The definition of cruel and unusual punishment is any inhuman act that violates basic human rights. In light of this, the criterion for deciding whether punishments are cruel or unusual should be the extent to which they violate human dignity. To decide if the conditions are cruel and inhumane, we must first determine if they infringe on fundamental human rights. We must remember that inmates are also human and must respect their basic human rights.
A conscious disdain for a person’s detrimental actions or omissions is deliberate indifference. The purposeful indifference threshold is used to determine whether a professional has violated the rights of a specific prisoner (Amy Newman, Eighth Amendment—Cruel and Unusual Punishment and Conditions Cases, JCLC. Rev. 979, 980 (1992)). Despite the difficulty of defining purposeful indifference, the courts have identified situations in which it arises. For instance, ignoring a prisoner’s complaint demonstrates purposeful indifference.
A prisoner’s detention in a four-by-six-foot cell is unconstitutional. Typically, the cells are poorly aired, which boosts the warmth and makes it unpleasant for the prisoner to remain there. In actuality, the four-by-six-foot cell significantly restricts the prisoner’s mobility.
Having a smoker and a nonsmoker in the same cell is not advisable since passive smoking produces additional health concerns. Due to the absence of air conditioning, the cells are often poorly ventilated and have restricted airflow. This poses a significant risk to the health of nonsmokers (Sharon Dolovich, Cruelty, Prison Environment, and the Eighth Amendment, 84 NYU L. Rev. 886, 962 (2009)). In essence, it is unconstitutional to house a smoker and a nonsmoker in the same cell.
The prison’s temperature should be maintained at 55 degrees. In this regard, low temperatures are maintained, which eliminates airborne bacteria and humidity. Therefore…