As the options are not included with this question, we cannot chose a particular statement. Nevertheless, we are able to explain what the Supreme Court has ruled when it comes to the constitutional requirements of confinement.
The first case that addressed such conditions was that of <em>Holt v. Sarver</em>, in 1970. This was the first in a series of common law cases that found state prison systems to violate the Eighth Amendment. This amendment prohibits the use of cruel and unusual punishment.
This series of cases established that confinement should not include the unnecessary infliction of pain, nor should conditions be grossly disproportionate to the severity of the crime warranting imprisonment. The restrictions placed on prisoners can be restrictive, and even harsh, but should not become cruel. This includes the display of deliberate indifference in emergencies on the part of officials, or malicious and sadistic acts.
