Edit: HB35_Restorative_housing_and_isolated_confinement_restrictions_on_use

Markdown Content:

= HB35 Restorative housing and isolated confinement; restrictions on use. =

== Status ==
[https://house.vga.virginia.gov/subcommittees/H15002/agendas/5187 Public Safety | Subcommittee #2 — agenda]

<hr>

== Overview ==

=== Summary as Introduced ===
Restorative housing and isolated confinement; restrictions on use. Prohibits the use of isolated confinement, defined in the bill, in state correctional facilities, subject to certain exceptions. The bill requires that before placing an incarcerated person in restorative housing or isolated confinement for his own protection, the facility administrator shall place an incarcerated person in a less-restrictive setting, including by transferring such person to another institution or to a special-purpose housing unit for incarcerated persons who face similar threats. The bill requires that if an incarcerated person is placed in restorative housing or isolated confinement, such placement shall be reviewed every 48 hours and the facility administrator shall ensure that the incarcerated person receives a medical and mental health evaluation from certified medical and mental health professionals within one working day of placement in restorative housing or any form of isolated confinement. The bill also requires the facility administrator to notify the regional administrator in writing that an incarcerated person was placed in restorative housing or isolated confinement within 24 hours of such placement. Finally, the bill requires that formal reviews of an incarcerated person's placement in any form of isolated confinement shall be held in such person's presence, inform him of any reasons administrative officials believe isolated confinement remains necessary, and give the incarcerated person an opportunity to respond to those reasons, and a formal ruling shall be provided to the incarcerated individual within 24 hours.

<hr>

=== Patrons ===
==== House Patrons ====
• Joshua G. Cole (chief patron)

• Patrick A. Hope (chief-co-patron)

• Sam Rasoul (co-patron

• Holly Seibold

==== Senate Patrons ====
• Lamont Bagby

<hr>

== Language ==
The language of [https://lis.virginia.gov/bill-details/20261/HB35/text/HB35 HB35] can be viewed here.

<hr>

== Proposed Amendment ==
=== Amendment Offered for Consideration (requested for subcommittee) ===

==== Add “Lockdown” throughout relevant provisions ====
Amend the bill to explicitly include “lockdown” alongside “solitary confinement/isolated confinement” and “restorative housing” in all relevant sections, to prevent facilities from using unit-wide lockdown practices as a functional substitute for individual isolated confinement.

==== Strengthen the time-limit clause (close the cumulative-days gap) ====
Replace the current time-limit phrasing with:

“No individual shall be held in solitary confinement, lockdown, or restorative housing for more than 15 consecutive days, nor 15 days in any 60-day period.”

Purpose of the amendment: The introduced text already uses “15 consecutive days…in any 60-day period,”

but stakeholders have raised concerns that “consecutive” language can be worked around by cycling people in and out (or shifting to lockdown practices) without ever hitting a “consecutive” threshold. The amendment makes the limit explicitly both consecutive and cumulative.

Again, the intent is to prohibit the outcome of prolonged, solitary isolation, not to jeopardize the safety of anyone, but to ensure the constraint of this practice.

<hr>

== Opening Statement ==

=== House Subcommittee Statement ===
<blockquote>
====Notes on delivery: ====
 bold—emphasize, increase volume; 
 italicized—stressed, extended pronunciation, sing-songy; 
 bold italicized—stressed and emphatic, increase volume; 
 CAPITALIZED—climactic and declarative;
 »chevrons«—deliver jokingly, with humor; 
 • bulleted—drum-like repetition, think of MLK's "I Have a Dream," "I have a dream that..." repeated for emphasis; 
 — a half pause, slight build-up; 
 — — a full pause, major build-up.

VIBE: think "victory lap;" sell the idea that this bill is a done deal and that doubters should get on board while they still have a chance to be on the right side of history. This is a pathos and ethos argument, not logos; lean on expert testimonies for questions of logic. - Eric
</blockquote>

Mister Chair, members of the subcommittee—

This is not our first time here.

For two straight years, the General Assembly has passed this reform — —

In 2024, I gave you a »sermon« — — and then we passed HB 1244.

