Federal judge rules that prisoners' death dates can remain secret

In response to a public records lawsuit filed by the Reason Foundation, the nonprofit organization that ReasonA federal judge has ruled that the U.S. government can withhold information about whether people who died in federal prisons received adequate medical care – partly out of fear that these records could be used to criticize prison staff.

U.S. District Judge for the District of Columbia Christopher R. Cooper issued an opinion in August that the Federal Bureau of Prisons (BOP) was largely exempt from releasing redacted information from mortality analyses of deaths at two federal prisons for women that had been the subject of numerous allegations of medical neglect.

In addition to finding that the mortality reports were part of the BOP's decision-making process, Cooper wrote that the BOP successfully demonstrated that releasing the records would result in foreseeable harm to the agency. The judge wrote that a statement from a BOP official credibly demonstrated that the mortality reports could be used to “criticize” or “ridicule” the agency.

“And as described above, it states that the members of the Mortality Review Committee would ‘discourage’[red] … from admitting mistakes if they fear those mistakes might become public,” Cooper continued.

Reason Foundation, represented by the law firm of Deborah Golden, filed a Lawsuit for violation of the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) last year against the BOP to request mortality investigations into in-custody deaths at FCI Aliceville, a federal prison for women in Alabama, and FMC Carswell, a federal prison in Texas that is the only medical center for incarcerated women in the BOP system.

When a federal prisoner dies, a committee reviews the circumstances and whether BOP policies were violated. The committee then makes recommendations on how care could have been improved. This information could shed light on whether the BOP is aware of medical neglect within its walls and how severe the problem is.

Reason reported in 2020 on Allegations of fatal medical neglect at FCI Aliceville. Numerous current and former inmates and their families said in interviews, desperate letters and lawsuits that women at FCI Aliceville faced catastrophic delays in health care. They described months-long waits for doctor's appointments and routine procedures, skepticism and retaliation from staff, and terrible pain and fear.

I would like to know more, Reason filed a FOIA request in May 2020 for inmate mortality reviews at FCI Aliceville and FMC Carswell.

When the BOP finally released the FMC Carswell mortality reports three years later, it redacted any information that might have indicated inadequate care, including the review board's findings regarding the timeliness and appropriateness of care, problems that occurred during the medical emergency, whether the patient's medical records were adequately documented, and whether the patient received appropriate care according to BOP guidelines.

The BOP withheld this information, citing exception b(5) of the FOIA, which protects “pre-decision” or advisory communications between officials. The National Security Archive described it as Exception: “hold it back because you want to”.

The BOP only published edited mortality reports from FCI Aliceville Reason filed a FOIA lawsuit. Those records showed that staff ignored an incarcerated woman's cries for help for eight months as her ability to walk became increasingly limited. Staff advised her to take Motrin for the unbearable pain and delayed and denied a CT scan that would have revealed the cause of her ordeal: bone cancer. She died in a prison transport van en route to a local hospital to see an oncologist.

The Court's acceptance of the BOP's arguments is based on the assumption that the BOP is actually making a good faith effort to improve its health care services and is not covering up neglect and malpractice.

But in case after case, BOP officials were caught lying and obstructing. In 2022, another federal judge considered the BOP to be in breach of civil law and imposed sanctions on the agency for allowing an incarcerated man to languish with untreated cancer and for willfully ignoring and misleading the court. The judge wrote that the BOP's actions were “inconsistent with the moral values ​​of a civilized society and unworthy of the Department of Justice of the United States of America.”

A NPR Investigation A report released in January of this year suggested that the BOP over-categorizes deaths in custody as “natural,” allowing it to avoid autopsies. A report released in February by the Justice Department’s Office of Inspector General documented widespread staff shortages and a Culture of fatal negligence in the BOP system. One of the many problems the Inspector General identified was “inadequate staff response to inmate emergencies.”

It is disturbing that a government agency would make the argument—and even more disturbing that a federal judge would endorse it—that BOP bureaucrats would not give honest advice that could potentially save lives if doing so could damage the agency's reputation.

“The BOP's rationale is essentially that its employees – sworn law enforcement officers and medical personnel – would not propose improvements that could save lives if doing so would potentially mean publicly admitting a flaw or weakness in the system,” the Reason Foundation argued in a court filing in February.

But for now, keeping the ethical failings of the BOP, whose reputation is already ruined, secret is more important than the public's right to know how people live and die under its terrifying care.