Politics

Concerns Rise Over U.S. Anti-Prison Rape Law’s Fate

Published

12 years ago

January 5, 2015

Reporter II

(Courtesy of spaulforrest.com)

Rebecca Boone, ASSOCIATED PRESS

(AP)—When Congress passed a law in 2003 aimed at ending sexual assault in U.S. prisons, jails and juvenile detention centers, survivors like Jan Lastocy were hopeful that it would help solve the long-ignored problem.

Lastocy and a coalition of inmate advocacy groups and evangelical groups had worked for years to convince policymakers and corrections officials that rape behind bars shouldn’t be accepted, even if the public had little sympathy for its victims.

“I felt vindicated because I had been fighting so hard, and for so long, to bring attention to this issue and get justice for myself and for all survivors,” said Lastocy, who was repeatedly raped by a guard while serving time for embezzlement.

Now, some advocates worry that a proposal to reduce the law’s financial penalties will severely damage it. The measure failed last fall, but its sponsor, Sen. John Cornyn, R-Texas, vows to re-introduce it in the new GOP-controlled Congress.

Cornyn said the funds include grants for worthy programs, such as ones that support rape and domestic violence victims. He said the law should be more narrowly tailored to affect money for prison construction, operations and administration.

The proposal has put some prison rape survivors on the opposite side of those who survived sexual assault on the outside.

Nearly two dozen organizations, including prison industry groups and the Rape, Abuse and Incest National Network, have lauded Cornyn’s efforts, and say they trust prison officials to work vigorously at reducing rapes even without financial penalties.

“There’s no desire to do anything less than help victims,” said Rebecca O’Connor, RAINN’s vice president of public policy, adding that her organization just wants to make sure the law is applied in a way that doesn’t harm existing programs.

Advocates say the measure is the latest sign that the law’s implementation is too slow.

Federal statistics show about 216,000 adult and juvenile inmates are sexually assaulted each year, compared to 238,000 people living outside of correction facilities in the U.S.

Allen Beck, a statistician with the U.S. Department of Justice who researches the incidence of prison rape, said the biggest indicator of prisoner sexual assault is the culture of the facility, not the number of inmates or security cameras.

“Really it’s about how the facilities are managed, in terms of institutional culture,” Beck said.

When Lastocy stepped into Camp Branch, a minimum security women’s prison in Michigan, in 1998, she was facing as much as 10 years in prison for attempting to embezzle several thousand dollars from her employer, ABO Security.

As she adjusted to the discovery after her arrest that she had bipolar disorder, rape quickly became a fact of life.

Like many prison rape survivors, she feared that the guard who raped her could extend her prison stay by writing her false tickets for breaking prison rules if she reported him. He was later convicted of sexually assaulting several inmates, including Lastocy.

When she learned that she may have been his first victim, she felt guilt for not speaking up, said Lastocy, who now is an advocate for prison rape survivors.

The passage of the law, however, gave her hope that there would be fewer victims. But like other advocates, she’s been frustrated by the pace of change at correctional institutions throughout the country.

So far, seven states have opted out of the law, and stand to lose 5 percent in federal money that goes toward prisons. Two states — New Jersey and New Hampshire — say they are in compliance, and 41 others are working to meet the law’s requirements.

The law’s backers say Cornyn’s proposal would essentially gut the penalty because little, if any, federal grant money actually goes toward prison administration, operations and constructions. Those are funded by state and local governments.

To take the provision out “would totally obliterate the incentive states have to comply with” the law, said U.S. District Judge Reggie B. Walton, the chairman of the former National Prison Rape Elimination Commission.

The commission developed the law’s requirements, which range from increased training of staff about sex abuse policies to screening new inmates to determine if they’re likely to commit sexual assault or to be assaulted.

In Texas, which has six facilities among those nationally with the highest prevalence rate of sexual assaults, officials used nearly $2.6 million in federal money to install extra cameras in some facilities and develop a sexual assault awareness curriculum.

The state has since opted out, and faces an $800,000 loss in federal funding.

Jason Clark, a corrections spokesman, said a requirement to prevent guards from seeing inmates of the opposite sex naked in the showers or during strip searches wouldn’t work because 40 percent of the correctional officer workforce is female.

Many states have trained staffers and educated inmates about how to spot and report sexual assault.

Addressing sexual assault and caring for victims “decreases the likelihood of an offender becoming a victim again and committing a violent act once he or she returns to the community,” said Norah West, Washington state’s corrections spokeswoman.

For Lastocy, the trauma didn’t end when she left prison. She still has nightmares, 15 years later. “As much as I despise him, I don’t even wish my rapist would be raped while he is in prison, because nobody deserves it,” she said.
Copyright 2015 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.

###

Reporter II

Posts by Reporter II

Up Next

Edging Closer to 2016 Bid, Republican Jeb Bush Forms New PAC

Don't Miss

Scalise Gets Backing of GOP in Supremacist Flap

Reporter II

Click to comment

Business

AC Transit Labor Unions Back Director Joel Young

ATU Local 192 Vice President Nathaniel Arnold stated “our support reflects confidence in Young’s leadership and experience as the longest-serving member of AC Transit’s current Board of Directors. His experience is particularly important as AC Transit confronts serious fiscal challenges while working to preserve and strengthen service.

Published

28 minutes ago

October 13, 2026

Post News Group

Joel Young with bus union workers. Courtesy photo.

By Post Staff

In the AC Transit Ward 3 election, AC Transit’s labor organizations have recently expressed their endorsement for Director Joel Young, recognizing his longstanding commitment to public transportation, workforce investment, and the employees who keep AC Transit moving every day.

Those unions include the Amalgamated Transit Union Local 192, the International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers Local 1245, and the American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees Local 3916.

