The ongoing discourse surrounding the liability of prison officials for COVID-19 management measures continues to evolve as the U.S. Supreme Court considers whether to grant certiorari for Burt v. Gordon. This case once again puts the spotlight on the extent to which prison officials can be held accountable under the Eighth Amendment for their actions during the pandemic.
The case stems from a lawsuit filed by Jimmie Leon Gordon, who contracted COVID-19 while incarcerated at the Muskegon Correctional Facility in August 2020. Gordon alleged that the prison warden and deputy warden demonstrated deliberate indifference to his health risks, thus violating his Eighth Amendment rights. Although a district court initially dismissed Gordon’s claims, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 6th Circuit overturned this decision, accepting Gordon’s assertion that the prison officials failed to adhere to social-distancing guidelines and isolate infected inmates.
On remand, the district court ruled that the prison administration was entitled to qualified immunity due to the unprecedented nature of the COVID-19 pandemic, reasoning that no clearly established federal law indicated their actions were unlawful. However, the 6th Circuit again reversed this decision. The appellate court stated that the fundamental legal principle—mandating that prison officials cannot be deliberately indifferent to inmates’ exposure to communicable diseases—was well-established before the pandemic. The court concluded that a reasonable prison official should have realized that not separating infected inmates violated the Eighth Amendment.
As Michigan presents its case to the Supreme Court, it argues that the novelty of the pandemic meant that no clear guidelines existed to notify officials that their actions might be unconstitutional. Michigan asserts that despite some inconsistency among courts regarding the pandemic’s legal ramifications, most courts have determined that prison officials meet their obligations if they develop reasonable protocols to curb the virus’s spread.
The MacArthur Justice Center now represents Gordon, contending that the case does not engender a circuit split and lacks the grounds for Supreme Court review. As the justices deliberate, the central question remains whether the denial of qualified immunity in this context is justified, setting a potential precedent for holding prison officials accountable during public health emergencies.