A Prison Project guide to DNA testing requests and Section 1983: the facts behind Skinner v. Switzer, its legal rule, limits, and evidence families can preserve.
Digital tracking systems, forensic cellphone extraction tools, and predictive algorithms are raising a critical question: How much surveillance authority should a child welfare agency have, and who is watching the investigators?
For families involved in child protective services investigations, the prospect of government agencies using police-grade surveillance technology raises serious concerns about privacy, consent, and constitutional protections.
A Prison Project guide to equal protection race segregation: the facts behind Johnson v. California, its legal rule, limits, and evidence families can preserve.
A Prison Project guide to retroactive application of juvenile sentencing rules: the facts behind Montgomery v. Louisiana, its legal rule, limits, and evidence families can preserve.
A Prison Project guide to supermax notice and review: the facts behind Wilkinson v. Austin, its legal rule, limits, and evidence families can preserve.
A Prison Project guide to atypical and significant hardship: the facts behind Sandin v. Conner, its legal rule, limits, and evidence families can preserve.
A Prison Project guide to discipline and loss of good time: the facts behind Wolff v. McDonnell, its legal rule, limits, and evidence families can preserve.
A Prison Project guide to pretrial punishment versus administration: the facts behind Bell v. Wolfish, its legal rule, limits, and evidence families can preserve.
A Prison Project guide to juvenile homicide sentencing and individualized consideration: the facts behind Miller v. Alabama, its legal rule, limits, and evidence families can preserve.
A Prison Project guide to extent of injury versus nature of force: the facts behind Wilkins v. Gaddy, its legal rule, limits, and evidence families can preserve.
