of Christ Central Atlantic Conference - • Unitarian Universalist Legislative Ministry of Virginia + • LatinoJustice PRLDEF - • Unlock the Box Campaign + • NAACP Loudoun - • Virginia CURE + • National Association of Social Workers - • Virginia Defenders for Freedom, Justice & Equality + • National Association of Social Workers, Virginia Chapter - • Virginia Justice Democrats + • National Religious Campaign Against Torture - • Virginia Justice for Life + • No Left Turns - • Virginia Justice Alliance + • Resource Information Help for the Disadvantaged and Disenfranchised (RIHD) - • Virginia Prisons Accountability Committee + • RISE for Youth - • Virginia Prisoner Of Conscience + • RVA Health Alliance for Social Justice and Equity - • Virginia Prison Justice Network + • Social Action Linking Together (SALT) - • WJCC Coalition for Community Justice + • Social Workers and Allies Against Solitary Confinement - • 40 Strong + • The Humanization Project - + • The Sentencing Project - === Opposition === + • Unitarian Universalist Legislative Ministry of Virginia - • (to be updated) + • Unlock the Box Campaign - + • Virginia CURE - === No Recommendation / Neutral === + • Virginia Defenders for Freedom, Justice & Equality - • (to be updated) + • Virginia Justice Democrats - + • Virginia Justice for Life - <hr> + • Virginia Justice Alliance - + • Virginia Prisons Accountability Committee - == Fiscal Impact == + • Virginia Prisoner Of Conscience - No fiscal impact statement is posted for HB35. + • Virginia Prison Justice Network - + • WJCC Coalition for Community Justice - <hr> + • 40 Strong - == Possible Questions == + === Opposition === - + • (to be updated) - === TL;DR === + - <b>Q1: “Does this end solitary confinement in Virginia?”</b> TL;DR: No—it ends <i>prolonged</i> solitary confinement and sets clear limits, oversight, and due-process rules for any use. <br> + === No Recommendation / Neutral === - <b>Q2: “Does this make prisons less safe for staff?”</b> TL;DR: No—HB35 keeps exceptions for imminent threats and requires documentation; it’s about targeted use, not “never.” + • (to be updated) - <br> + <hr> - <b>Q3: “What changes day-to-day?”</b> TL;DR: Frequent reviews, rapid medical/mental health checks, real programming/out-of-cell time, and written accountability when isolation is used. + - + == Fiscal Impact == - <br> + No fiscal impact statement is posted for HB35. - <b>Q4: “Can DOC just use ‘lockdowns’ instead?”</b> TL;DR: The bill defines lockdown and regulates it, and the requested amendment strengthens this further by applying the same time limits to lockdown explicitly. + - + <hr> - <br> + - + == Possible Questions == - === Q1: “What does the bill aim to accomplish?” === + - <b>Answer you can use:</b> HB35 ends prolonged solitary confinement by setting clear time limits and requiring real oversight—regular reviews, rapid medical and mental health evaluations, documentation, and in-person due process when isolation continues. + === TL;DR === - + <b>Q1: “Does this end solitary confinement in Virginia?”</b> TL;DR: No—it ends <i>prolonged</i> solitary confinement and sets clear limits, oversight, and due-process rules for any use. <br> - <br> + <b>Q2: “Does this make prisons less safe for staff?”</b> TL;DR: No—HB35 keeps exceptions for imminent threats and requires documentation; it’s about targeted use, not “never.” - === Q2: “How often is placement reviewed?” === + <br> - <b>Answer you can use:</b> Placement is reviewed frequently, including a required 48-hour review cycle with written documentation explaining why less restrictive settings were not used. + <b>Q3: “What changes day-to-day?”</b> TL;DR: Frequent reviews, rapid medical/mental health checks, real programming/out-of-cell time, and written accountability when isolation is used. - <br> + <br> - + <b>Q4: “Can DOC just use ‘lockdowns’ instead?”</b> TL;DR: The bill defines lockdown and regulates it, and the requested amendment strengthens this further by applying the same time limits to lockdown explicitly. - === Q3: “What health protections are required?” === + - <b>Answer you can use:</b> HB35 requires medical and mental health evaluations by certified professionals within one working day of placement in restorative housing or isolated confinement (with limited exceptions). + <br> - <br> + === Q1: “What does the bill aim to accomplish?” === - + <b>Answer you can use:</b> HB35 ends prolonged solitary confinement by setting clear time limits and requiring real oversight—regular reviews, rapid medical and mental health evaluations, documentation, and in-person due process when isolation continues. - === Q4: “Does this stop people from getting programming or recreation?” === + - <b>Answer you can use:</b> No—the bill requires at least four hours of out-of-cell programming or congregate activity daily, plus at least one hour of congregate recreation unless exceptional safety circumstances apply. + <br> - <br> + === Q2: “How often is placement reviewed?” === - + <b>Answer you can use:</b> Placement is reviewed frequently, including a required 48-hour review cycle with written documentation explaining why less restrictive settings were not used. - === Q5: “What stops indefinite ‘lockdowns’?” === + - <b>Answer you can use:</b> Lockdowns that interrupt programming must have a specific documented security purpose, must end as soon as the purpose is served, are time-limited, require approvals to extend or repeat, and must be documented and published. + <br> - <hr> + === Q3: “What health protections are required?” === - + <b>Answer you can use:</b> HB35 requires medical and mental health evaluations by certified professionals within one working day of placement in restorative housing or isolated confinement (with limited exceptions). - == Additional Information == + - <b>1. Definitions are the enforcement backbone</b> + <br> - • The bill defines isolated confinement and lockdown by hours-per-day and loss of programming, so policy can’t be evaded by unit names. + - + === Q4: “Does this stop people from getting programming or recreation?” === - + <b>Answer you can use:</b> No—the bill requires at least four hours of out-of-cell programming or congregate activity daily, plus at least one hour of congregate recreation unless exceptional safety circumstances apply. - <b>Policy implication:</b> Regulates conditions, not labels. + - + <br> - <br> + - + === Q5: “What stops indefinite ‘lockdowns’?” === - <b>2. The “less restrictive first” rule targets protective-custody misuse</b> + <b>Answer you can use:</b> Lockdowns that interrupt programming must have a specific documented security purpose, must end as soon as the purpose is served, are time-limited, require approvals to extend or repeat, and must be documented and published. - • For “own protection” placements, the facility must use less restrictive options first, including transfers or special-purpose housing for similarly threatened individuals, unless infeasible. + - + <hr> - <b>Policy implication:</b> Safety without defaulting to isolation. + - + == Additional Information == - <br> + <b>1. Definitions are the enforcement backbone</b> - + • The bill defines isolated confinement and lockdown by hours-per-day and loss of programming, so policy can’t be evaded by unit names. - <b>3. Reviews + documentation create accountability</b> + - • Requires regular reviews, documentation in the institutional file, notice up the chain, and formal in-person reviews with appeal rights. + - + <b>Policy implication:</b> Regulates conditions, not labels. - <b>Policy implication:</b> Isolation becomes a documented exception, not a routine. + - + <br> - <br> + - + <b>2. The “less restrictive first” rule targets protective-custody misuse</b> - <b>4. Lockdown limits matter because lockdown can function like solitary</b> + • For “own protection” placements, the facility must use less restrictive options first, including transfers or special-purpose housing for similarly threatened individuals, unless infeasible. - • The bill regulates lockdowns that interrupt programming and requires publication of documentation. + - + <b>Policy implication:</b> Safety without defaulting to isolation. - <b>Policy implication:</b> Prevents “unit-wide solitary” from becoming the workaround. + <br> - [[Category:2026 Session]] + <b>3. Reviews + documentation create accountability</b> + • Requires regular reviews, documentation in the institutional file, notice up the chain, and formal in-person reviews with appeal rights. + + <b>Policy implication:</b> Isolation becomes a documented exception, not a routine. + + <br> + + <b>4. Lockdown limits matter because lockdown can function like solitary</b> + • The bill regulates lockdowns that interrupt programming and requires publication of documentation. + + + <b>Policy implication:</b> Prevents “unit-wide solitary” from becoming the workaround. + + [[Category:2026 Session]]
2026-01-22 06:07:20
Edited by: 74.110.183.75
Edited by: 74.110.183.75
= HB35 Restorative housing and isolated confinement; restrictions on use. = == Status == [https://house.vga.virginia.gov/subcommittees/H15002/agendas/5187 Public Safety | Subcommittee #2 — agenda] <hr> == Overview == === Summary as Introduced === <b>Restorative housing and isolated confinement; restrictions on use.</b> Prohibits the use of isolated confinement, defined in the bill, in state correctional facilities, subject to certain exceptions. The bill requires that before placing an incarcerated person in restorative housing or isolated confinement for his own protection, the facility administrator shall place an incarcerated person in a less-restrictive setting, including by transferring such person to another institution or to a special-purpose housing unit for incarcerated persons who face similar threats. The bill requires that if an incarcerated person is placed in restorative housing or isolated confinement, such placement shall be reviewed every 48 hours and the facility administrator shall ensure that the incarcerated person receives a medical and mental health evaluation from certified medical and mental health professionals within one working day of placement in restorative housing or any form of isolated confinement. The bill also requires the facility administrator to notify the regional administrator in writing that an incarcerated person was placed in restorative housing or isolated confinement within 24 hours of such placement. Finally, the bill requires that formal reviews of an incarcerated person's placement in any form of isolated confinement shall be held in such person's presence, inform him of any reasons administrative officials believe isolated confinement remains necessary, and give the incarcerated person an opportunity to respond to those reasons, and a formal ruling shall be provided to the incarcerated individual within 24 hours. <hr> === Patrons === ==== House Patrons ==== • Joshua G. Cole (chief patron) • Patrick A. Hope • Sam Rasoul • Holly Seibold ==== Senate Patrons ==== • Bagby <hr> == Language == - The language of [https://lis.virginia.gov/bill-details/20261/HB35/text/HB35 HB35] can be viewed here. (No fiscal impact statement.) + The language of [https://lis.virginia.gov/bill-details/20261/HB35/text/HB35 HB35] can be viewed here. <hr> == Proposed Amendment == === Amendment Offered for Consideration (requested for subcommittee) === ==== Add “Lockdown” throughout relevant provisions ==== Amend the bill to explicitly include “lockdown” alongside “solitary confinement/isolated confinement” and “restorative housing” in all relevant sections, to prevent facilities from using unit-wide lockdown practices as a functional substitute for individual isolated confinement. ==== Strengthen the time-limit clause (close the cumulative-days gap) ==== Replace the current time-limit phrasing with: “No individual shall be held in solitary confinement, lockdown, or restorative housing for more than 15 consecutive days, nor 15 days in any 60-day period.” <b>Purpose of the amendment:</b> The introduced text already uses “15 consecutive days…in any 60-day period,” but stakeholders have raised concerns that “consecutive” language can be worked around by cycling people in and out (or shifting to lockdown practices) without ever hitting a “consecutive” threshold. The amendment makes the limit explicitly <i>both</i> consecutive and cumulative. <hr> == Opening Statement == === House Subcommittee Statement === Mister Chair, members of the subcommittee— HB35 ends <i>prolonged</i> solitary confinement in Virginia by putting clear, enforceable limits and oversight into statute—while still allowing short-term separation when safety truly requires it. The bill does four main things: <b>Sets clear definitions and closes loopholes:</b> It defines isolated confinement and lockdown so we’re regulating what actually happens in practice—not just what a unit is called. <b>Limits duration and requires justification:</b> It limits isolated confinement/restorative housing time and restricts continued use to specific, documented circumstances. <b>Requires out-of-cell time and programming:</b> It ensures meaningful out-of-cell interventions and recreation, because rehabilitation can’t happen in permanent deprivation. <b>Adds oversight, health checks, and due process:</b> It requires regular reviews, rapid medical and mental health evaluations, documentation, notice to regional leadership, and formal in-person reviews with a multidisciplinary team. This legislation has been passed by the General Assembly twice and vetoed twice. We’re back because the core point is simple: Virginia can maintain safety without relying on prolonged isolation that breaks people down and undermines long-term security. I ask that the subcommittee favorably report HB35 to full committee. <hr> == Support and Opposition == === Support === • ACLU People Power Fairfax • Bridging The Gap In Virginia • Charlottesville Chapter National Organization for Women • Coalition for Justice • EJUSA Evangelical Network • Fighting 4 Freedom • Greater Washington (JCRC) • Inmate Support Virginia • Interfaith Action for Human Rights (IAHR) • HALT Solitary • Jewish Community Relations Council of Just Future Project • Justice & Witness Action Network- VA • United Church of Christ Central Atlantic Conference • LatinoJustice PRLDEF • NAACP Loudoun • National Association of Social Workers • National Association of Social Workers, Virginia Chapter • National Religious Campaign Against Torture • No Left Turns • Resource Information Help for the Disadvantaged and Disenfranchised (RIHD) • RISE for Youth • RVA Health Alliance for Social Justice and Equity • Social Action Linking Together (SALT) • Social Workers and Allies Against Solitary Confinement • The Humanization Project • The Sentencing Project • Unitarian Universalist Legislative Ministry of Virginia • Unlock the Box Campaign • Virginia CURE • Virginia Defenders for Freedom, Justice & Equality • Virginia Justice Democrats • Virginia Justice for Life • Virginia Justice Alliance • Virginia Prisons Accountability Committee • Virginia Prisoner Of Conscience • Virginia Prison Justice Network • WJCC Coalition for Community Justice • 40 Strong === Opposition === • (to be updated) === No Recommendation / Neutral === • (to be updated) <hr> == Fiscal Impact == No fiscal impact statement is posted for HB35. <hr> == Possible Questions == === TL;DR === <b>Q1: “Does this end solitary confinement in Virginia?”</b> TL;DR: No—it ends <i>prolonged</i> solitary confinement and sets clear limits, oversight, and due-process rules for any use. <br> <b>Q2: “Does this make prisons less safe for staff?”</b> TL;DR: No—HB35 keeps exceptions for imminent threats and requires documentation; it’s about targeted use, not “never.” <br> <b>Q3: “What changes day-to-day?”</b> TL;DR: Frequent reviews, rapid medical/mental health checks, real programming/out-of-cell time, and written accountability when isolation is used. <br> <b>Q4: “Can DOC just use ‘lockdowns’ instead?”</b> TL;DR: The bill defines lockdown and regulates it, and the requested amendment strengthens this further by applying the same time limits to lockdown explicitly. <br> === Q1: “What does the bill aim to accomplish?” === <b>Answer you can use:</b> HB35 ends prolonged solitary confinement by setting clear time limits and requiring real oversight—regular reviews, rapid medical and mental health evaluations, documentation, and in-person due process when isolation continues. <br> === Q2: “How often is placement reviewed?” === <b>Answer you can use:</b> Placement is reviewed frequently, including a required 48-hour review cycle with written documentation explaining why less restrictive settings were not used. <br> === Q3: “What health protections are required?” === <b>Answer you can use:</b> HB35 requires medical and mental health evaluations by certified professionals within one working day of placement in restorative housing or isolated confinement (with limited exceptions). <br> === Q4: “Does this stop people from getting programming or recreation?” === <b>Answer you can use:</b> No—the bill requires at least four hours of out-of-cell programming or congregate activity daily, plus at least one hour of congregate recreation unless exceptional safety circumstances apply. <br> === Q5: “What stops indefinite ‘lockdowns’?” === <b>Answer you can use:</b> Lockdowns that interrupt programming must have a specific documented security purpose, must end as soon as the purpose is served, are time-limited, require approvals to extend or repeat, and must be documented and published. <hr> == Additional Information == <b>1. Definitions are the enforcement backbone</b> • The bill defines isolated confinement and lockdown by hours-per-day and loss of programming, so policy can’t be evaded by unit names. <b>Policy implication:</b> Regulates conditions, not labels. <br> <b>2. The “less restrictive first” rule targets protective-custody misuse</b> • For “own protection” placements, the facility must use less restrictive options first, including transfers or special-purpose housing for similarly threatened individuals, unless infeasible. <b>Policy implication:</b> Safety without defaulting to isolation. <br> <b>3. Reviews + documentation create accountability</b> • Requires regular reviews, documentation in the institutional file, notice up the chain, and formal in-person reviews with appeal rights. <b>Policy implication:</b> Isolation becomes a documented exception, not a routine. <br> <b>4. Lockdown limits matter because lockdown can function like solitary</b> • The bill regulates lockdowns that interrupt programming and requires publication of documentation. <b>Policy implication:</b> Prevents “unit-wide solitary” from becoming the workaround. [[Category:2026 Session]]
2026-01-22 05:45:05
Edited by: 74.110.183.75
Edited by: 74.110.183.75
= HB35 Restorative housing and isolated confinement; restrictions on use. = == Status == [https://house.vga.virginia.gov/subcommittees/H15002/agendas/5187 Public Safety | Subcommittee #2 — agenda] <hr> == Overview == === Summary as Introduced === <b>Restorative housing and isolated confinement; restrictions on use.</b> Prohibits the use of isolated confinement, defined in the bill, in state correctional facilities, subject to certain exceptions. The bill requires that before placing an incarcerated person in restorative housing or isolated confinement for his own protection, the facility administrator shall place an incarcerated person in a less-restrictive setting, including by transferring such person to another institution or to a special-purpose housing unit for incarcerated persons who face similar threats. The bill requires that if an incarcerated person is placed in restorative housing or isolated confinement, such placement shall be reviewed every 48 hours and the facility administrator shall ensure that the incarcerated person receives a medical and mental health evaluation from certified medical and mental health professionals within one working day of placement in restorative housing or any form of isolated confinement. The bill also requires the facility administrator to notify the regional administrator in writing that an incarcerated person was placed in restorative housing or isolated confinement within 24 hours of such placement. Finally, the bill requires that formal reviews of an incarcerated person's placement in any form of isolated confinement shall be held in such person's presence, inform him of any reasons administrative officials believe isolated confinement remains necessary, and give the incarcerated person an opportunity to respond to those reasons, and a formal ruling shall be provided to the incarcerated individual within 24 hours. <hr> === Patrons === ==== House Patrons ==== • Joshua G. Cole (chief patron) • Patrick A. Hope • Sam Rasoul • Holly Seibold ==== Senate Patrons ==== • Bagby <hr> == Language == - The language of [https://lis.virginia.gov/bill-details/20261/HB35/text/HB35 + The language of [https://lis.virginia.gov/bill-details/20261/HB35/text/HB35 HB35] can be viewed here. (No fiscal impact statement.) - HB35] can be viewed here. (No fiscal impact statement.) + - + <hr> - <hr> + - + == Proposed Amendment == - == Proposed Amendment == + === Amendment Offered for Consideration (requested for subcommittee) === - === Amendment Offered for Consideration (requested for subcommittee) === + - + ==== Add “Lockdown” throughout relevant provisions ==== - ==== Add “Lockdown” throughout relevant provisions ==== + Amend the bill to explicitly include “lockdown” alongside “solitary confinement/isolated confinement” and “restorative housing” in all relevant sections, to prevent facilities from using unit-wide lockdown practices as a functional substitute for individual isolated confinement. - Amend the bill to explicitly include “lockdown” alongside “solitary confinement/isolated confinement” and “restorative housing” in all relevant sections, to prevent facilities from using unit-wide lockdown practices as a functional substitute for individual isolated confinement. + - + ==== Strengthen the time-limit clause (close the cumulative-days gap) ==== - ==== Strengthen the time-limit clause (close the cumulative-days gap) ==== + Replace the current time-limit phrasing with: - Replace the current time-limit phrasing with: + - + “No individual shall be held in solitary confinement, lockdown, or restorative housing for more than 15 consecutive days, nor 15 days in any 60-day period.” - “No individual shall be held in solitary confinement, lockdown, or restorative housing for more than 15 consecutive days, nor 15 days in any 60-day period.” + - + <b>Purpose of the amendment:</b> The introduced text already uses “15 consecutive days…in any 60-day period,” - <b>Purpose of the amendment:</b> The introduced text already uses “15 consecutive days…in any 60-day period,” + - + but stakeholders have raised concerns that “consecutive” language can be worked around by cycling people in and out (or shifting to lockdown practices) without ever hitting a “consecutive” threshold. The amendment makes the limit explicitly <i>both</i> consecutive and cumulative. - but stakeholders have raised concerns that “consecutive” language can be worked around by cycling people in and out (or shifting to lockdown practices) without ever hitting a “consecutive” threshold. The amendment makes the limit explicitly <i>both</i> consecutive and cumulative. + - + <hr> - <hr> + - + == Opening Statement == - == Opening Statement == + - + === House Subcommittee Statement === - === House Subcommittee Statement === + Mister Chair, members of the subcommittee— - Mister Chair, members of the subcommittee— + - + HB35 ends <i>prolonged</i> solitary confinement in Virginia by putting clear, enforceable limits and oversight into statute—while still allowing short-term separation when safety truly requires it. - HB35 ends <i>prolonged</i> solitary confinement in Virginia by putting clear, enforceable limits and oversight into statute—while still allowing short-term separation when safety truly requires it. + - + The bill does four main things: - The bill does four main things: + - + <b>Sets clear definitions and closes loopholes:</b> It defines isolated confinement and lockdown so we’re regulating what actually happens in practice—not just what a unit is called. - <b>Sets clear definitions and closes loopholes:</b> It defines isolated confinement and lockdown so we’re regulating what actually happens in practice—not just what a unit is called. + - + <b>Limits duration and requires justification:</b> It limits isolated confinement/restorative housing time and restricts continued use to specific, documented circumstances. - <b>Limits duration and requires justification:</b> It limits isolated confinement/restorative housing time and restricts continued use to specific, documented circumstances. + - + <b>Requires out-of-cell time and programming:</b> It ensures meaningful out-of-cell interventions and recreation, because rehabilitation can’t happen in permanent deprivation. - <b>Requires out-of-cell time and programming:</b> It ensures meaningful out-of-cell interventions and recreation, because rehabilitation can’t happen in permanent deprivation. + - + <b>Adds oversight, health checks, and due process:</b> It requires regular reviews, rapid medical and mental health evaluations, documentation, notice to regional leadership, and formal in-person reviews with a multidisciplinary team. - <b>Adds oversight, health checks, and due process:</b> It requires regular reviews, rapid medical and mental health evaluations, documentation, notice to regional leadership, and formal in-person reviews with a multidisciplinary team. + - + This legislation has been passed by the General Assembly twice and vetoed twice. We’re back because the core point is simple: Virginia can maintain safety without relying on prolonged isolation that breaks people down and undermines long-term security. - This legislation has been passed by the General Assembly twice and vetoed twice. We’re back because the core point is simple: Virginia can maintain safety without relying on prolonged isolation that breaks people down and undermines long-term security. + - + I ask that the subcommittee favorably report HB35 to full committee. - I ask that the subcommittee favorably report HB35 to full committee. + - + <hr> - <hr> + - + == Support and Opposition == - == Support and Opposition == + - + === Support === - === Support === + • ACLU People Power Fairfax - • ACLU People Power Fairfax + • Bridging The Gap In Virginia - • Bridging The Gap In Virginia + • Charlottesville Chapter National Organization for Women - • Charlottesville Chapter National Organization for Women + • Coalition for Justice - • Coalition for Justice + • EJUSA Evangelical Network - • EJUSA Evangelical Network + • Fighting 4 Freedom - • Fighting 4 Freedom + • Greater Washington (JCRC) - • Greater Washington (JCRC) + • Inmate Support Virginia - • Inmate Support Virginia + • Interfaith Action for Human Rights (IAHR) - • Interfaith Action for Human Rights (IAHR) + • HALT Solitary - • HALT Solitary + • Jewish Community Relations Council of Just Future Project - • Jewish Community Relations Council of Just Future Project + • Justice & Witness Action Network- VA - • Justice & Witness Action Network- VA + • United Church of Christ Central Atlantic Conference - • United Church of Christ Central Atlantic Conference + • LatinoJustice PRLDEF - • LatinoJustice PRLDEF + • NAACP Loudoun - • NAACP Loudoun + • National Association of Social Workers - • National Association of Social Workers + • National Association of Social Workers, Virginia Chapter - • National Association of Social Workers, Virginia Chapter + • National Religious Campaign Against Torture - • National Religious Campaign Against Torture + • No Left Turns - • No Left Turns + • Resource Information Help for the Disadvantaged and Disenfranchised (RIHD) - • Resource Information Help for the Disadvantaged and Disenfranchised (RIHD) + • RISE for Youth - • RISE for Youth + • RVA Health Alliance for Social Justice and Equity - • RVA Health Alliance for Social Justice and Equity + • Social Action Linking Together (SALT) - • Social Action Linking Together (SALT) + • Social Workers and Allies Against Solitary Confinement - • Social Workers and Allies Against Solitary Confinement + • The Humanization Project - • The Humanization Project + • The Sentencing Project - • The Sentencing Project + • Unitarian Universalist Legislative Ministry of Virginia - • Unitarian Universalist Legislative Ministry of Virginia + • Unlock the Box Campaign - • Unlock the Box Campaign + • Virginia CURE - • Virginia CURE + • Virginia Defenders for Freedom, Justice & Equality - • Virginia Defenders for Freedom, Justice & Equality + • Virginia Justice Democrats - • Virginia Justice Democrats + • Virginia Justice for Life - • Virginia Justice for Life + • Virginia Justice Alliance - • Virginia Justice Alliance + • Virginia Prisons Accountability Committee - • Virginia Prisons Accountability Committee + • Virginia Prisoner Of Conscience - • Virginia Prisoner Of Conscience + • Virginia Prison Justice Network - • Virginia Prison Justice Network + • WJCC Coalition for Community Justice - • WJCC Coalition for Community Justice + • 40 Strong - • 40 Strong + - + === Opposition === - === Opposition === + • (to be updated) - • (to be updated) + - + === No Recommendation / Neutral === - === No Recommendation / Neutral === + • (to be updated) - • (to be updated) + - + <hr> - <hr> + - + == Fiscal Impact == - == Fiscal Impact == + No fiscal impact statement is posted for HB35. - No fiscal impact statement is posted for HB35. + - + <hr> - <hr> + - + == Possible Questions == - == Possible Questions == + - + === TL;DR === - === TL;DR === + <b>Q1: “Does this end solitary confinement in Virginia?”</b> TL;DR: No—it ends <i>prolonged</i> solitary confinement and sets clear limits, oversight, and due-process rules for any use. <br> - <b>Q1: “Does this end solitary confinement in Virginia?”</b> TL;DR: No—it ends <i>prolonged</i> solitary confinement and sets clear limits, oversight, and due-process rules for any use. <br> + <b>Q2: “Does this make prisons less safe for staff?”</b> TL;DR: No—HB35 keeps exceptions for imminent threats and requires documentation; it’s about targeted use, not “never.” - <b>Q2: “Does this make prisons less safe for staff?”</b> TL;DR: No—HB35 keeps exceptions for imminent threats and requires documentation; it’s about targeted use, not “never.” + - + <br> - <br> + <b>Q3: “What changes day-to-day?”</b> TL;DR: Frequent reviews, rapid medical/mental health checks, real programming/out-of-cell time, and written accountability when isolation is used. - <b>Q3: “What changes day-to-day?”</b> TL;DR: Frequent reviews, rapid medical/mental health checks, real programming/out-of-cell time, and written accountability when isolation is used. + - + <br> - <br> + <b>Q4: “Can DOC just use ‘lockdowns’ instead?”</b> TL;DR: The bill defines lockdown and regulates it, and the requested amendment strengthens this further by applying the same time limits to lockdown explicitly. - <b>Q4: “Can DOC just use ‘lockdowns’ instead?”</b> TL;DR: The bill defines lockdown and regulates it, and the requested amendment strengthens this further by applying the same time limits to lockdown explicitly. + - + <br> - <br> + - + === Q1: “What does the bill aim to accomplish?” === - === Q1: “What does the bill aim to accomplish?” === + <b>Answer you can use:</b> HB35 ends prolonged solitary confinement by setting clear time limits and requiring real oversight—regular reviews, rapid medical and mental health evaluations, documentation, and in-person due process when isolation continues. - <b>Answer you can use:</b> HB35 ends prolonged solitary confinement by setting clear time limits and requiring real oversight—regular reviews, rapid medical and mental health evaluations, documentation, and in-person due process when isolation continues. + - + <br> - <br> + - + === Q2: “How often is placement reviewed?” === - === Q2: “How often is placement reviewed?” === + <b>Answer you can use:</b> Placement is reviewed frequently, including a required 48-hour review cycle with written documentation explaining why less restrictive settings were not used. - <b>Answer you can use:</b> Placement is reviewed frequently, including a required 48-hour review cycle with written documentation explaining why less restrictive settings were not used. + - + <br> - <br> + - + === Q3: “What health protections are required?” === - === Q3: “What health protections are required?” === + <b>Answer you can use:</b> HB35 requires medical and mental health evaluations by certified professionals within one working day of placement in restorative housing or isolated confinement (with limited exceptions). - <b>Answer you can use:</b> HB35 requires medical and mental health evaluations by certified professionals within one working day of placement in restorative housing or isolated confinement (with limited exceptions). + - + <br> - <br> + - + === Q4: “Does this stop people from getting programming or recreation?” === - === Q4: “Does this stop people from getting programming or recreation?” === + <b>Answer you can use:</b> No—the bill requires at least four hours of out-of-cell programming or congregate activity daily, plus at least one hour of congregate recreation unless exceptional safety circumstances apply. - <b>Answer you can use:</b> No—the bill requires at least four hours of out-of-cell programming or congregate activity daily, plus at least one hour of congregate recreation unless exceptional safety circumstances apply. + - + <br> - <br> + - + === Q5: “What stops indefinite ‘lockdowns’?” === - === Q5: “What stops indefinite ‘lockdowns’?” === + <b>Answer you can use:</b> Lockdowns that interrupt programming must have a specific documented security purpose, must end as soon as the purpose is served, are time-limited, require approvals to extend or repeat, and must be documented and published. - <b>Answer you can use:</b> Lockdowns that interrupt programming must have a specific documented security purpose, must end as soon as the purpose is served, are time-limited, require approvals to extend or repeat, and must be documented and published. + - + <hr> - <hr> + - + == Additional Information == - == Additional Information == + <b>1. Definitions are the enforcement backbone</b> - <b>1. Definitions are the enforcement backbone</b> + • The bill defines isolated confinement and lockdown by hours-per-day and loss of programming, so policy can’t be evaded by unit names. - • The bill defines isolated confinement and lockdown by hours-per-day and loss of programming, so policy can’t be evaded by unit names. + - + <b>Policy implication:</b> Regulates conditions, not labels. - <b>Policy implication:</b> Regulates conditions, not labels. + - + <br> - <br> + - + <b>2. The “less restrictive first” rule targets protective-custody misuse</b> - <b>2. The “less restrictive first” rule targets protective-custody misuse</b> + • For “own protection” placements, the facility must use less restrictive options first, including transfers or special-purpose housing for similarly threatened individuals, unless infeasible. - • For “own protection” placements, the facility must use less restrictive options first, including transfers or special-purpose housing for similarly threatened individuals, unless infeasible. + - + <b>Policy implication:</b> Safety without defaulting to isolation. - <b>Policy implication:</b> Safety without defaulting to isolation. + - + <br> - <br> + - + <b>3. Reviews + documentation create accountability</b> - <b>3. Reviews + documentation create accountability</b> + • Requires regular reviews, documentation in the institutional file, notice up the chain, and formal in-person reviews with appeal rights. - • Requires regular reviews, documentation in the institutional file, notice up the chain, and formal in-person reviews with appeal rights. + - + <b>Policy implication:</b> Isolation becomes a documented exception, not a routine. - <b>Policy implication:</b> Isolation becomes a documented exception, not a routine. + - + <br> - <br> + - + <b>4. Lockdown limits matter because lockdown can function like solitary</b> - <b>4. Lockdown limits matter because lockdown can function like solitary</b> + • The bill regulates lockdowns that interrupt programming and requires publication of documentation. - • The bill regulates lockdowns that interrupt programming and requires publication of documentation. + - + <b>Policy implication:</b> Prevents “unit-wide solitary” from becoming the workaround. - <b>Policy implication:</b> Prevents “unit-wide solitary” from becoming the workaround. + - + [[Category:2026 Session]] - [[Category:2026 Session]]
2026-01-22 05:44:42
Edited by: 74.110.183.75
Edited by: 74.110.183.75
= HB35 Restorative housing and isolated confinement; restrictions on use. = == Status == [https://house.vga.virginia.gov/subcommittees/H15002/agendas/5187 Public Safety | Subcommittee #2 — agenda] <hr> == Overview == === Summary as Introduced === - Restorative housing and isolated confinement; restrictions on use. HB35 amends § 53.1-39.2 to limit how long incarcerated people may be held in restorative housing or isolated confinement, sets clearer guardrails and documentation requirements for any placement, and expands oversight and procedural protections. + <b>Restorative housing and isolated confinement; restrictions on use.</b> Prohibits the use of isolated confinement, defined in the bill, in state correctional facilities, subject to certain exceptions. The bill requires that before placing an incarcerated person in restorative housing or isolated confinement for his own protection, the facility administrator shall place an incarcerated person in a less-restrictive setting, including by transferring such person to another institution or to a special-purpose housing unit for incarcerated persons who face similar threats. The bill requires that if an incarcerated person is placed in restorative housing or isolated confinement, such placement shall be reviewed every 48 hours and the facility administrator shall ensure that the incarcerated person receives a medical and mental health evaluation from certified medical and mental health professionals within one working day of placement in restorative housing or any form of isolated confinement. The bill also requires the facility administrator to notify the regional administrator in writing that an incarcerated person was placed in restorative housing or isolated confinement within 24 hours of such placement. Finally, the bill requires that formal reviews of an incarcerated person's placement in any form of isolated confinement shall be held in such person's presence, inform him of any reasons administrative officials believe isolated confinement remains necessary, and give the incarcerated person an opportunity to respond to those reasons, and a formal ruling shall be provided to the incarcerated individual within 24 hours. - Key provisions include: + <hr> - <b>Definitions:</b> Defines “isolated confinement” (17+ hours/day in a cell) and “lockdown” (20+ hours/day for an entire pod/unit/facility, with interrupted out-of-cell programming). + === Patrons === - + ==== House Patrons ==== - <b>Time limits:</b> Bars placement in restorative housing or isolated confinement “for longer than 15 consecutive days…in any 60-day period,” with enumerated exceptions (including informed voluntary consent, self-protection determinations, imminent threat, medical isolation, or substantial threats to safe operation that cannot be resolved through less restrictive settings). + • Joshua G. Cole (chief patron) - <b>Use less restrictive settings first (protective requests):</b> Before placing someone in restorative housing or isolated confinement for their own protection, the facility administrator must first use a less restrictive setting (including transfer to another institution or a special-purpose unit for similarly threatened individuals), unless no less restrictive setting would be sufficient or practicable. + • Patrick A. Hope - <b>Out-of-cell time:</b> Requires at least four hours/day of out-of-cell programmatic interventions or other congregate activities (classes, work, treatment, etc.) for those in restorative housing/isolated confinement/other restricted populations, plus at least one hour of congregate recreation absent exceptional safety circumstances. + • Sam Rasoul - <b>Reviews, documentation, and notice:</b> Requires frequent reviews (including every 48 hours), documentation in the institutional file, medical and mental health evaluations within one working day of placement, and notice to the regional administrator within 24 hours when someone is placed in isolated confinement. + • Holly Seibold - <b>Due process for continued isolation:</b> Requires formal reviews in the person’s presence, reasons stated, an opportunity to respond, written rulings within 24 hours, and an appeal opportunity—conducted by a multidisciplinary team including non-security and medical/mental health professionals. + ==== Senate Patrons ==== - + • Bagby - <b>Lockdown constraints and transparency:</b> Limits lockdowns that interrupt programming, imposes time caps and approval requirements for extensions/repeats, and requires documentation to be provided to the Director and published on DOC’s website. + - + <hr> - <hr> + - + == Language == - === Patrons === + The language of [https://lis.virginia.gov/bill-details/20261/HB35/text/HB35 - ==== House Patrons ==== + HB35] can be viewed here. (No fiscal impact statement.) - • Joshua G. Cole (chief patron) + - + <hr> - • Patrick A. Hope + - + == Proposed Amendment == - • Sam Rasoul + === Amendment Offered for Consideration (requested for subcommittee) === - • Holly Seibold + ==== Add “Lockdown” throughout relevant provisions ==== - + Amend the bill to explicitly include “lockdown” alongside “solitary confinement/isolated confinement” and “restorative housing” in all relevant sections, to prevent facilities from using unit-wide lockdown practices as a functional substitute for individual isolated confinement. - ==== Senate Patrons ==== + - • Bagby + ==== Strengthen the time-limit clause (close the cumulative-days gap) ==== - + Replace the current time-limit phrasing with: - <hr> + - + “No individual shall be held in solitary confinement, lockdown, or restorative housing for more than 15 consecutive days, nor 15 days in any 60-day period.” - == Language == + - The language of [https://lis.virginia.gov/bill-details/20261/HB35/text/HB35 + <b>Purpose of the amendment:</b> The introduced text already uses “15 consecutive days…in any 60-day period,” - HB35] can be viewed here. (No fiscal impact statement.) + - + but stakeholders have raised concerns that “consecutive” language can be worked around by cycling people in and out (or shifting to lockdown practices) without ever hitting a “consecutive” threshold. The amendment makes the limit explicitly <i>both</i> consecutive and cumulative. - <hr> + - + <hr> - == Proposed Amendment == + - === Amendment Offered for Consideration (requested for subcommittee) === + == Opening Statement == - ==== Add “Lockdown” throughout relevant provisions ==== + === House Subcommittee Statement === - Amend the bill to explicitly include “lockdown” alongside “solitary confinement/isolated confinement” and “restorative housing” in all relevant sections, to prevent facilities from using unit-wide lockdown practices as a functional substitute for individual isolated confinement. + Mister Chair, members of the subcommittee— - ==== Strengthen the time-limit clause (close the cumulative-days gap) ==== + HB35 ends <i>prolonged</i> solitary confinement in Virginia by putting clear, enforceable limits and oversight into statute—while still allowing short-term separation when safety truly requires it. - Replace the current time-limit phrasing with: + - + The bill does four main things: - “No individual shall be held in solitary confinement, lockdown, or restorative housing for more than 15 consecutive days, nor 15 days in any 60-day period.” + - + <b>Sets clear definitions and closes loopholes:</b> It defines isolated confinement and lockdown so we’re regulating what actually happens in practice—not just what a unit is called. - <b>Purpose of the amendment:</b> The introduced text already uses “15 consecutive days…in any 60-day period,” + - + <b>Limits duration and requires justification:</b> It limits isolated confinement/restorative housing time and restricts continued use to specific, documented circumstances. - but stakeholders have raised concerns that “consecutive” language can be worked around by cycling people in and out (or shifting to lockdown practices) without ever hitting a “consecutive” threshold. The amendment makes the limit explicitly <i>both</i> consecutive and cumulative. + - <hr> + <b>Requires out-of-cell time and programming:</b> It ensures meaningful out-of-cell interventions and recreation, because rehabilitation can’t happen in permanent deprivation. - == Opening Statement == + <b>Adds oversight, health checks, and due process:</b> It requires regular reviews, rapid medical and mental health evaluations, documentation, notice to regional leadership, and formal in-person reviews with a multidisciplinary team. - === House Subcommittee Statement === + This legislation has been passed by the General Assembly twice and vetoed twice. We’re back because the core point is simple: Virginia can maintain safety without relying on prolonged isolation that breaks people down and undermines long-term security. - Mister Chair, members of the subcommittee— + - + I ask that the subcommittee favorably report HB35 to full