CALL TO CONSCIENCE

  Being wrongfully convicted abroad was a call to conscience for Scott Zirus. As he spent every possible moment after his conviction at the law library to teach himself Texas law, he observed the seemingly insurmountable injustices inflicted upon so many people. He realized very quickly that this was greater than just his own innocence, and developed an unquenchable thirst for justice.

After years of study, Scott Zirus has made a name in the legal activism scene and proven to be a talented litigator in his own right. One judge stated: "Zirus has demonstrated an ability to represent himself and his interests beyond the capabilities of some licensed attorneys practicing in this Court" (2019 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 148224; 2020 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 212081) - In other words, Scott Zirus is better at the law than some licensed attorneys.

For as long as he remains in Texas, Scott Zirus has openly vowed to challenge the inhumane conditions within the Texas Department of Criminal Justice and hold Texas Officials accountable for the violation of the Constitutional Rights of literally hundreds of thousands of incarcerated people in Texas. Scott Zirus stands by this vow as part of his life's mission.

Upon release, Scott Zirus intends to use his legal expertise and experience as a wrongfully convicted person to start a foundation that advocates for the release of innocent and unnecessarily incarcerated people world-wide.

Scott Zirus is the founding member of the National Lawyers Guild - Prison Chapter (NLG-PC) and the current Chairperson of the NLG-PC Steering Committee.

The NLG - Prison Chapter is an autonomous chapter of the National Lawyers Guild, which is the oldest and largest progressive bar association and the first in the U.S. to be racially integrated.  The objective of the NLG - Prison Chapter is to fundamentally transform the criminal justice system from within and to empower the Voice of those deprived of liberty.  

The NLG - Prison Chapter endeavors to articulate the systemic humanitarian crisis within the prison system and to highlight the societal cost of disenfranchisement and the systemic distraction of family, as well as, the fiscal cost of maintaining a dysfunctional, unconstitutional, and inhumane prison system at taxpayer expense.

The NLG Prison Chapter believes in a future without mass incarceration that invests in Restorative Justice and alternatives to incarceration. They directly oppose the

continued confinement of innocent people and those unnecessarily incarcerated or warehoused with excessive sentences.

The NLG Prison Chapter strategy for meaningful change revolves around the use of litigation and social outreach and awareness. The following are a few of the NLG - Prison Chapter lawsuits that challenge the unconstitutional and inhumane conditions within the Texas Department of Criminal Justice:

Cox, et al., v. O'Daniel, et al ., TBA

The COVID pandemic caused a severe staffing shortage in Texas prisons to the level that it is causing dangerous and unsafe conditions, and resulting in system-wide human rights violations that constitute cruel, inhumane and degrading punishment of Texas prisoners. This staff shortage is the equivalent of prisoner overcrowding.

It has been reported that the Texas Department of Criminal Justice had 7,253 correction officer vacancies for the 24,016 budgeted full-time positions [as of 30th November 2021]• This is more than a 30% shortfall - however that number does not include a significant number of officers out on sick leave, on vacation, or simply AWOL (which is increasingly a common phenomenon because officers just don't show up). The number also does not accurately reflect that the positions are divided into two shifts and that a large portion is not directly assigned to supervising housing areas where the majority of the incarcerated people are warehoused.

TDCJ has been plagued by understaffing issues for the past decade or more, so it is unknown if TDCJ has a mandatory minimum prisoner-to-officer ratio. However, during normal operations, the ratio in housing areas tends to be somewhere between 72:1 - 144:1.

Specifically, this represents one officer on patrol in a wing housing 144 incarcerated persons and one officer in the picket.

On the common occasion when incarcerated people are placed on lockdown because of staff shortages, one officer may supervise two wings, raising the ratio to 144:1 - 288:1. In comparison, the Federal Bureau of Prisons (BOP) requires a staffing ratio less than 15:1 to maintain adequate security.

Prolonged (or indefinite) staff shortages are equivalent to overcrowding - a situation in TDCJ that is strikingly similar to the horrific conditions created by overcrowding in the 70's which resulted in ever-increasing riots, violence, and rapes to the point that TDCJ (then Texas Department of Corrections) came under Federal supervision.

The inadequate security caused by staff shortages and subsequent overcrowding has ushered in the informal practice that has reincarnated the Turn Key/Building Tender system a hierarchical system where prisoners have implicit authority over other prisoners and perform the duties of the guards. As is historically proven "peer pressure" in prison as a control mechanism has no real enforcement power without the threat or use of prisoner-on-prisoner violence. As the issue of staff shortages I overcrowding increases, so will the risk to the safety of all incarcerated people confined within TDCJ.

To challenge these inhumane and unconstitutional conditions, the NLG - Prison Chapter has filed a multi-plaintiff lawsuit demanding that TDCJ provide a safe prisoner-to­ officer ratio, and ensure the end of constitutional violations that stem from understaffing issues. This suit is the thread that runs through a lot of the other violations in NLG - Prison Chapter lawsuits.

Baker, et al., v. Collier, et al., 1:23-CV-00190 Northern District of Texas, Abilene Division

Over the past few decades, the Texas Department of Criminal Justice has adamantly fought the long saga of challenges to the conditions of confinement in regards to excessively high temperatures in the prison housing and work areas. In Texas, where during summer months indoor temperatures can reach over l00°F (38°C) and consistently exceed 90°F (33°C), climate control is not a mere luxury but a human rights issue. It is common knowledge why human beings should not be confined in an enclosed area during temperatures above 90°F (33°C). Such can cause severe illness, and eventual death. Yet TDCJ has for decades subjected its prisoners to these inhumane conditions. As the effects of climate change increase , so do the inherent dangers of confining prisoners in cells that easily reach temperatures that pose a substantial risk of serious harm or death. TDCJ's blatant denial of climate controlled facilities is akin to rebuking the existential threat that climate change imposes upon humanity.

Within TDCJ there are currently 70 units/facilities that are not fully air-conditioned and thus have no way to keep temperatures at humane levels. This constitutes a collective

107, 295 TDCJ beds where incarcerated people are exposed to extreme temperatures in their housing areas. There are more beds in TDCJ without air-conditioning than the entire prison populations of Alabama, Arkansas, Georgia, and New Mexico combined.

This issue has been compounded by the short staffing I overcrowding epidemic in TDCJ because incarcerated people are forced to endure increased periods locked in their cells during excessive heat conditions. Incarcerated people compare such to the "hot boxes" used as punishment in the days of slavery.

To challenge these inhumane and unconstitutional conditions, the NLG - Prison Chapter has filed a multi-plaintiff lawsuit demanding universal AC in all TDCJ units/facilities. This lawsuit has the potential to save the lives of hundreds of incarcerated people from exposure to excessive and deadly heat conditions in TDCJ.

Few people would disagree that forced labor without pay and under threat of punishment is a form of slavery. However, in America, when slavery was abolished it was done with an exception - for punishment of crime. So forcing incarcerated people to work without pay does NOT violate the U.S. Constitution under the Thirteenth Amendment. But if the state authorities choose to compensate one group of incarcerated people for working, but not another for the same work, does that violate the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment? This multi-plaintiff lawsuit seeks to find out.