Use of Force
Correctional staff are permitted to use force in narrow, specific circumstances — not as punishment, and not beyond what a situation requires. When that line is crossed, it's a civil rights violation. Independent attorneys in our nationwide network take these cases on contingency, at no upfront cost to you.
What this covers
These cases are won or lost on evidence. What you preserve in the days and weeks after an incident often determines whether a claim can move forward.
Preserve the evidence
Get injuries examined and documented as soon as possible — even minor-seeming ones. See how to request records and video.
Photos of visible injuries, taken as early as possible and periodically as they heal or scar.
Facility video is often overwritten on a schedule — the sooner a preservation request goes out, the better.
Names of anyone who witnessed the incident, even if they're no longer at the same facility.
Filing — and completing — the facility's grievance process is often a required step before a lawsuit can proceed.
Write down what happened while it's fresh — dates, times, names, and sequence of events.
What to look for
Force is allowed in narrow situations — to bring a situation back under control or stop a real threat. It is not allowed as punishment, and not after the situation is already under control. We made a free, plain-English guide called The First 72 Hours that walks families through exactly what to record in the first three days. Here's what points to a violation.
None of these alone proves a case — but any of them is worth a confidential review. Someone held before trial has not been convicted of anything, and the law does not permit punishing them at all. These protections apply whether someone is awaiting trial or serving a sentence, though courts analyze the two situations under different constitutional provisions. For harm inside a federal facility, the claim runs through the Federal Tort Claims Act instead — a different route with its own strict deadlines, and one that can reach assaults by federal corrections staff — and our FTCA page explains that path. The record is what courts rely on, and that record starts with what you write down now.
For the plain-English version of how courts evaluate excessive force claims, see our explainer.
Where to start
There are two ways we can help families in your situation.
We can connect you with one of the independent attorneys we work with — a licensed civil-rights attorney who can look at what happened and explain your options. For serious harm — a death in custody, an assault, or denied care that caused harm — request a case review with one of the independent attorneys we work with.
If you'd rather handle the case yourself — or you're not ready for a full lawsuit yet — our Pro Se Paralegal Assistance Plan helps with document preparation, research support, and case organization, all under the oversight of a licensed attorney. See the Pro Se Paralegal Assistance Plan.
Not sure which fits? Start with the case-review request and choose "Not Sure — Please Advise" from the dropdown. And if you want a licensed attorney's read first, we can connect you with one of the attorneys we work with.
Legal document preparation and research support services; we connect families with independent licensed attorneys.
42 U.S.C. § 1983 — the federal civil-rights statute; the vehicle for these claims.
Hudson v. McMillian, 503 U.S. 1 (1992) — excessive force against a prisoner can violate the Eighth Amendment even without serious injury; the question is whether force was applied in a good-faith effort to maintain discipline, or maliciously and sadistically to cause harm.
Kingsley v. Hendrickson, 576 U.S. 389 (2015) — for a person held before trial, excessive force is judged by objective reasonableness under the Fourteenth Amendment; the detainee must show that the force purposely or knowingly used against him was objectively unreasonable.
County of Sacramento v. Lewis, 523 U.S. 833, 847 (1998) — executive action violates substantive due process only when it can properly be characterized as arbitrary, or conscience shocking, in a constitutional sense.
Zero upfront cost
One call starts the process. We'll take it from there.