committee. - HB35 ends <i>prolonged</i> solitary confinement in Virginia by putting clear, enforceable limits and oversight into statute—while still allowing short-term separation when safety truly requires it. + - + <hr> - The bill does four main things: + - + == Support and Opposition == - <b>Sets clear definitions and closes loopholes:</b> It defines isolated confinement and lockdown so we’re regulating what actually happens in practice—not just what a unit is called. + - + === Support === - <b>Limits duration and requires justification:</b> It limits isolated confinement/restorative housing time and restricts continued use to specific, documented circumstances. + • ACLU People Power Fairfax - + • Bridging The Gap In Virginia - + • Charlottesville Chapter National Organization for Women - <b>Requires out-of-cell time and programming:</b> It ensures meaningful out-of-cell interventions and recreation, because rehabilitation can’t happen in permanent deprivation. + • Coalition for Justice - + • EJUSA Evangelical Network - <b>Adds oversight, health checks, and due process:</b> It requires regular reviews, rapid medical and mental health evaluations, documentation, notice to regional leadership, and formal in-person reviews with a multidisciplinary team. + • Fighting 4 Freedom - + • Greater Washington (JCRC) - This legislation has been passed by the General Assembly twice and vetoed twice. We’re back because the core point is simple: Virginia can maintain safety without relying on prolonged isolation that breaks people down and undermines long-term security. + • Inmate Support Virginia - + • Interfaith Action for Human Rights (IAHR) - I ask that the subcommittee favorably report HB35 to full committee. + • HALT Solitary - + • Jewish Community Relations Council of Just Future Project - <hr> + • Justice & Witness Action Network- VA - + • United Church of Christ Central Atlantic Conference - == Support and Opposition == + • LatinoJustice PRLDEF - + • NAACP Loudoun - === Support === + • National Association of Social Workers - • ACLU People Power Fairfax + • National Association of Social Workers, Virginia Chapter - • Bridging The Gap In Virginia + • National Religious Campaign Against Torture - • Charlottesville Chapter National Organization for Women + • No Left Turns - • Coalition for Justice + • Resource Information Help for the Disadvantaged and Disenfranchised (RIHD) - • EJUSA Evangelical Network + • RISE for Youth - • Fighting 4 Freedom + • RVA Health Alliance for Social Justice and Equity - • Greater Washington (JCRC) + • Social Action Linking Together (SALT) - • Inmate Support Virginia + • Social Workers and Allies Against Solitary Confinement - • Interfaith Action for Human Rights (IAHR) + • The Humanization Project - • HALT Solitary + • The Sentencing Project - • Jewish Community Relations Council of Just Future Project + • Unitarian Universalist Legislative Ministry of Virginia - • Justice & Witness Action Network- VA + • Unlock the Box Campaign - • United Church of Christ Central Atlantic Conference + • Virginia CURE - • LatinoJustice PRLDEF + • Virginia Defenders for Freedom, Justice & Equality - • NAACP Loudoun + • Virginia Justice Democrats - • National Association of Social Workers + • Virginia Justice for Life - • National Association of Social Workers, Virginia Chapter + • Virginia Justice Alliance - • National Religious Campaign Against Torture + • Virginia Prisons Accountability Committee - • No Left Turns + • Virginia Prisoner Of Conscience - • Resource Information Help for the Disadvantaged and Disenfranchised (RIHD) + • Virginia Prison Justice Network - • RISE for Youth + • WJCC Coalition for Community Justice - • RVA Health Alliance for Social Justice and Equity + • 40 Strong - • Social Action Linking Together (SALT) + - • Social Workers and Allies Against Solitary Confinement + === Opposition === - • The Humanization Project + • (to be updated) - • The Sentencing Project + - • Unitarian Universalist Legislative Ministry of Virginia + === No Recommendation / Neutral === - • Unlock the Box Campaign + • (to be updated) - • Virginia CURE + - • Virginia Defenders for Freedom, Justice & Equality + <hr> - • Virginia Justice Democrats + - • Virginia Justice for Life + == Fiscal Impact == - • Virginia Justice Alliance + No fiscal impact statement is posted for HB35. - • Virginia Prisons Accountability Committee + - • Virginia Prisoner Of Conscience + <hr> - • Virginia Prison Justice Network + - • WJCC Coalition for Community Justice + == Possible Questions == - • 40 Strong + - + === TL;DR === - === Opposition === + <b>Q1: “Does this end solitary confinement in Virginia?”</b> TL;DR: No—it ends <i>prolonged</i> solitary confinement and sets clear limits, oversight, and due-process rules for any use. <br> - • (to be updated) + <b>Q2: “Does this make prisons less safe for staff?”</b> TL;DR: No—HB35 keeps exceptions for imminent threats and requires documentation; it’s about targeted use, not “never.” - === No Recommendation / Neutral === + <br> - • (to be updated) + <b>Q3: “What changes day-to-day?”</b> TL;DR: Frequent reviews, rapid medical/mental health checks, real programming/out-of-cell time, and written accountability when isolation is used. - <hr> + <br> - + <b>Q4: “Can DOC just use ‘lockdowns’ instead?”</b> TL;DR: The bill defines lockdown and regulates it, and the requested amendment strengthens this further by applying the same time limits to lockdown explicitly. - == Fiscal Impact == + - No fiscal impact statement is posted for HB35. + <br> - <hr> + === Q1: “What does the bill aim to accomplish?” === - + <b>Answer you can use:</b> HB35 ends prolonged solitary confinement by setting clear time limits and requiring real oversight—regular reviews, rapid medical and mental health evaluations, documentation, and in-person due process when isolation continues. - == Possible Questions == + - + <br> - === TL;DR === + - <b>Q1: “Does this end solitary confinement in Virginia?”</b> TL;DR: No—it ends <i>prolonged</i> solitary confinement and sets clear limits, oversight, and due-process rules for any use. <br> + === Q2: “How often is placement reviewed?” === - <b>Q2: “Does this make prisons less safe for staff?”</b> TL;DR: No—HB35 keeps exceptions for imminent threats and requires documentation; it’s about targeted use, not “never.” + <b>Answer you can use:</b> Placement is reviewed frequently, including a required 48-hour review cycle with written documentation explaining why less restrictive settings were not used. - <br> + <br> - <b>Q3: “What changes day-to-day?”</b> TL;DR: Frequent reviews, rapid medical/mental health checks, real programming/out-of-cell time, and written accountability when isolation is used. + - + === Q3: “What health protections are required?” === - <br> + <b>Answer you can use:</b> HB35 requires medical and mental health evaluations by certified professionals within one working day of placement in restorative housing or isolated confinement (with limited exceptions). - <b>Q4: “Can DOC just use ‘lockdowns’ instead?”</b> TL;DR: The bill defines lockdown and regulates it, and the requested amendment strengthens this further by applying the same time limits to lockdown explicitly. + - + <br> - <br> + - + === Q4: “Does this stop people from getting programming or recreation?” === - === Q1: “What does the bill aim to accomplish?” === + <b>Answer you can use:</b> No—the bill requires at least four hours of out-of-cell programming or congregate activity daily, plus at least one hour of congregate recreation unless exceptional safety circumstances apply. - <b>Answer you can use:</b> HB35 ends prolonged solitary confinement by setting clear time limits and requiring real oversight—regular reviews, rapid medical and mental health evaluations, documentation, and in-person due process when isolation continues. + - + <br> - <br> + - + === Q5: “What stops indefinite ‘lockdowns’?” === - === Q2: “How often is placement reviewed?” === + <b>Answer you can use:</b> Lockdowns that interrupt programming must have a specific documented security purpose, must end as soon as the purpose is served, are time-limited, require approvals to extend or repeat, and must be documented and published. - <b>Answer you can use:</b> Placement is reviewed frequently, including a required 48-hour review cycle with written documentation explaining why less restrictive settings were not used. + - + <hr> - <br> + - + == Additional Information == - === Q3: “What health protections are required?” === + <b>1. Definitions are the enforcement backbone</b> - <b>Answer you can use:</b> HB35 requires medical and mental health evaluations by certified professionals within one working day of placement in restorative housing or isolated confinement (with limited exceptions). + • The bill defines isolated confinement and lockdown by hours-per-day and loss of programming, so policy can’t be evaded by unit names. - <br> + - + <b>Policy implication:</b> Regulates conditions, not labels. - === Q4: “Does this stop people from getting programming or recreation?” === + - <b>Answer you can use:</b> No—the bill requires at least four hours of out-of-cell programming or congregate activity daily, plus at least one hour of congregate recreation unless exceptional safety circumstances apply. + <br> - <br> + <b>2. The “less restrictive first” rule targets protective-custody misuse</b> - + • For “own protection” placements, the facility must use less restrictive options first, including transfers or special-purpose housing for similarly threatened individuals, unless infeasible. - === Q5: “What stops indefinite ‘lockdowns’?” === + - <b>Answer you can use:</b> Lockdowns that interrupt programming must have a specific documented security purpose, must end as soon as the purpose is served, are time-limited, require approvals to extend or repeat, and must be documented and published. + <b>Policy implication:</b> Safety without defaulting to isolation. - <hr> + <br> - == Additional Information == + <b>3. Reviews + documentation create accountability</b> - <b>1. Definitions are the enforcement backbone</b> + • Requires regular reviews, documentation in the institutional file, notice up the chain, and formal in-person reviews with appeal rights. - • The bill defines isolated confinement and lockdown by hours-per-day and loss of programming, so policy can’t be evaded by unit names. + - + <b>Policy implication:</b> Isolation becomes a documented exception, not a routine. - <b>Policy implication:</b> Regulates conditions, not labels. + <br> - <br> + <b>4. Lockdown limits matter because lockdown can function like solitary</b> - + • The bill regulates lockdowns that interrupt programming and requires publication of documentation. - <b>2. The “less restrictive first” rule targets protective-custody misuse</b> + - • For “own protection” placements, the facility must use less restrictive options first, including transfers or special-purpose housing for similarly threatened individuals, unless infeasible. + - + <b>Policy implication:</b> Prevents “unit-wide solitary” from becoming the workaround. - <b>Policy implication:</b> Safety without defaulting to isolation. + - + [[Category:2026 Session]] - <br> - - <b>3. Reviews + documentation create accountability</b> - • Requires regular reviews, documentation in the institutional file, notice up the chain, and formal in-person reviews with appeal rights. - - <b>Policy implication:</b> Isolation becomes a documented exception, not a routine. - - <br> - - <b>4. Lockdown limits matter because lockdown can function like solitary</b> - • The bill regulates lockdowns that interrupt programming and requires publication of documentation. - - - <b>Policy implication:</b> Prevents “unit-wide solitary” from becoming the workaround. - - [[Category:2026 Session]]
