Flake calling on US Supreme Court to overturn prisoners’ restraints ruling
Sep 30, 2017, 5:34 AM
U.S. Sen. Jeff Flake addresses business officials gathered for an event in Prescott, Ariz., Thursday, Aug. 10, 2017. Flake told the group that that the new administration is restoring the balance on environmental regulations from what he called the one-sided oversight of the Obama Administration. (AP Photo/Bob Christie)
(AP Photo/Bob Christie)
PHOENIX — U.S. Sen. Jeff Flake is calling on the U.S. Supreme Court to overturn an appellate court’s ruling that involved prisoners’ rights in courtrooms, his office announced Thursday.
The defendants in the U.S. v. Sanchez-Gomez case challenged the Southern District’s policy of shackling defendants while they are in custody even when it is not determined that they post a “material risk of flight or violence.”
The 9th Circuit ruled that the policy violated prisoners’ rights, holding that the fundamental right “to be free from unwarranted restraints is protected by the Fifth Amendment of the Constitution.”
“At the heart of our criminal justice system is the well-worn phrase, innocent until proven guilty,” the court said in its ruling. “We must guard against any gradual erosion of the principle it represents, whether in practice or appearance. This principle safeguards our most basic constitutional liberties, including the right to be free from unwarranted restraints.”
But Flake argued that this court ruling “creates a new burden in processing illegal border crossings and presents a serious danger to the safety of law enforcement officers and the public.”
Flake filed an amicus brief, alongside the Arizona Sheriffs’ Association, the Western States Sheriffs’ Association, and the National Sheriffs’ Association, to call the U.S. Supreme Court to hear and overturn the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals’ decision in the case.
In a press release, Flake argued that this ruling forces law enforcement to “increase the number of officers needed to maintain the safety of prisoners, staff, and the public inside courtrooms,” leaving fewer officers to “[pursue] violent fugitives or [prevent] street crime.”
Flake also said the ruling “dramatically undercuts federal courts’ ability to process illegal border crossing cases” under the Operation Streamline border enforcement program.
The operation establishes a “zero-tolerance” approach to illegal border crossings and helps deter them in places like Yuma and Tucson. According to Flake, hearings for the operation averaged 45 people per hearing, which can only be maintained “in large part to traditional courtroom-safety procedures.”
Even if more law enforcement officers were present in courtrooms, Flake argued, the “high threshold” which they must attain “has created serious safety concerns among the sheriffs and U.S. marshals.”
“This monumentally dangerous decision upends decades of responsible courtroom security measures, and I am hopeful the Supreme Court will once again overturn another fringe ruling by the 9th Circuit,” Flake said in a statement.
In a joint statement, all of Arizona’s 15 sheriffs said they “applaud” Flake for his “support of local law enforcement and public safety.”
“The 9th Circuit decision in U.S. v. Sanchez-Gomez recklessly endangers officers, victims, court employees, and the public at-large by superseding sheriffs’ executive authority to enforce traditional courtroom safety procedures. We thank Senator Flake for his continued support of Arizona sheriffs and we are happy to join him in this effort,” the statement read.