In 2025, • my sister, • my friend, • and my esteemed colleague, Delegate Karen Keys-Gamarra, took up the torch — — and then we passed HB 2647.

Twice, this body has said—clearly—that we are ready to turn the page on solitary confinement.

And after two straight years, nobody can pretend this is new...

• You know this bill. 
• You know this issue.
• You know how overdue this change is — —

Mister Chair, members of the committee, this is not our first time here—»BUT it will be our last«—because this year we will make history.

And what is so great about this year is that we all have a chance—a chance to be part of making history.

If you're still on the fence, I want you to look forward into the future with me. Don't let the past hold you back — —

• Because when we look back in 25 years, we will know this legislation was the right thing to do.

• Because when we look back in 50 years, we will know this legislation was the right thing to do.

• Because when we look back in one-hundred years, we will know this legislation was the right thing to do!

Today—I hope everyone in this room joins us in doing the right thing.

We know the counterarguments. We know the questions. And we're happy to answer them. But I encourage us to listen—

• To listen to the testimonies of those who have suffered;

• To listen to the voices who are ready for change;

• To listen so that we may be reminded—again—just how overdue this legislation is.

Thank you, Mister Chair and members of the committee. I hope you report this bill favorably to full committee.

<hr>

=== Appropriations Subcommittee Statement ===

=== House Floor Statement ===

Mr. Speaker, they said the third time's a charm.

This body has passed a solitary confinement restriction for two years in a row. This year, we have a chance to pass it for a third and final time.

HB35 would restrict solitary confinement to 15 days total in any 60-day period. The science of isolation is not a mystery to us; prolonged isolation is dangerous to the mind and the body. And times, Mr. Speaker, are a-changin'. Our commonwealth is more ready than ever to bring humane compassion to rehabilitation inside our prisons.

I ask that we engross the bill and pass it on to it's third reading.

==== Amendment ====

The amendment changes “48 hours” to “two business days.” This was done to remove the FIS.

==== Introduction ====

HB35 includes a timing provision that is driving its fiscal impact. After speaking with the Department of Corrections, it is clear that the FIS comes from overtime when the 48-hour deadline falls on weekends or holidays. To address this, we replaced "48 hours" with "two business days."

We worked with DOC and stakeholders to reach this version, which keeps the bill’s intent but removes the additional costs. Mr. Elam or DOC staff should be here to confirm that this will eliminate the fiscal impact.

(let DOC testify to the elimination of the FIS)

I hope it will be the will of the subcommittee to report the bill to full committee.

=== Senate Rehabilitation and Social Services Committee ===

==== Substitute Description ====

We have a substitute in front of the committee.

The substitute before you makes three straightforward changes to the bill.

First, it corrects a structural issue in the language so that the statute clearly maintains the limits on when restorative housing or isolated confinement can be used.

Second, it keeps the bill’s original intent intact: establishing a 15-day consecutive limit on isolated confinement while maintaining existing safety exceptions and review procedures.

Third, the substitute removes the additional recreation hour requirement, which we have come to understand raised concerns about additional staffing.

This substitute keeps the policy focused and workable while preserving the bill’s core reform.

I respectfully ask the committee to adopt the substitute.

==== Introduction Speech ====

HB35 sets clear guardrails on the use of isolated confinement in Virginia’s state correctional facilities.

The bill establishes a 15-day consecutive limit on isolated confinement, while preserving exceptions when separation is necessary for safety, protection, or medical isolation.

26109378D

It also requires that facilities use less-restrictive housing first when someone requests protection, rather than defaulting to isolation.

If isolation is used, the bill requires prompt medical and mental-health evaluations, regular review of the placement, and written documentation explaining why less-restrictive options were not possible.

Finally, it ensures that decisions to continue isolation are reviewed through a formal process with notice and the opportunity to respond.

In short, HB35 allows necessary separation when safety requires it, but ensures it is limited, reviewed, and accountable.

I hope it will be the will of the committee to report the bill.

=== Senate Finance and Appropriations ===

Madam Chair, members of the committee,

HB35, in its substituted form, is intended to remove fiscal impact.

The substitute removes the additional recreation hour that raised staffing concerns, and the remaining provisions largely reflect policies and procedures the Department of Corrections already follows.