2026-01-22 05:43:40
Edited by: 74.110.183.75
Edited by: 74.110.183.75
= HB35 Restorative housing and isolated confinement; restrictions on use. = == Status == - [https://house.vga.virginia.gov/subcommittees/H15002/agendas/5187 + [https://house.vga.virginia.gov/subcommittees/H15002/agendas/5187 Public Safety | Subcommittee #2 — agenda] - Public Safety | Subcommittee #2 — agenda] + - + <hr> - <hr> + - + == Overview == - == Overview == + - + === Summary as Introduced === - === Summary as Introduced === + Restorative housing and isolated confinement; restrictions on use. HB35 amends § 53.1-39.2 to limit how long incarcerated people may be held in restorative housing or isolated confinement, sets clearer guardrails and documentation requirements for any placement, and expands oversight and procedural protections. - Restorative housing and isolated confinement; restrictions on use. HB35 amends § 53.1-39.2 to limit how long incarcerated people may be held in restorative housing or isolated confinement, sets clearer guardrails and documentation requirements for any placement, and expands oversight and procedural protections. + - + Key provisions include: - Key provisions include: + - + <b>Definitions:</b> Defines “isolated confinement” (17+ hours/day in a cell) and “lockdown” (20+ hours/day for an entire pod/unit/facility, with interrupted out-of-cell programming). - <b>Definitions:</b> Defines “isolated confinement” (17+ hours/day in a cell) and “lockdown” (20+ hours/day for an entire pod/unit/facility, with interrupted out-of-cell programming). + - + <b>Time limits:</b> Bars placement in restorative housing or isolated confinement “for longer than 15 consecutive days…in any 60-day period,” with enumerated exceptions (including informed voluntary consent, self-protection determinations, imminent threat, medical isolation, or substantial threats to safe operation that cannot be resolved through less restrictive settings). - <b>Time limits:</b> Bars placement in restorative housing or isolated confinement “for longer than 15 consecutive days…in any 60-day period,” with enumerated exceptions (including informed voluntary consent, self-protection determinations, imminent threat, medical isolation, or substantial threats to safe operation that cannot be resolved through less restrictive settings). + - + <b>Use less restrictive settings first (protective requests):</b> Before placing someone in restorative housing or isolated confinement for their own protection, the facility administrator must first use a less restrictive setting (including transfer to another institution or a special-purpose unit for similarly threatened individuals), unless no less restrictive setting would be sufficient or practicable. - <b>Use less restrictive settings first (protective requests):</b> Before placing someone in restorative housing or isolated confinement for their own protection, the facility administrator must first use a less restrictive setting (including transfer to another institution or a special-purpose unit for similarly threatened individuals), unless no less restrictive setting would be sufficient or practicable. + - + <b>Out-of-cell time:</b> Requires at least four hours/day of out-of-cell programmatic interventions or other congregate activities (classes, work, treatment, etc.) for those in restorative housing/isolated confinement/other restricted populations, plus at least one hour of congregate recreation absent exceptional safety circumstances. - <b>Out-of-cell time:</b> Requires at least four hours/day of out-of-cell programmatic interventions or other congregate activities (classes, work, treatment, etc.) for those in restorative housing/isolated confinement/other restricted populations, plus at least one hour of congregate recreation absent exceptional safety circumstances. + - + <b>Reviews, documentation, and notice:</b> Requires frequent reviews (including every 48 hours), documentation in the institutional file, medical and mental health evaluations within one working day of placement, and notice to the regional administrator within 24 hours when someone is placed in isolated confinement. - <b>Reviews, documentation, and notice:</b> Requires frequent reviews (including every 48 hours), documentation in the institutional file, medical and mental health evaluations within one working day of placement, and notice to the regional administrator within 24 hours when someone is placed in isolated confinement. + - + <b>Due process for continued isolation:</b> Requires formal reviews in the person’s presence, reasons stated, an opportunity to respond, written rulings within 24 hours, and an appeal opportunity—conducted by a multidisciplinary team including non-security and medical/mental health professionals. - <b>Due process for continued isolation:</b> Requires formal reviews in the person’s presence, reasons stated, an opportunity to respond, written rulings within 24 hours, and an appeal opportunity—conducted by a multidisciplinary team including non-security and medical/mental health professionals. + - + <b>Lockdown constraints and transparency:</b> Limits lockdowns that interrupt programming, imposes time caps and approval requirements for extensions/repeats, and requires documentation to be provided to the Director and published on DOC’s website. - <b>Lockdown constraints and transparency:</b> Limits lockdowns that interrupt programming, imposes time caps and approval requirements for extensions/repeats, and requires documentation to be provided to the Director and published on DOC’s website. + - + <hr> - <hr> + - + === Patrons === - === Patrons === + ==== House Patrons ==== - ==== House Patrons ==== + • Joshua G. Cole (chief patron) - • Joshua G. Cole (chief patron) + - + • Patrick A. Hope - • Patrick A. Hope + - + • Sam Rasoul - • Sam Rasoul + - + • Holly Seibold - • Holly Seibold + - + ==== Senate Patrons ==== - ==== Senate Patrons ==== + • Bagby - • Bagby + - + <hr> - <hr> + - + == Language == - == Language == + The language of [https://lis.virginia.gov/bill-details/20261/HB35/text/HB35 - The language of [https://lis.virginia.gov/bill-details/20261/HB35/text/HB35 + HB35] can be viewed here. (No fiscal impact statement.) - HB35] can be viewed here. (No fiscal impact statement.) + - + <hr> - <hr> + - + == Proposed Amendment == - == Proposed Amendment == + === Amendment Offered for Consideration (requested for subcommittee) === - === Amendment Offered for Consideration (requested for subcommittee) === + - + ==== Add “Lockdown” throughout relevant provisions ==== - ==== Add “Lockdown” throughout relevant provisions ==== + Amend the bill to explicitly include “lockdown” alongside “solitary confinement/isolated confinement” and “restorative housing” in all relevant sections, to prevent facilities from using unit-wide lockdown practices as a functional substitute for individual isolated confinement. - Amend the bill to explicitly include “lockdown” alongside “solitary confinement/isolated confinement” and “restorative housing” in all relevant sections, to prevent facilities from using unit-wide lockdown practices as a functional substitute for individual isolated confinement. + - + ==== Strengthen the time-limit clause (close the cumulative-days gap) ==== - ==== Strengthen the time-limit clause (close the cumulative-days gap) ==== + Replace the current time-limit phrasing with: - Replace the current time-limit phrasing with: + - + “No individual shall be held in solitary confinement, lockdown, or restorative housing for more than 15 consecutive days, nor 15 days in any 60-day period.” - “No individual shall be held in solitary confinement, lockdown, or restorative housing for more than 15 consecutive days, nor 15 days in any 60-day period.” + - + <b>Purpose of the amendment:</b> The introduced text already uses “15 consecutive days…in any 60-day period,” - <b>Purpose of the amendment:</b> The introduced text already uses “15 consecutive days…in any 60-day period,” + - + but stakeholders have raised concerns that “consecutive” language can be worked around by cycling people in and out (or shifting to lockdown practices) without ever hitting a “consecutive” threshold. The amendment makes the limit explicitly <i>both</i> consecutive and cumulative. - but stakeholders have raised concerns that “consecutive” language can be worked around by cycling people in and out (or shifting to lockdown practices) without ever hitting a “consecutive” threshold. The amendment makes the limit explicitly <i>both</i> consecutive and cumulative. + - + <hr> - <hr> + - + == Opening Statement == - == Opening Statement == + - + === House Subcommittee Statement === - === House Subcommittee Statement === + Mister Chair, members of the subcommittee— - Mister Chair, members of the subcommittee— + - + HB35 ends <i>prolonged</i> solitary confinement in Virginia by putting clear, enforceable limits and oversight into statute—while still allowing short-term separation when safety truly requires it. - HB35 ends <i>prolonged</i> solitary confinement in Virginia by putting clear, enforceable limits and oversight into statute—while still allowing short-term separation when safety truly requires it. + - + The bill does four main things: - The bill does four main things: + - + <b>Sets clear definitions and closes loopholes:</b> It defines isolated confinement and lockdown so we’re regulating what actually happens in practice—not just what a unit is called. - <b>Sets clear definitions and closes loopholes:</b> It defines isolated confinement and lockdown so we’re regulating what actually happens in practice—not just what a unit is called. + - + <b>Limits duration and requires justification:</b> It limits isolated confinement/restorative housing time and restricts continued use to specific, documented circumstances. - <b>Limits duration and requires justification:</b> It limits isolated confinement/restorative housing time and restricts continued use to specific, documented circumstances. + - + <b>Requires out-of-cell time and programming:</b> It ensures meaningful out-of-cell interventions and recreation, because rehabilitation can’t happen in permanent deprivation. - <b>Requires out-of-cell time and programming:</b> It ensures meaningful out-of-cell interventions and recreation, because rehabilitation can’t happen in permanent deprivation. + - + <b>Adds oversight, health checks, and due process:</b> It requires regular reviews, rapid medical and mental health evaluations, documentation, notice to regional leadership, and formal in-person reviews with a multidisciplinary team. - <b>Adds oversight, health checks, and due process:</b> It requires regular reviews, rapid medical and mental health evaluations, documentation, notice to regional leadership, and formal in-person reviews with a multidisciplinary team. + - + This legislation has been passed by the General Assembly twice and vetoed twice. We’re back because the core point is simple: Virginia can maintain safety without relying on prolonged isolation that breaks people down and undermines long-term security. - This legislation has been passed by the General