DOJ to investigate California over housing of trans inmates at women’s prisons
-
Click here to listen to this article - Share via
- The Department of Justice said it would investigate two state women’s facilities to determine “if those prisons unconstitutionally provided housing and preferential treatment to biological male prisoners.”
- LGBTQ+ advocates have called past claims about men being housed in California women’s prisons “not accurate and not respectful towards trans women.”
The U.S. Department of Justice announced Thursday that it has launched an investigation into two California women’s prisons to determine if they unconstitutionally provided housing and preferential treatment to “biological male prisoners.”
In a letter to Gov. Gavin Newsom, Assistant Atty. Gen. Harmeet Dhillon — who heads the Justice Department’s Civil Rights Division — said investigators will look into “widely reported allegations of deprivation of female prisoners’ rights” at the Central California Women’s Facility in Madera County and the California Institution for Women in San Bernardino County.
The Justice Department said in a news release that there have been allegations “of sexual assaults, rape, voyeurism and a pervasive climate of sexual intimidation due to the presence of males in the women’s prison.”
Newsom’s office referred The Times to the California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation, from which a spokesperson responded that the agency is “committed to providing a safe, humane, respectful and rehabilitative environment for all incarcerated people.”
A criminal defense attorney said agents in plainclothes pulled his client out of a federal courtroom Thursday. The Department of Homeland Security confirmed that ICE arrested his client that afternoon.
The Department of Justice also notified Maine Gov. Janet Mills of an investigation into allegations that the state “has allowed a biological male inmate to remain housed with women despite complaints that the male inmate has assaulted or harassed several female inmates.”
Dhillon said in a video posted on X that the investigations are part of a new project called the “single-sex prisons initiative” to look for potential civil rights violations in which female inmates are forced “to be in the same rooms with men who are posing as women to get access to the female prisons.”
“In California there are reports of many dozen such men housed in women’s prisons which of course is exposing these women to sexual assault and other forms of violence and harassment that, if true, are extremely troubling and could violate the civil rights of these women,” Dhillon said.
In 2020, Newsom signed into law Senate Bill 132, which gives transgender, nonbinary and intersex inmates at state prisons the right to be housed at either men’s or women’s facilities. Opponents of the law sued the following year, alleging that it was unconstitutional and created an unsafe environment for women in female facilities, with some plaintiffs claiming they were assaulted.
At the time, LGBTQ+ advocates slammed the suit as baseless and damaging.
“The way they wrote [the complaint] is saying that trans women are men and they are putting men in women’s prisons, which is completely false,” Bamby Salcedo, president and chief executive of the TransLatin@ Coalition, which cosponsored SB 132, previously told The Times. “They’re making a claim that is not accurate and not respectful towards trans women specifically.”
The Women’s Liberation Front, which brought the lawsuit, announced this month that a federal court had dismissed the case but that they planned to appeal. In a statement posted on X Thursday, Elspeth Cypher, Women’s Liberation Front board president, called the new Justice Department investigations “a welcome advance.”
“Every day incarcerated women suffer from sexual harassment and abuse by the admission of men who say they are women,” Cypher said.
Under the bill enacted in 2021, 1,028 inmates housed at male prisons have requested to be moved to female facilities, according to data as of March 4. The department had granted 47 requests and denied 132. Another 140 applicants “changed their minds,” according to the department.
State officials said that 84 inmates sought to be transferred into men’s facilities from women’s prisons. Of those, seven were approved.
The federal public defender’s office in L.A. was 5 and 0 against prosecutors in trials related to immigration raids and protests. Trial No. 6 was last month.
According to the corrections department, 2,405 inmates identify as nonbinary, intersex or transgender. Those populations are said to experience excessive violence in prison. A 2007 UC Irvine study that included interviews with 39 transgender inmates found that the rate of sexual assault is 13 times higher for transgender people, with 59% of those surveyed reporting experiencing such encounters.
The Justice Department said Thursday that its investigation was just getting underway and that it “has not reached any conclusions regarding allegations in these matters.”
“I’m very determined to ensure that no woman who’s incarcerated in the United States is subject to potential rape, sexual assault or other violations of her civil rights as a condition of incarceration to satisfy some woke ideology by the state,” Dhillon said. “If these states are violating these rights and they don’t stop, we will make them through litigation.”
Facts Only
Department of Justice is investigating Central California Women’s Facility and California Institution for Women (California)
Investigation looks into alleged housing and preferential treatment of biological male prisoners
Allegations include sexual assault, rape, voyeurism, and a pervasive climate of sexual intimidation due to the presence of males in women’s prisons
Governor Gavin Newsom referred queries to California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation (CDCR)
CDCR confirmed commitment to providing safe, humane, respectful, and rehabilitative environment for all incarcerated people
In March 2021, a federal court dismissed lawsuit brought by The Women’s Liberation Front against California over SB 132
SB 132 gives transgender, nonbinary, and intersex inmates the right to be housed at either men's or women's facilities
Executive Summary
Full Take
The Department of Justice investigation into California’s women’s prisons raises questions about the rights and safety of transgender individuals in correctional facilities. The debate surrounding Senate Bill 132, which allows transgender inmates to be housed at either men's or women’s facilities, highlights competing interests between ensuring equal treatment for transgender individuals and maintaining the safety and well-being of other incarcerated women.
Patterns detected: ARC-0043 Motte-and-Bailey, ARC-0024 Ambiguity
The motte-and-bailey strategy is evident in the debate over SB 132. Proponents argue for equal rights and protection from discrimination, while opponents emphasize safety concerns and potential violence against women. The ambiguity pattern is present in the definition of what constitutes a "biological male" or "transgender woman," as these terms can be interpreted differently based on cultural, legal, and medical contexts.
The root cause of this issue lies in societal attitudes towards gender identity and the tension between individual rights and collective safety within correctional facilities. The implications extend beyond California, as other states may face similar challenges when addressing housing arrangements for transgender inmates.
Bridge questions: How can we balance the need for equal treatment with concerns about safety in correctional facilities? What alternative housing arrangements could address the needs of both transgender individuals and other incarcerated people?
The pattern of motte-and-bailey and ambiguity in the debate over SB 132 suggests a complex issue that requires nuanced, compassionate, and evidence-based solutions. As the DOJ investigation unfolds, it will be essential to consider multiple perspectives and prioritize the safety and dignity of all incarcerated individuals.
Sentinel — Human
The article appears to be written by a human journalist with evidence of personal voice, local knowledge, and cited sources. While some stylometric signals are present, they are not indicative of AI generation.