The bill simply sets a 15-day consecutive limit on isolated confinement, while preserving exceptions for safety, protection, and medical isolation, and requiring documentation and regular review when isolation is used.

With the staffing concern addressed, the bill maintains its policy goal without creating additional costs.

I hope it will be the will of the committee to report the bill.

<hr>

== Support and Opposition ==

=== Support ===
• ACLU People Power Fairfax
• Bridging The Gap In Virginia
• Charlottesville Chapter National Organization for Women
• Coalition for Justice
• EJUSA Evangelical Network
• Fighting 4 Freedom
• Greater Washington (JCRC)
• Inmate Support Virginia
• Interfaith Action for Human Rights (IAHR)
• HALT Solitary
• Jewish Community Relations Council of Just Future Project
• Justice & Witness Action Network- VA
• United Church of Christ Central Atlantic Conference
• LatinoJustice PRLDEF
• NAACP Loudoun
• National Association of Social Workers
• National Association of Social Workers, Virginia Chapter
• National Religious Campaign Against Torture
• No Left Turns
• Resource Information Help for the Disadvantaged and Disenfranchised (RIHD)
• RISE for Youth
• RVA Health Alliance for Social Justice and Equity
• Social Action Linking Together (SALT)
• Social Workers and Allies Against Solitary Confinement
• The Humanization Project
• The Sentencing Project
• Unitarian Universalist Legislative Ministry of Virginia
• Unlock the Box Campaign
• Virginia CURE
• Virginia Defenders for Freedom, Justice & Equality
• Virginia Justice Democrats
• Virginia Justice for Life
• Virginia Justice Alliance
• Virginia Prisons Accountability Committee
• Virginia Prisoner Of Conscience
• Virginia Prison Justice Network
• WJCC Coalition for Community Justice
• 40 Strong

=== Opposition ===
• (to be updated)

=== No Recommendation / Neutral ===
• (to be updated)

=== No Position Provided ===
• Department of Corrections

<hr>

== Fiscal Impact ==
No fiscal impact statement is posted for HB35. The Department of Corrections may try to bring forward a claim for a fiscal impact; however, LIS and Appropriations Committee have currently not provided any impact statement.

<hr>

== Possible Questions ==

=== TL;DR ===
Q1: “Does this end solitary confinement in Virginia?” TL;DR: No—it ends prolonged solitary confinement and sets clear limits, oversight, and due-process rules for any use. 
Q2: “Does this make prisons less safe for staff?” TL;DR: No—HB35 keeps exceptions for imminent threats and requires documentation; it’s about targeted use, not “never.”

Q3: “What changes day-to-day?” TL;DR: Frequent reviews, rapid medical/mental health checks, real programming/out-of-cell time, and written accountability when isolation is used.

Q4: “Can DOC just use ‘lockdowns’ instead?” TL;DR: The bill defines lockdown and regulates it, and the requested amendment strengthens this further by applying the same time limits to lockdown explicitly.

=== Q1: “What does the bill aim to accomplish?” ===
Answer you can use: HB35 ends prolonged solitary confinement by setting clear time limits and requiring real oversight—regular reviews, rapid medical and mental health evaluations, documentation, and in-person due process when isolation continues.

=== Q2: “How often is placement reviewed?” ===
Answer you can use: Placement is reviewed frequently, including a required 48-hour review cycle with written documentation explaining why less restrictive settings were not used.

=== Q3: “What health protections are required?” ===
Answer you can use: HB35 requires medical and mental health evaluations by certified professionals within one working day of placement in restorative housing or isolated confinement (with limited exceptions).

=== Q4: “Does this stop people from getting programming or recreation?” ===
Answer you can use: No—the bill requires at least four hours of out-of-cell programming or congregate activity daily, plus at least one hour of congregate recreation unless exceptional safety circumstances apply.

=== Q5: “What stops indefinite ‘lockdowns’?” ===
Answer you can use: Lockdowns that interrupt programming must have a specific documented security purpose, must end as soon as the purpose is served, are time-limited, require approvals to extend or repeat, and must be documented and published.