Assembly twice and vetoed twice. We’re back because the core point is simple: Virginia can maintain safety without relying on prolonged isolation that breaks people down and undermines long-term security. + - + I ask that the subcommittee favorably report HB35 to full committee. - I ask that the subcommittee favorably report HB35 to full committee. + - + <hr> - <hr> + - + == Support and Opposition == - == Support and Opposition == + - + === Support === - === Support === + • ACLU People Power Fairfax - • ACLU People Power Fairfax + • Bridging The Gap In Virginia - • Bridging The Gap In Virginia + • Charlottesville Chapter National Organization for Women - • Charlottesville Chapter National Organization for Women + • Coalition for Justice - • Coalition for Justice + • EJUSA Evangelical Network - • EJUSA Evangelical Network + • Fighting 4 Freedom - • Fighting 4 Freedom + • Greater Washington (JCRC) - • Greater Washington (JCRC) + • Inmate Support Virginia - • Inmate Support Virginia + • Interfaith Action for Human Rights (IAHR) - • Interfaith Action for Human Rights (IAHR) + • HALT Solitary - • HALT Solitary + • Jewish Community Relations Council of Just Future Project - • Jewish Community Relations Council of Just Future Project + • Justice & Witness Action Network- VA - • Justice & Witness Action Network- VA + • United Church of Christ Central Atlantic Conference - • United Church of Christ Central Atlantic Conference + • LatinoJustice PRLDEF - • LatinoJustice PRLDEF + • NAACP Loudoun - • NAACP Loudoun + • National Association of Social Workers - • National Association of Social Workers + • National Association of Social Workers, Virginia Chapter - • National Association of Social Workers, Virginia Chapter + • National Religious Campaign Against Torture - • National Religious Campaign Against Torture + • No Left Turns - • No Left Turns + • Resource Information Help for the Disadvantaged and Disenfranchised (RIHD) - • Resource Information Help for the Disadvantaged and Disenfranchised (RIHD) + • RISE for Youth - • RISE for Youth + • RVA Health Alliance for Social Justice and Equity - • RVA Health Alliance for Social Justice and Equity + • Social Action Linking Together (SALT) - • Social Action Linking Together (SALT) + • Social Workers and Allies Against Solitary Confinement - • Social Workers and Allies Against Solitary Confinement + • The Humanization Project - • The Humanization Project + • The Sentencing Project - • The Sentencing Project + • Unitarian Universalist Legislative Ministry of Virginia - • Unitarian Universalist Legislative Ministry of Virginia + • Unlock the Box Campaign - • Unlock the Box Campaign + • Virginia CURE - • Virginia CURE + • Virginia Defenders for Freedom, Justice & Equality - • Virginia Defenders for Freedom, Justice & Equality + • Virginia Justice Democrats - • Virginia Justice Democrats + • Virginia Justice for Life - • Virginia Justice for Life + • Virginia Justice Alliance - • Virginia Justice Alliance + • Virginia Prisons Accountability Committee - • Virginia Prisons Accountability Committee + • Virginia Prisoner Of Conscience - • Virginia Prisoner Of Conscience + • Virginia Prison Justice Network - • Virginia Prison Justice Network + • WJCC Coalition for Community Justice - • WJCC Coalition for Community Justice + • 40 Strong - • 40 Strong + - + === Opposition === - === Opposition === + • (to be updated) - • (to be updated) + - + === No Recommendation / Neutral === - === No Recommendation / Neutral === + • (to be updated) - • (to be updated) + - + <hr> - <hr> + - + == Fiscal Impact == - == Fiscal Impact == + No fiscal impact statement is posted for HB35. - No fiscal impact statement is posted for HB35. + - + <hr> - <hr> + - + == Possible Questions == - == Possible Questions == + - + === TL;DR === - === TL;DR === + <b>Q1: “Does this end solitary confinement in Virginia?”</b> TL;DR: No—it ends <i>prolonged</i> solitary confinement and sets clear limits, oversight, and due-process rules for any use. <br> - <b>Q1: “Does this end solitary confinement in Virginia?”</b> TL;DR: No—it ends <i>prolonged</i> solitary confinement and sets clear limits, oversight, and due-process rules for any use. <br> + <b>Q2: “Does this make prisons less safe for staff?”</b> TL;DR: No—HB35 keeps exceptions for imminent threats and requires documentation; it’s about targeted use, not “never.” - <b>Q2: “Does this make prisons less safe for staff?”</b> TL;DR: No—HB35 keeps exceptions for imminent threats and requires documentation; it’s about targeted use, not “never.” + - + <br> - <br> + <b>Q3: “What changes day-to-day?”</b> TL;DR: Frequent reviews, rapid medical/mental health checks, real programming/out-of-cell time, and written accountability when isolation is used. - <b>Q3: “What changes day-to-day?”</b> TL;DR: Frequent reviews, rapid medical/mental health checks, real programming/out-of-cell time, and written accountability when isolation is used. + - + <br> - <br> + <b>Q4: “Can DOC just use ‘lockdowns’ instead?”</b> TL;DR: The bill defines lockdown and regulates it, and the requested amendment strengthens this further by applying the same time limits to lockdown explicitly. - <b>Q4: “Can DOC just use ‘lockdowns’ instead?”</b> TL;DR: The bill defines lockdown and regulates it, and the requested amendment strengthens this further by applying the same time limits to lockdown explicitly. + - + <br> - <br> + - + === Q1: “What does the bill aim to accomplish?” === - === Q1: “What does the bill aim to accomplish?” === + <b>Answer you can use:</b> HB35 ends prolonged solitary confinement by setting clear time limits and requiring real oversight—regular reviews, rapid medical and mental health evaluations, documentation, and in-person due process when isolation continues. - <b>Answer you can use:</b> HB35 ends prolonged solitary confinement by setting clear time limits and requiring real oversight—regular reviews, rapid medical and mental health evaluations, documentation, and in-person due process when isolation continues. + - + <br> - <br> + - + === Q2: “How often is placement reviewed?” === - === Q2: “How often is placement reviewed?” === + <b>Answer you can use:</b> Placement is reviewed frequently, including a required 48-hour review cycle with written documentation explaining why less restrictive settings were not used. - <b>Answer you can use:</b> Placement is reviewed frequently, including a required 48-hour review cycle with written documentation explaining why less restrictive settings were not used. + - + <br> - <br> + - + === Q3: “What health protections are required?” === - === Q3: “What health protections are required?” === + <b>Answer you can use:</b> HB35 requires medical and mental health evaluations by certified professionals within one working day of placement in restorative housing or isolated confinement (with limited exceptions). - <b>Answer you can use:</b> HB35 requires medical and mental health evaluations by certified professionals within one working day of placement in restorative housing or isolated confinement (with limited exceptions). + - + <br> - <br> + - + === Q4: “Does this stop people from getting programming or recreation?” === - === Q4: “Does this stop people from getting programming or recreation?” === + <b>Answer you can use:</b> No—the bill requires at least four hours of out-of-cell programming or congregate activity daily, plus at least one hour of congregate recreation unless exceptional safety circumstances apply. - <b>Answer you can use:</b> No—the bill requires at least four hours of out-of-cell programming or congregate activity daily, plus at least one hour of congregate recreation unless exceptional safety circumstances apply. + - + <br> - <br> + - + === Q5: “What stops indefinite ‘lockdowns’?” === - === Q5: “What stops indefinite ‘lockdowns’?” === + <b>Answer you can use:</b> Lockdowns that interrupt programming must have a specific documented security purpose, must end as soon as the purpose is served, are time-limited, require approvals to extend or repeat, and must be documented and published. - <b>Answer you can use:</b> Lockdowns that interrupt programming must have a specific documented security purpose, must end as soon as the purpose is served, are time-limited, require approvals to extend or repeat, and must be documented and published. + - + <hr> - <hr> + - + == Additional Information == - == Additional Information == + <b>1. Definitions are the enforcement backbone</b> - <b>1. Definitions are the enforcement backbone</b> + • The bill defines isolated confinement and lockdown by hours-per-day and loss of programming, so policy can’t be evaded by unit names. - • The bill defines isolated confinement and lockdown by hours-per-day and loss of programming, so policy can’t be evaded by unit names. + - + <b>Policy implication:</b> Regulates conditions, not labels. - <b>Policy implication:</b> Regulates conditions, not labels. + - + <br> - <br> + - + <b>2. The “less restrictive first” rule targets protective-custody misuse</b> - <b>2. The “less restrictive first” rule targets protective-custody misuse</b> + • For “own protection” placements, the facility must use less restrictive options first, including transfers or special-purpose housing for similarly threatened individuals, unless infeasible. - • For “own protection” placements, the facility must use less restrictive options first, including transfers or special-purpose housing for similarly threatened individuals, unless infeasible. + - + <b>Policy implication:</b> Safety without defaulting to isolation. - <b>Policy implication:</b> Safety without defaulting to isolation. + - + <br> - <br> + - + <b>3. Reviews + documentation create accountability</b> - <b>3. Reviews + documentation create accountability</b> + • Requires regular reviews, documentation in the institutional file, notice up the chain, and formal in-person reviews with appeal rights. - • Requires regular reviews, documentation in the institutional file, notice up the chain, and formal in-person reviews with appeal rights. + - + <b>Policy implication:</b> Isolation becomes a documented exception, not a routine. - <b>Policy implication:</b> Isolation becomes a documented exception, not a routine. + - + <br> - <br> + - + <b>4. Lockdown limits matter because lockdown can function like solitary</b> - <b>4. Lockdown limits matter because lockdown can function like solitary</b> + • The bill regulates lockdowns that interrupt programming and requires publication of documentation. - • The bill regulates lockdowns that interrupt programming and requires publication of documentation. + - + <b>Policy implication:</b> Prevents “unit-wide solitary” from becoming the workaround. - <b>Policy implication:</b> Prevents “unit-wide solitary” from becoming the workaround. + - + [[Category:2026 Session]] - [[Category:2026 Session]]
2026-01-22 05:42:58
Edited by: 74.110.183.75
Edited by: 74.110.183.75
