Seventh Circuit Backs Away From Apparent Circuit Split on Three Strikes Provision of PLRA
Enacted in 1996, the Prison Litigation Reform Act raised numerous obstacles to prisoner rights lawsuits. The “three strikes” provision of the statute, codified at 28 U.S.C. § 1915(g), is intended to bar prisoners who have a history of frivolous litigation from proceeding in forma pauperis. IFP status results in the waiver of court filing fees that would otherwise be beyond that means of indigent litigants. For most prisoners, in light of their limited financial resources, a denial of IFP status is the functional equivalent of a denial of access to the courts.
Last week, in Turley v. Gaetz (No. 09-3847), the Seventh Circuit backed away from dicta in earlier decisions that seemed to embrace an exceptionally and unnecessarily broad reading of the three strikes bar. Had the court adhered to the earlier dicta, it would have opened a circuit split on a very important prisoner rights issue.
Here’s what happened.
Congratulations to the students in Appellate Writing and Advocacy, who are turning in their final briefs today. This moment is a good one to reprint an article that Emily Lonergan, the Chief Justice of the Moot Court Board, wrote for the most recent De Novo newsletter. De Novo is the publication of the State Bar of Wisconsin’s Appellate Practice Section. The Appellate Practice Section is active, and De Novo is a good source for news, information, and tips about appellate practice. This article is reprinted with permission.