Pennsylvania’s Prison Porn Ban

Hugely important prison news:

The Corrections Department in November 2005 announced a ban on “materials in which the purpose is sexual arousal” as well as images of human nudity. The policy was later amended to allow a case-by-case review of items that may have literary or educational value.

Mr. Brittain, convicted of rape in Luzerne County, filed a lawsuit in Commonwealth Court two years ago in which he argued his constitutional rights had been violated. To back up his claim, he offered the statements of six other inmates that nudity did not affect their rehabilitation or treatment, cause them to sexually harass anyone or create a hostile work environment for prison workers.

I’m about neck-deep* into a totally unrelated non-porn story — deadline in about… forty-five minutes — so I’m unable to devote my full investigative capacities to this issue. But I wonder what “statistical evidence” shows that “assaults and sexual misconduct cases declined after the porn ban was imposed.” Conversely, I wonder what factors Ms. McNaughton “credited with lower assault rates.” Sounds like bullshit in all directions, actually. But bullshit worth arguing. At length. With double entendres abounding, running amok.

The decision/denial also sounds like a dare:

Justice Baer said it is conceivable that some other inmate might be able to make a compelling argument against the prohibition on obscene materials, but “the burden of doing so is high” and Mr. Brittain did not meet it.

So, prisoners of Pennsylvania, who’s gonna step up? Who’s gonna fight for porn? You’re not doing too well on conjugal visits, so maybe now’s the time to take a stand. So to speak.

Thanks for the link, Jody.

* To the co-worker who suggested I change “neck-deep” to “balls-deep”: The answer is no.