Connecticut Prisons to End In-Cell Restraints in Settlement

The Connecticut Department of Correction has agreed to end its longtime practice of in-cell restraints as part of a settlement with civil rights groups, resolving a yearslong legal battle over the treatment of incarcerated people with mental illness. The agreement, announced Thursday, requires the department to revise its restraint policy, provide staff training, and report the use of restraints to the American Civil Liberties Union, according to AP News.

The settlement, reached with the ACLU of Connecticut and Disability Rights Connecticut (DRCT), requires the department to end the use of in-cell restraints by September 1, 2026. The practice, which the ACLU refers to as in-cell shackling, involves “chaining a prisoner’s legs and wrists, binding their hands to their feet with a tether chain, and then leaving them locked in their cell for hours or even days,” according to an ACLU press release.

A Practice Under Scrutiny

Advocates have long argued that in-cell restraints are particularly harmful for people with mental illness because they were often used in response to symptoms of the illness itself—such as head-banging or compulsive self-cutting—with little medical or mental health oversight. Experts say the practice worsened symptoms and could lead to decompensation and attempts at severe self-harm.

“This settlement represents an important step toward ensuring that Connecticut’s prisons treat people with mental illness with the dignity and care they deserve,” Jaclyn Blickley, a staff attorney with the ACLU Foundation of Connecticut, said in a statement. “The state cannot subject people with mental illness to abuse, and we will continue to hold the Connecticut Department of Correction to the commitments they have made to changing their practices.”

Kasey Considine, legal director of DRCT, called the policy change “an important step toward protecting incarcerated people with mental health disabilities from unnecessary and harmful restraint.”

Origins in the 2021 Supermax Lawsuit

The settlement follows a 2021 lawsuit filed by the ACLU on behalf of DRCT that challenged the department’s use of solitary confinement and in-cell restraints on people with mental illness held at Northern Correctional Institution, the state’s former “supermax” prison. The lawsuit, filed in U.S. District Court in Connecticut, alleged violations of the Eighth Amendment prohibition on cruel and unusual punishment and the Americans with Disabilities Act.

The case was brought with co-counsel from Morrison & Foerster LLP and Yale Law School’s Lowenstein International Human Rights Law Clinic. Kyle Mooney, the Morrison Foerster partner who led the firm’s pro bono representation, said the settlement finally brings an end to “Connecticut DOC’s barbaric, physically harmful, and psychologically damaging in-cell shackling of prisoners with mental illness.”

Days after the lawsuit was filed in February 2021, Gov. Ned Lamont announced the closure of Northern Correctional Institution. In June 2021, Lamont vetoed the original PROTECT Act—which would have created an independent correction ombudsman and limited isolation and restraints—instead signing an executive order adopting some of the same reforms. A revised PROTECT Act was signed into law in 2022.

However, advocates said the reforms were never fully enforced, and people with mental illness continued to be placed in isolation and restraints at other prisons across the state. “It was signed into law, but it was never enforced,” said Barbara Fair, executive director of Stop Solitary CT. “Had they enforced it, in-cell restraints would not just now be getting the recognition and everything that it’s getting now.”

What the Settlement Does and Doesn’t Do

While the agreement ends the use of in-cell restraints, it still allows department staff to use full-stationary restraints when an incarcerated person poses an immediate risk of harming themselves or others. Full-stationary restraints involve securing a person’s arms and legs to a bed, and the settlement limits these devices to those that are soft, wide, and flexible, according to Corrections1.com.

The settlement also requires staff training, revised protocols, ongoing oversight, and internal auditing to ensure consistent compliance across all correctional facilities. The agreement includes a reporting mechanism that will allow the ACLU to monitor compliance.

“I remain committed to providing the training and resources necessary to help correctional staff to safely manage challenging situations without the use of in-cell restraints,” Interim Correction Commissioner Sharonda Carlos said in a statement. “This agreement serves as a continuation of the progress we have made using mental health interventions and de-escalation techniques as appropriate alternatives to more restrictive practices.”

Correction Ombuds DeVaughn Ward welcomed the agreement, saying the practice “raises serious concerns for safety and mental health care.” He added that his office “will monitor its implementation to ensure the reforms are carried out in accordance with the settlement, produce meaningful change, and advance the Department’s rehabilitative mission.”

Concerns Remain

Despite the progress, advocates remain cautious. Fair expressed concern about the continued allowance of full-stationary restraints, which she described as “pretty awful in itself to have somebody pinned down for no-telling-how-many hours in full restraints.” She also noted that racial discrimination in state prisons remains a problem, explaining that it’s often Black men who are considered the most dangerous and placed in high-security housing units.

“It is a good step, but we have a long way to go to end the inhumanity that goes on inside of Connecticut DOC,” Fair said.

Blickley said the reporting process will “help us keep a pulse on how things are going and what else might be necessary to make sure that the benefits of the settlement are fully realized.”

The agreement is slated to take effect on September 1, 2026. As the department implements the reforms, advocates and officials alike will be watching closely to see whether the settlement produces the meaningful change it promises—and whether the lessons of Northern Correctional Institution are truly applied across Connecticut’s entire prison system.