The judge appoints external civil servants to take over the deadly Rikers Island prison

A federal judge who supervised the prisons of New York City took Rikers Island out of the control of the city on Tuesday and ordered that an external officer was appointed to make important decisions about the troubled and violent prison complex.

The judge, Laura Taylor Swain, said in a 77-page statement that the civil servant would report directly to her and not be a city employee, which would again be reserved the efforts of Mayor Eric Adams to maintain control of the lock-ups. The civil servant, called a remediation manager, will work with the New York City Correction Commissioner, but is “authorized to take all the required actions” to reverse the prisons of the city, she wrote.

“Although the necessary changes will take some time, the court expects to see continuous progress in the direction of these goals,” wrote Judge Swain.

The order arrives almost a decade after the prisons of the city, including the Rikers Island Complex, fell under federal supervision The settlement of a lawsuit. The agreement was aimed at limiting the use of violence and violence towards both prisoners and correction officers. A monitor appointed by the court has issued regular reports on the persistent chaos.

New York City has held control of rikers with white knuckles – struggling to show progress and to achieve the uphill of losing supervision of prisons, because critics of the system evoked an external authority. According to lawyers for the claimants and the federal monitor, the conditions have not been improved.

New York City has spent more than $ 500,000 per prisoner in recent years, according to city data, much further than some other large cities have issued, and yet prisoners still sometimes go without food or good medical care. A New York Times Research In 2021 it turned out that guards are often stationed in inefficient ways that do not protect prisoners. And although the prisons system has been the most well sent in the United States in the United States, about one uniformed officer is for every prisoner in Rikers, according to Stadsontens and unlimited sick leave policy and other use of leave have led to staff falling to a dangerous level.

The Class-Action rights case that led to the acquisition, known as Nunez v. City of New YorkWas regulated in June 2015 and required the prisons, in particular Rikers Island, being checked by a monitor appointed by the court that would regularly give reports on the conditions there, but would not exercise direct authority to achieve change.

Through these reports, Judge Swain received an extensive history of the cyclical character of the problems of the prison system. Through the administration of two mayors and various correction commissioners, the prisons remained awaiting the lawyers of prisoners and the reports of the monitor. In November, the judge found the city in contempt For not turning violence and excessive violence in the facility, which is currently run by correction commissioner Lynelle Maginley-Liddie.

Over the years, the city has argued that the Department of Correction has made progress, even when Judge Swain has issued remedial orders and the proponents of the monitor and prisoners pointed out for a relapse.

In an opinion of 65 pages last year, Judge Swain said that the city and the Ministry of Correction had violated the constitutional rights of prisoners and employees by exposing them to danger, and had deliberately ignored its orders for years. Civil servants had fallen in an “unfortunate cycle” where initiatives were abandoned and then started again under new administrations, she wrote.

Last year Judge Swain ordered city leaders to meet lawyers for prisoners to make a plan for an ‘external person’, known as a recipient who could lead the system.

The parties gathered in recent months to try to reach an agreement, under the supervision of the Federal Monitor, Steve J. Martin. He told the court that the parties and his team had been “actively involved” in discussions.

Ultimately, the parties submitted dual proposals.

The Legal Aid Society and a private law firm that represents detained people, argued that the court would rid the city of the check and install a recipient who would only answer the court. The recipient must have a broad power to make changes, they proposed, including with regard to personnel and trade union contracts that rule.

The recipient, they said, could “revise, investigate and undertake disciplinary or other corrective or corrective actions with regard to violations of DOC policy, procedures and protocols” related to the judicial order.

In her plan, the city offered to Mrs Maginley-Liddie the double roles by adding the title of “Compliance Director” to its responsibilities.

The city suggested that she responded to the court about issues related to the consent decision, such as safety and staff shortages, while answering the mayor on everything else. In this way, the city argued, the recipient would immediately be and that Mrs. Maginley-Liddie is already a city employee, they only receive her salary and benefits from the Commissioner.

This is a developing story and will be updated.