A panel of judges has ordered California to significantly cut its prison population due to egregious overcrowding. In some part, this is the wages of the initiative process, with "tough on crime" measures like "three strikes and you're out" requiring the state to increase its prison population without providing commensurate resources. But it isn't just the doing of initiative voters. It's also the product of California politicians who want to have it all ways:
The state nearly reached a settlement with the inmates last year that would have reduced the prison population by tens of thousands, largely by shifting low-level offenders to local jails and rehabilitation programs. But that deal fell apart when Republican state lawmakers and county prosecutors objected.
Now, needless to say said Republican lawmakers don't actually support the tax increases that would be necessary to keep 70-year-old non-violent offenders locked up for life; they just like the idea. (And Jerry Brown, with his complaints about judicial meddling in light of his government's irresponsibility, isn't covering himself in glory either.) It is certainly appropriate for the courts to get involved in such cases, and if the state isn't willing to spend the money on more (or expanded prisons) it's hard to take the public safety rationales behind ever-lengthening sentences seriously.
--Scott Lemieux
