The Solitary Confinement of Girls in the United States: International Law and the Eighth Amendment Comments 92 Tulane Law Review 2017-2018

About | HeinOnline Law Journal Library | HeinOnline Law Journal Library | HeinOnline

92 Tul. L. Rev. 697 (2017-2018)
The Solitary Confinement of Girls in the United States: International Law and the Eighth Amendment

handle is hein.journals/tulr92 and id is 737 raw text is:

The Solitary Confinement of Girls in the
United States: International Law and the
Eighth Amendment

Colleen Murphy*

I. INTRODUCTION.......................................697
II. THE SOLITARY CONFINEMENT OF YOUTH ........... ......699
III. SOLITARY CONFINEMENT, YOUTH, AND GENDER ...... .....702
A. The Unique Experience of Girls in Detention..............702
B. The Need for a Gender-Specific Approach to
Solitary Confinement................ .........703
IV. INTERNATIONAL LAW AND THE SOLITARY CONFINEMENT
OF GIRLS.. ..........................................705
A. International Law in General ........... ......705
B. International Treaties and Resolutions Related to
Solitary Confinement of Girls .................708
1. The Convention on the Rights of the Child..............708
2. U.N. General Assembly Resolutions ...... .....710
C. Applying International Law to the Eighth
Amendment. .................... ...........712
1. Proportionality Test.................. .....713
2. Two-Prong Test ........................716
V. CONCLUSION ............................................718

I. INTRODUCTION
In 1970, Antoinette Lollis, a fourteen-year-old girl, was detained
at the Hudson Training School for Girls in New York.' She started a
fight with another inmate and was put in solitary confinement where
she remained twenty-four hours a day for over two weeks.2 The room
was six feet by nine feet.3 In the room was a bench, a blanket, and

* C 2018 Colleen Murphy. J.D. candidate 2018, Tulane University Law School;
B.A. 2011, University of North Carolina. Thanks to Professor Addis for the feedback and for
advising me on this project. I am also so grateful to my family for their endless support and
to the members of Tulane Law Review for their work on this Comment.
1. Lollis v. N.Y. State Dep't of Soc. Servs., 322 F. Supp. 473, 475 (S.D.N.Y. 1970).
2. Id.
3. Id.
697