scotus · 2026-06-29
author: unavailable · not independently reviewed
Case and law context
Interpretation-only case: no authored CASE context or instance blocks recorded in this snapshot.
Instances and excluded annotation blocks
| Case | Element | Holding and scope | Pattern | Exact source quotations |
|---|
Court interpretations recorded from this case
interpretation
The Court has long held that prison officials violate the Eighth Amendment when they are deliberately indifferent to the deprivation of a prisoner’s basic needs, that is, when they “kno[w] of and disregar[d] an excessive risk to inmate health or safety.
Smith v. Kind — citation unavailable · scotus · 2026 (42usc1983: author: unavailable · not independently reviewed)
The Court has long held that prison officials violate the Eighth Amendment when they are deliberately indifferent to the deprivation of a prisoner’s basic needs, that is, when they “kno[w] of and disregar[d] an excessive risk to inmate health or safety.Source:
docroot/ir/caselaw/clus_cl.jsonl#/cl/10881677; Unicode character offsets [7348:7601] (end exclusive); SHA-256 5fee11e8c3cb547879ec5596eefbeac05a81201647444d51d8f4498423f41866.Splits into excessive force (Whitley/Hudson malicious-and-sadistic test) and conditions of confinement / medical care (Farmer v. Brennan subjective deliberate indifference test).