I'm in a Zoom conference with the federal court in 45 mins trying to get two constitutional violations at the biggest jail in the country fixed, but obviously the government's lawyers are maintaining that this jail is too big to fix the problems. The judge's line is that if the smallest jails in the country can not violate the rights of the detainees, why can't the biggest? The government is adamant that their size protects them from having to say, provide a working mail system.
This is the sort of people that run our jails and prisons -- and spend your tax dollars.
They tried to insert this clause, but my lawyer had it excised.
The hospitals hire many ER doctors as “contractors” so they can crank the rates up. But the doctor works for a conglomerate that rents them out to the hospital for a fixed salary and the conglomerate profits the spread.
Yes, my case was (probably, maybe) barred from injunctive relief because you can't sue to fix problems at a jail or prison if they release you[0]. Some people have been prematurely released just to activate this option.
You can (sometimes) get declaratory judgment though, which at least declares you a winner and you can then pass the baton to the guy behind you who is still behind bars and use that as a stick to hit the institution over the head with.
And sometimes you can also get monetary damages too, which can be another stick to hit them with.
[0] some exceptions apply if the case is likely to repeat itself, but this argument is very, very hard to muster
Or does class-action not apply to this kind of violation at all?
My case involved access to news and mail delivery. The mail delivery claim is left open for a future class action as the judge made an excellent ruling on it, just short of handing me victory. The person behind me can cite that persuasive ruling to bring a class action if they can find representation.
Law doesn't work like cryptocurrencies. Two different judges can see the same motions and make completely different judgements.
The appellate courts do the real work of determining the legality of the judge's decisions and fixing them where necessary. If you don't have the resources to marshall a competent appeal, then you're usually out of luck.
War on Drugs is the case in point. The entire system is abusive and corrupt, but most of the people with first-hand experience are automatically disenfranchised, so it has persisted for generations against all reason.