Free speech is a core value of liberal democracies, but for 2.3 million incarcerated Americans, it is largely inaccessible. Incarcerated people are prohibited from posting on social media, have scarce access to phone calls and in-person visits, and face severe reprisals (like solitary confinement, a form of torture) for engaging in protest. Are such authoritarian controls on speech—controls which it would be unthinkable to impose on the general public—justified behind the prison gate? This paper considers the strongest candidate justification for restrictive policies around speech in prisons, including restricting access to social media, and argues that these arguments fail. The paper then put forward two arguments in support of increasing speech protections.  These arguments appeal to (1) the dignity of incarcerated people, and (2) the moral improvement of the general public. The paper concludes by discussing the relationship between speech-promoting reforms to our prison system and efforts to end mass incarceration.

For more information, contact Tena Thau (t.thau@ucl.ac.uk).