Alabama Inmates Lawsuit Challenges ‘Modern-Day Slavery’ Work Requirements
In a novel legal challenge, a group of current and former Alabama inmates has filed a lawsuit against the state, alleging they were compelled to work in commercial establishments, including fast-food chains, under conditions they describe as “modern-day slavery.”
The case has been filed in the U.S. District Court for the Middle District of Alabama and attacks the state’s program known as “convict leasing.”
The inmates argue the state’s program that contracts their labor to private companies is essentially like slavery. Justice Catalyst Law director Janet Harold said, “The forced labor scheme that currently exists in the Alabama prison system is the modern reincarnation of the notorious ‘convict leasing’ system.”
The complaint filed in the case claims that inmates “live in a constant danger of being murdered, stabbed, or raped” while working at typical Alabama fast-food restaurants.
The Free Alabama Movement supports the inmates’ lawsuit. Co-founder Robert Earl Council said of the program: “Each corporation, each fast-food company — anybody who participates and has their hand in their cookie jar with the Alabama Department of Corrections — you’re guilty of slavery. You are a slave master.”
The lawsuit alleges requiring convicts to work violates the Alabama and U.S. Constitutions. However, with regard to the allegation that forcing prisoners to work is “modern-day slavery,” there is a constitutional provision that will make things difficult for the plaintiffs. The Thirteenth Amendment was ratified soon after the end of the Civil War. It was expressly directed at eradicating slavery and forced labor from the United States permanently — with a notable exception.
Section One of the amendment provides: “Neither slavery nor involuntary servitude, except as a punishment for crime whereof the party shall have been duly convicted, shall exist within the United States, or any place subject to their jurisdiction.” (emphasis added).
As the case proceeds, the outcome could set a precedent for the treatment of inmate labor across the United States, either ratifying existing practices or prompting nationwide reform.