“At a time when difficult decisions lie ahead, Young brings institutional knowledge, longstanding relationships, and a demonstrated commitment to public transportation.

“Since joining the board in 2009, Young has served in key leadership roles, including president and vice president, helping guide AC Transit through periods of growth, innovation, and change.

During his tenure, he helped AC Transit secure more than $600 million in funding to support critical transportation investments. Young has also helped advance workforce development initiatives, support transit technology improvements, expand AC Transit’s zero-emission bus fleet, and strengthen the District’s national presence on transportation policy issues.

His leadership has extended beyond the Bay Area.

Young has represented AC Transit on the national stage, including participation in the White House Roundtable on Clean Bus Manufacturing, where transit leaders and policymakers discussed the future of clean transportation and domestic manufacturing.

Post News Group

Posts by Post News Group

Community

‘ICE-Free Marin’ Supporters Press Supervisors as County Drafts Enforcement Restrictions

“County resources are to never be used in the furtherance of federal immigration enforcement,” Johnson said, of the policy which is still in development. “The policy will require all county employees to notify the county executive within 24 hours of any immigration enforcement activity in which they become aware on county property.”

Published

42 minutes ago

October 13, 2026

Post News Group

A crowd of over 100 supporters and members of the No ICE in Marin coalition gather in the chamber of the Marin County Board of Supervisors to speak in support of an Anti-ICE ordinance being discussed in San Rafael on Tuesday, Sept. 29. Courtney Sadowski via Bay City News.

By Ruth Dessault, Bay City News

More than 100 protesters packed the Marin County Board of Supervisors chamber Sept. 29, urging supervisors to consider an ordinance restricting the actions of U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement officers.

County and state officials are already advancing some measures that overlap with demands the protesters have made for the past year.

“I want to share that the immigration subcommittee has been hard at work drafting important board policy as directed by the Board of Supervisors,” said Marin County Executive Derek Johnson, referring to policy that will prevent the use of county property for federal immigration enforcement activities.

Those policy goals align with the two central provisions proposed by the No ICE in Marin Coalition, which filled the room at Tuesday’s meeting.

Their policy proposal, called ICE-Free Marin, prohibits ICE from using county property, resources or personnel without a judicial warrant and establishes clear reporting requirements whenever county department staff observe or communicate with federal immigration authorities. Those interactions may include the service of subpoenas and warrants, as well as attempts to access county facilities.

The ICE-Free Marin ordinance would require the county to post signs and barriers restricting ICE from entering county property, with county staff denying ICE officials entry and refusing to provide information and assistance. If ICE disregards directives, the county counsel would seek a court order to stop them, and if ICE unlawfully detains someone, they can be challenged in court, according to the ordinance.

Last year, the group protested the county’s participation in the State Criminal Alien Assistance Program, administered by the U.S. Department of Justice in conjunction with ICE and the U.S. Department of Homeland Security.

SCAAP funds are used to reimburse costs incurred for jailing immigrants lacking permanent legal status who have at least one felony or two misdemeanor convictions and are incarcerated for a minimum of four consecutive days.

In February, the county announced its 2026-28 budget does not include SCAAP funding.

State Takes Action on Immigrant Protections

Also on Sep.t 29, California Gov. Gavin Newsom signed a package of more than 20 bills aimed at increasing state oversight of federal immigration enforcement and protecting immigrant communities, according to a news release from the governor’s office.

The state legislation creates a 25% tax on private detention centers, expands health and safety oversight in those centers, requires additional public input and planning approvals for new facilities, and strengthens the role of state Attorney General Rob Bonta in inspecting them.

The measures also ban law enforcement from using wearable electroshock “shock gloves,” restrict flash-bang grenades and explosive breaching charges, limit the use of state-owned property for federal immigration operations, and require temporary identification decals on rental vehicles used by law enforcement.

The legislation expands access to public records involving private detention facilities and restricts former federal immigration officers who committed serious misconduct from becoming California peace officers or public employees.

Other measures allow people to sue federal officials for alleged violations of their constitutional rights and protect people traveling to and from courthouses from civil immigration arrests.

“We may not be able to dictate federal immigration enforcement policy, but we can make clear that activities taking place in California will be subject to California law,” the governor said in a video message announcing the bills.

The group leading the local campaign for the ICE-Free Marin ordinance is the Democratic Socialists of America. DSA spokesperson Courtney Sadowski said in an email that the group has spoken with supervisors Eric Lucan, Mary Sackett, Dennis Rodoni and Stephanie Moulton-Peters.

“But none have committed to introducing the ICE-Free Marin ordinance,” Sadowski said.

The group has attended numerous meetings of the Civilian Oversight Commission of the Sheriff’s Office asking for their support, she said.

“We cannot afford to wait the months or years it would take them to review and consider this item,” she said. “Even if they moved more quickly, all they can do is issue a recommendation.”

Speakers Weigh In

Hector Garcia, a community library specialist with the Marin County Free Library, spoke to the supervisors. He said that he recently completed an intense Department of Justice certification that will allow him to provide immigration services at the library.

The Recognition and Accreditation program allows qualified non-attorney staff working for eligible nonprofit organizations to legally provide immigration services for low-income and indigent individuals who cannot afford private attorneys.

“It would be impossible for me to fulfill this job with the presence of ICE,” Garcia said. “A fascist police force, they disregard the law, terrorize, assassinate and separate Black indigenous people of color and their families.”

Lisa Bennett with the Marin Rapid Response Network, a nonprofit that helps families locate detained relatives and provides other support services, said families go into shock when the major breadwinner is detained.

“Basic things like money for food, utilities, even driving are no longer a given,” she said. “They worry about their parent’s medical needs. They worry about themselves being next. They worry about what happens if the remaining parent is taken. This is what our government is doing to its own people. Silence is complicity.”