
Armstrong v. Newsom
Case Summary
The Prison Law Office and Rosen Bien Galvan and Grunfeld LLP filed a federal class action lawsuit in 1994 on behalf of people with disabilities, including those with vision, kidney, hearing, mobility, speech, and/or learning disabilities, who were in CDCR custody. The lawsuit alleged that people with disabilities did not have equal access to programs, services, and activities, both in prison and while on parole, as required by the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA). The Court found that CDCR was violating the ADA and Rehabilitation Act, and issued an injunction to improve access to prison programs for prisoners with physical disabilities at all of California’s prisons and parole facilities. Since that time, the Prison Law Office has been working to enforce the terms of the injunction and ensure that people with disabilities are treated fairly in the California prison system.

Timeline
1994 | Incarcerated people with disabilities file the case against the California Department of Corrections—now the California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation (“CDCR”). |
1995 | Plaintiffs additionally sue the California Board of Parole Hearings (“BPH,” previously known as the Board of Parole Terms) as a defendant, and district court certifies the Armstrong case as a class action. |
1996 | District court issues remedial order and injunction requiring CDCR to develop remedial plan to correct its violations of the Americans with Disabilities Act (“ADA”) and the Rehabilitation Act. |
1999 | District court issues a permanent injunction requiring the BPH to comply with the ADA and Rehabilitation Act. |
2001 | After multiple appeals to the Ninth Circuit, CDCR submits Armstrong Remedial Plan to the district court. Plaintiffs seek a court order requiring CDCR to make prison facilities structurally accessible. |
2002 | In response to Plaintiffs’ motion, district court orders CDCR to make prison facilities structurally accessible, and enters a Revised Permanent Injunction against the BPH. |
2006 | District court grants Plaintiffs’ motion seeking an order requiring the BPH to systematically track incarcerated individuals’ disability-related needs. |
2007 | District court appoints Armstrong Court Expert. District court grants Plaintiffs’ motion for a more specific injunction requiring CDCR to take an array of remedial steps, including establishing permanent positions for sign-language interpreters, creating a statewide tracking system to monitor the needs of people with disabilities, and monitoring prisons’ and individual prison employees’ failures to comply with court orders. |
2009 | District court orders Defendants to fix ADA violations occurring against plaintiffs held in county jail facilities. |
2012 | District court modifies the 2007 injunction to require CDCR to track and investigate allegations of noncompliance with the ADA, the Armstrong Remedial Plan, and prior court orders, and to initiate disciplinary or corrective action proceedings against employees where appropriate. (Court revises and finalizes order in 2014 following Ninth Circuit appeal.) |
2013 | Plaintiffs seek—and district court issues—order requiring CDCR to take further steps to ensure adequate provision of sign-language interpretation services to deaf incarcerated people. |
2015 | District court orders CDCR to stop housing incarcerated people in administrative segregation due to a lack of accessible housing, in response to Plaintiffs’ motion. |
2016 - 2019 | Plaintiffs investigate and report to the district court misconduct by CDCR staff against incarcerated people with disabilities at numerous prisons across the state. |
2020 | District court orders CDCR to abide by stipulated agreement regarding protection of plaintiffs during the COVID-19 pandemic. |
2020 - 2021 | District court orders CDCR to stop assaulting, abusing, and retaliating against people with disabilities, including by ordering the implementation of body-worn cameras on correctional officers at Richard J. Donovan (RJD) and five additional prisons. |
2022 - 2023 | Court Expert and Plaintiffs investigate mistreatment of people with disabilities at Substance Abuse Treatment Facility (SATF). In December 2022, August 2023, and November 2023, Court Expert reports ongoing concerns at SATF. Court orders CDCR to develop plans to remedy specific violations of the ADA and ARP at SATF and beyond. |
2024 | District court, in response to Plaintiffs’ motion, orders Defendants to comply with previous courts by providing specific accommodations for people with vision and hearing disabilities. |
Documents & Resources
Recent Litigation Documents
Court Expert’s Quarterly Report on Investigations and Discipline (March 31, 2025)
Court Expert’s Recommendations Regarding Compliance with SATF Stipulation (January 10, 2025)
Joint Status Statement re Compliance with the Court’s December 7, 2023 Order (October 16, 2024)
Stipulation and Order re RJD Remedial Plan and Five Prisons Remedial Plan (March 23, 2022)
Many documents from the Armstrong docket are available in the RECAP archive, available at this link.
Documents from our work in fighting prison staff misconduct against people with disabilities are available at this page of the website of our co-counsel, Rosen, Bien, Galvan, and Grunfeld LLP.
Informational Resources
CDCR Policies and Information About Disability Accommodations
Part of our monitoring and advocacy work in Armstrong involves negotiating new policies with CDCR about disability accommodations. We maintain many of these policies for public access here.
Office of the Inspector General Reports
The Office of the Inspector General (OIG) publishes reports on CDCR’s performance in a number of areas, including staff misconduct. The OIG’s recent staff misconduct reports can be found below.
News
California fails to adequately help blind and deaf prisoners, US judge rules (California Healthline, April 9, 2024)
9th Circuit upholds California prison reforms, citing abuse of inmates with disabilities (Los Angeles Times, February 3, 2023)
More California prison employees to wear body cameras through new oversight measures (Sacramento Bee, July 26, 2021)