- = HB35 Restorative housing and isolated confinement restrictions on use = + = HB35 Restorative housing and isolated confinement; restrictions on use. = - Start writing your article here using '''Wikitext'''. + == Status == - + [https://house.vga.virginia.gov/subcommittees/H15002/agendas/5187 - [[Category:2026 Session]] + Public Safety | Subcommittee #2 — agenda] + + <hr> + + == Overview == + + === Summary as Introduced === + Restorative housing and isolated confinement; restrictions on use. HB35 amends § 53.1-39.2 to limit how long incarcerated people may be held in restorative housing or isolated confinement, sets clearer guardrails and documentation requirements for any placement, and expands oversight and procedural protections. + + Key provisions include: + + <b>Definitions:</b> Defines “isolated confinement” (17+ hours/day in a cell) and “lockdown” (20+ hours/day for an entire pod/unit/facility, with interrupted out-of-cell programming). + + <b>Time limits:</b> Bars placement in restorative housing or isolated confinement “for longer than 15 consecutive days…in any 60-day period,” with enumerated exceptions (including informed voluntary consent, self-protection determinations, imminent threat, medical isolation, or substantial threats to safe operation that cannot be resolved through less restrictive settings). + + <b>Use less restrictive settings first (protective requests):</b> Before placing someone in restorative housing or isolated confinement for their own protection, the facility administrator must first use a less restrictive setting (including transfer to another institution or a special-purpose unit for similarly threatened individuals), unless no less restrictive setting would be sufficient or practicable. + + <b>Out-of-cell time:</b> Requires at least four hours/day of out-of-cell programmatic interventions or other congregate activities (classes, work, treatment, etc.) for those in restorative housing/isolated confinement/other restricted populations, plus at least one hour of congregate recreation absent exceptional safety circumstances. + + <b>Reviews, documentation, and notice:</b> Requires frequent reviews (including every 48 hours), documentation in the institutional file, medical and mental health evaluations within one working day of placement, and notice to the regional administrator within 24 hours when someone is placed in isolated confinement. + + <b>Due process for continued isolation:</b> Requires formal reviews in the person’s presence, reasons stated, an opportunity to respond, written rulings within 24 hours, and an appeal opportunity—conducted by a multidisciplinary team including non-security and medical/mental health professionals. + + <b>Lockdown constraints and transparency:</b> Limits lockdowns that interrupt programming, imposes time caps and approval requirements for extensions/repeats, and requires documentation to be provided to the Director and published on DOC’s website. + + <hr> + + === Patrons === + ==== House Patrons ==== + • Joshua G. Cole (chief patron) + + • Patrick A. Hope + + • Sam Rasoul + + • Holly Seibold + + ==== Senate Patrons ==== + • Bagby + + <hr> + + == Language == + The language of [https://lis.virginia.gov/bill-details/20261/HB35/text/HB35 + HB35] can be viewed here. (No fiscal impact statement.) + + <hr> + + == Proposed Amendment == + === Amendment Offered for Consideration (requested for subcommittee) === + + ==== Add “Lockdown” throughout relevant provisions ==== + Amend the bill to explicitly include “lockdown” alongside “solitary confinement/isolated confinement” and “restorative housing” in all relevant sections, to prevent facilities from using unit-wide lockdown practices as a functional substitute for individual isolated confinement. + + ==== Strengthen the time-limit clause (close the cumulative-days gap) ==== + Replace the current time-limit phrasing with: + + “No individual shall be held in solitary confinement, lockdown, or restorative housing for more than 15 consecutive days, nor 15 days in any 60-day period.” + + <b>Purpose of the amendment:</b> The introduced text already uses “15 consecutive days…in any 60-day period,” + + but stakeholders have raised concerns that “consecutive” language can be worked around by cycling people in and out (or shifting to lockdown practices) without ever hitting a “consecutive” threshold. The amendment makes the limit explicitly <i>both</i> consecutive and cumulative. + + <hr> + + == Opening Statement == + + === House Subcommittee Statement === + Mister Chair, members of the subcommittee— + + HB35 ends <i>prolonged</i> solitary confinement in Virginia by putting clear, enforceable limits and oversight into statute—while still allowing short-term separation when safety truly requires it. + + The bill does four main things: + + <b>Sets clear definitions and closes loopholes:</b> It defines isolated confinement and lockdown so we’re regulating what actually happens in practice—not just what a unit is called. + + <b>Limits duration and requires justification:</b> It limits isolated confinement/restorative housing time and restricts continued use to specific, documented circumstances. + + + <b>Requires out-of-cell time and programming:</b> It ensures meaningful out-of-cell interventions and recreation, because rehabilitation can’t happen in permanent deprivation. + + <b>Adds oversight, health checks, and due process:</b> It requires regular reviews, rapid medical and mental health evaluations, documentation, notice to regional leadership, and formal in-person reviews with a multidisciplinary team. + + This legislation has been passed by the General Assembly twice and vetoed twice. We’re back because the core point is simple: Virginia can maintain safety without relying on prolonged isolation that breaks people down and undermines long-term security. + + I ask that the subcommittee favorably report HB35 to full committee. + + <hr> + + == Support and Opposition == + + === Support === + • ACLU People Power Fairfax + • Bridging The Gap In Virginia + • Charlottesville Chapter National Organization for Women + • Coalition for Justice + • EJUSA Evangelical Network + • Fighting 4 Freedom + • Greater Washington (JCRC) + • Inmate Support Virginia + • Interfaith Action for Human Rights (IAHR) + • HALT Solitary + • Jewish Community Relations Council of Just Future Project + • Justice & Witness Action Network- VA + • United Church of Christ Central Atlantic Conference + • LatinoJustice PRLDEF + • NAACP Loudoun + • National Association of Social Workers + • National Association of Social Workers, Virginia Chapter + • National Religious Campaign Against Torture + • No Left Turns + • Resource Information Help for the Disadvantaged and Disenfranchised (RIHD) + • RISE for Youth + • RVA Health Alliance for Social Justice and Equity + • Social Action Linking Together (SALT) + • Social Workers and Allies Against Solitary Confinement + • The Humanization Project + • The Sentencing Project + • Unitarian Universalist Legislative Ministry of Virginia + • Unlock the Box Campaign + • Virginia CURE + • Virginia Defenders for Freedom, Justice & Equality + • Virginia Justice Democrats + • Virginia Justice for Life + • Virginia Justice Alliance + • Virginia Prisons Accountability Committee + • Virginia Prisoner Of Conscience + • Virginia Prison Justice Network + • WJCC Coalition for Community Justice + • 40 Strong + + === Opposition === + • (to be updated) + + === No Recommendation / Neutral === + • (to be updated) + + <hr> + + == Fiscal Impact == + No fiscal impact statement is posted for HB35. + + <hr> + + == Possible Questions == + + === TL;DR === + <b>Q1: “Does this end solitary confinement in Virginia?”</b> TL;DR: No—it ends <i>prolonged</i> solitary confinement and sets clear limits, oversight, and due-process rules for any use. <br> + <b>Q2: “Does this make prisons less safe for staff?”</b> TL;DR: No—HB35 keeps exceptions for imminent threats and requires documentation; it’s about targeted use, not “never.” + + <br> + <b>Q3: “What changes day-to-day?”</b> TL;DR: Frequent reviews, rapid medical/mental health checks, real programming/out-of-cell time, and written accountability when isolation is used. + + <br> + <b>Q4: “Can DOC just use ‘lockdowns’ instead?”</b> TL;DR: The bill defines lockdown and regulates it, and the requested amendment strengthens this further by applying the same time limits to lockdown explicitly. + + <br> + + === Q1: “What does the bill aim to accomplish?” === + <b>Answer you can use:</b> HB35 ends prolonged solitary confinement by setting clear time limits and requiring real oversight—regular reviews, rapid medical and mental health evaluations, documentation, and in-person due process when isolation continues. + + <br> + + === Q2: “How often is placement reviewed?” === + <b>Answer you can use:</b> Placement is reviewed frequently, including a required 48-hour review cycle with written documentation explaining why less restrictive settings were not used. + + <br> + + === Q3: “What health protections are required?” === + <b>Answer you can use:</b> HB35 requires medical and mental health evaluations by certified professionals within one working day of placement in restorative housing or isolated confinement (with limited exceptions). + + <br> + + === Q4: “Does this stop people from getting programming or recreation?” === + <b>Answer you can use:</b> No—the bill requires at least four hours of out-of-cell programming or congregate activity daily, plus at least one hour of congregate recreation unless exceptional safety circumstances apply. + + <br> + + === Q5: “What stops indefinite ‘lockdowns’?” === + <b>Answer you can use:</b> Lockdowns that interrupt programming must have a specific documented security purpose, must end as soon as the purpose is served, are time-limited, require approvals to extend or repeat, and must be documented and published. + + <hr> + + == Additional Information == + <b>1. Definitions are the enforcement backbone</b> + • The bill defines isolated confinement and lockdown by hours-per-day and loss of programming, so policy can’t be evaded by unit names. + + + <b>Policy implication:</b> Regulates conditions, not labels. + + <br> + + <b>2. The “less restrictive first” rule targets protective-custody misuse</b> + • For “own protection” placements, the facility must use less restrictive options first, including transfers or special-purpose housing for similarly threatened individuals, unless infeasible. + + <b>Policy implication:</b> Safety without defaulting to isolation. + + <br> + + <b>3. Reviews + documentation create accountability</b> + • Requires regular reviews, documentation in the institutional file, notice up the chain, and formal in-person reviews with appeal rights. + + <b>Policy implication:</b> Isolation becomes a documented exception, not a routine. + + <br> + + <b>4. Lockdown limits matter because lockdown can function like solitary</b> + • The bill regulates lockdowns that interrupt programming and requires publication of documentation. + + + <b>Policy implication:</b> Prevents “unit-wide solitary” from becoming the workaround. + + [[Category:2026 Session]]
2026-01-22 05:42:36
Edited by: 74.110.183.75
Edited by: 74.110.183.75
= HB35 Restorative housing and isolated confinement restrictions on use = - Start writing your article here using '''Wikitext'''. + Start writing your article here using '''Wikitext'''. + + [[Category:2026 Session]]
2026-01-18 18:24:17
Edited by: 74.110.183.75
Edited by: 74.110.183.75
- == HB35 Restorative housing and isolated confinement restrictions on use == + = HB35 Restorative housing and isolated confinement restrictions on use = - + Start writing your article here using '''Wikitext'''.
Initial version (2026-01-18 18:23:38)
Created by: 74.110.183.75
Created by: 74.110.183.75
- == HB35 Restorative housing and isolated confinement restrictions on use == + = HB35 Restorative housing and isolated confinement restrictions on use = - + Start writing your article here using '''Wikitext'''.