Both the state and federal laws regulate the formation and operation of prisons, as well as the rights of prisoners. The 8th Amendments has a restriction on cruel and unusual punishment, other civil rights within the 8th Amendment include freedom of expression, due process, religious liberty, proper medical treatment, freedom from racial prejudice, and access to judicial systems, which protects prisoners (Richardson, 2017). In the United States, any person’s civil liberties are contingent on systems that uphold and safeguard those rights against infringement or denial. Limitations of these rights can only be enforced in extraordinary circumstances and for the sake of security and protection.
Accessibility to courts is a fundamental right that must be upheld if inmates’ other civil liberties are to be upheld. It is vital to remember that, apart from maybe the Constitution of the United States, state and federal statutes do not grant sentenced criminals any substantial rights. Most of the liberties now granted to inmates, including those granted to all other citizens of the United States, are the consequence of judicial decisions rather than administrative and legislative action. Prison administrative authorities are required by the fundamental constitutional liberty of access to the courts to help convicts in the drafting and filing of relevant court documents. This is done by allowing them enough law resources or sufficient legal support from individuals knowledgeable in the law.
The Courts are repeatedly requested to adjudicate on claims alleging violations of several Convention Articles relating to how inmates are treated, and also limits on or intrusions of their liberties. The Court made it clear that upholding inmates’ sense of personal dignity requires access to fully stocked and hygienic sanitation facilities. Cleanliness and hygiene are not just components of the high regard that people have for their bodies and for those around them with whom they cohabitate for long durations. They are also a prerequisite and a requirement for health preservation like in the case of Ananyev and others v. Russia (Navalnyy et al, 2018). In the past three decades, the U.S supreme and lower federal courts have come to recognize prisoners’ rights and ended the then hands-off policy used by the courts before.
Navalnyy, A., Ofitserova, P., Coman, A., & Clabourn, R. Al Nashiri v. Romania  ECtHR 35, 39, 121-122, 138 Alekseyev v. Russia  ECtHR 45, 99, 162. Human Rights, 53(76), 142-202.
Richardson, G. (2017). The case for prisoners’ rights (pp. 165-176). Routledge.