<hr>

== Talking Points ==

=== 1. Solitary Confinement Is Increasing in Virginia ===
Key Facts:
• In FY25, 7,999 people were placed in some form of isolation in VADOC facilities. 
• This represents an 11% increase from the prior year. 
• This is 57% higher than FY2021 levels. 
• The trend has been steadily upward for several years.

Policy Implication: Voluntary reforms have not reduced isolation. Without statutory limits, use continues to expand.

Answer you can use: 
Despite years of discussion, solitary confinement is increasing in Virginia. Nearly 8,000 people were placed in isolation last year—up 57 percent since 2021. That shows policy alone is not working. HB35 creates enforceable limits.

=== 2. Solitary Is Becoming More Prolonged ===
Key Facts:
• FY23 average length of stay: 9.9 days 
• FY25 average length of stay: 30.9 days 
• A threefold increase in two years 
• More than double the UN’s 15-day torture threshold

Policy Implication: Temporary isolation is becoming routine long-term confinement.

Answer you can use: 
The average stay in isolation has tripled in two years and now exceeds 30 days. That is more than double what the United Nations considers torture. This bill stops that normalization.

=== 3. Solitary Is Used Primarily on People in Mental Health Crisis ===
Key Facts:
• Over 56 percent have diagnosed mental health conditions 
• True prevalence is likely higher due to underreporting and limited staffing 
• The share of people with mental illness in isolation has increased

Policy Implication: Isolation is being used as a substitute for treatment.

Answer you can use: 
More than half the people placed in solitary already have mental health diagnoses. We are responding to crisis by locking people in a box alone for weeks. That makes no clinical sense.

=== 4. Solitary Increases Death Risk After Release ===
Key Facts:
• Suicide risk: 55% higher 
• Homicide risk: 29% higher 
• Overdose risk: 26% higher 
• All-cause mortality: 17% higher 
• Risk doubles with repeated isolation

Policy Implication: Solitary creates long-term public safety risks.

Answer you can use: 
People who experience solitary are more likely to die by suicide, overdose, or violence after release. This does not stay in prison. It comes back to our communities.

=== 5. Disproportionate Impact on Black Virginians ===
Key Facts:
• African Americans: ~19% of state population 
• ~52% of VADOC population 
• ~65% of long-term isolation placements

Policy Implication: Solitary compounds existing racial disparities.

Answer you can use: 
Black Virginians are already overrepresented in prison. They are even more overrepresented in solitary. HB35 addresses equity as well as safety.

=== 6. “By Any Name” — Lockdowns Replace Solitary ===
Key Facts:
• Increased use of extended lockdowns 
• Program and recreation suspensions 
• Unit-wide isolation practices

Policy Implication: Isolation is being relabeled rather than reduced.

Answer you can use: 
If we do not regulate lockdowns, solitary simply gets renamed. This bill focuses on conditions, not labels.

=== 7. This Bill Protects Safety While Ending Abuse ===
Key Facts:
• Preserves exceptions for imminent threats 
• Allows medical and security isolation 
• Requires documentation and review

Policy Implication: Safety tools remain, but abuse is limited.

Answer you can use: 
HB35 does not eliminate separation. It eliminates indefinite, unreviewed isolation.

<hr>

== Additional Information ==
1. Definitions are the enforcement backbone
• The bill defines isolated confinement and lockdown by hours-per-day and loss of programming, so policy can’t be evaded by unit names.

Policy implication: Regulates conditions, not labels.

2. The “less restrictive first” rule targets protective-custody misuse
• For “own protection” placements, the facility must use less restrictive options first, including transfers or special-purpose housing for similarly threatened individuals, unless infeasible.

Policy implication: Safety without defaulting to isolation.

3. Reviews + documentation create accountability
• Requires regular reviews, documentation in the institutional file, notice up the chain, and formal in-person reviews with appeal rights.

Policy implication: Isolation becomes a documented exception, not a routine.

4. Lockdown limits matter because lockdown can function like solitary
• The bill regulates lockdowns that interrupt programming and requires publication of documentation.

Policy implication: Prevents “unit-wide solitary” from becoming the workaround.

[[Category:2026 Session]]