Should Connecticut collect per diem incarceration fees from former inmates' settlements and windfalls?
Connecticut charges incarcerated people up to $347 a day and can collect the debt for 20 years after release, including from settlements and inheritances. A 2026 investigation found the state collected about $21 million this way since 2020.
Case period:
Published by The Dispute Index editorial teamPublished Updated
Overview
Connecticut has charged incarcerated people a daily fee for the cost of their imprisonment since 1995, and state law lets the Department of Administrative Services collect on that debt for up to 20 years after release, including by taking up to half of a lottery win, inheritance or lawsuit settlement, or a lien against a deceased person's estate. A Connecticut Mirror investigation published September 27, 2026 found the daily rate has reached $347, that a year in prison can produce a debt of nearly $127,000, and that the state collected about $21 million this way from 2020 to mid-2026 from hundreds of formerly incarcerated people, including money from wrongful-death and police-brutality settlements. The legislature narrowed the law in 2022 and 2024, and a federal lawsuit led the state to withdraw its claims against its four named plaintiffs by October 2024, but collection from others has continued. The dispute is whether Connecticut should be allowed to collect this debt from former inmates' settlements, inheritances and windfalls at all, not whether any individual's specific bill was calculated correctly.
Read the full background
This case classifies public positions on one question: should Connecticut be allowed to collect the cost of a person's incarceration from money they receive after release, including legal settlements, inheritances and lottery winnings, for up to 20 years after release? It does not classify whether any individual's specific debt calculation was correct, and it is not about prison funding or incarceration policy in general.
Connecticut has charged incarcerated people a per diem fee for the cost of their confinement since 1995. Under the current statute, the Department of Correction and the Department of Administrative Services, the state's collection agency, carry out the debt collection (opens in a new tab). A 2022 legislative research report (opens in a new tab) describes the mechanics: the state can place a lien against a lawsuit judgment or an inheritance for the full cost of incarceration or 50 percent of the proceeds, whichever is less, and can place a lien against a deceased person's estate for the full cost of incarceration, for up to 20 years after release. A 2022 amendment, Public Act 22-118, exempted the first $50,000 of most people's assets and limited the lawsuit-proceeds lien to a list of serious offenses, effective May 7, 2022.
A Connecticut Mirror investigation published September 27, 2026 (opens in a new tab) found the state has charged as much as $347 per day, producing a debt of nearly $127,000 for a year in prison, more than double the federal government's rate. Reviewing hundreds of probate-court cases from 2020 to 2026, the paper found the state collected about $21 million from hundreds of formerly incarcerated people in that period, including money from medical-malpractice, police-brutality, workplace-injury and wrongful-death settlements, and that about 72 percent of the liens the state filed in that period yielded nothing because the underlying estates had nothing left to collect.
State officials have described the debt as a lawful, long-standing collection duty rather than argued for its fairness on the merits. Eleanor Michael, a deputy commissioner at the Department of Administrative Services, said her agency implements the law and is "not involved in the policy discussion." Attorney General William Tong's office said it is required to assist DAS in debt collection "if the statutory criteria and facts of each case warrant it." When the law passed in 1995, its sponsors framed the fee as a matter of fairness to taxpayers; Sen. John Kissel, a co-sponsor still in the legislature, told the Associated Press in 2022 (opens in a new tab) that "knowing that one has to pay the state back a reasonable sum on a regular basis is not a bad policy."
Advocates, an attorney and several people pursued for the debt have condemned the practice. Dan Barrett, legal director of the ACLU of Connecticut, said the debt "builds so quickly that you can reach astronomical numbers within a comparatively short amount of time." Lisa Foster, co-founder of the Fines and Fees Justice Center, called the law "a regressive tax." The ACLU of Connecticut and formerly incarcerated plaintiffs sued Governor Ned Lamont and Attorney General Tong in March 2022, arguing the law violates the Eighth Amendment's ban on excessive fines. The state withdrew its demand to collect from all four plaintiffs by October 2024 (opens in a new tab), though collection from others has continued.
Connecticut's legislature considered a full repeal in 2022 but instead narrowed the law through Public Act 22-118; the Connecticut Mirror reported lawmakers made further, smaller changes in 2026 reporting on a 2024 follow-up bill, though the specific text of that later change could not be independently confirmed here. Rep. Steve Stafstrom, who sponsored the repeal effort, said the 2022 changes meant about 98 percent of Connecticut inmates no longer have to pay any of the costs of their incarceration after they get out. The Connecticut Mirror's 2026 reporting found the state is still pursuing hundreds of people a year for the remaining debt, including through settlements in wrongful-death and police cases.
People in this case
William TongDirectly involved
Ned LamontDirectly involved
Timeline
14 timeline entries on this page. Dates: June 1, 1995 to October 26, 2026
June 1995
Connecticut enacts law charging inmates for the cost of incarceration
State legislators passed a law directing the Department of Correction to assess a daily cost-of-incarceration fee against people in its custody. Sponsors said the goal was to help offset the state's prison costs and hold people accountable for the cost of their crimes.
[01]They served their time in prison. Then the bills arrived.
Source excerpt
The state has charged as much as $347 per day, meaning anyone who was imprisoned for a year in Connecticut racked up a tab of nearly $127,000. The state can collect on that debt for up to two decades after people are released from prison.
CT Mirror investigation into Connecticut's cost-of-incarceration collection law, published September 27, 2026. Based on a review of hundreds of probate-court cases filed from 2020 to 2026 and interviews with more than a dozen affected people, state officials, legislators and advocates. Anchors this case's account of the practice's scale, mechanics and the on-record positions of DAS, the Attorney General's office and named advocates and affected individuals.
They served their time in prison. Then the bills arrived.Full article, including the sections headed "Additional punishment," "The John Gottis of the world," "Blood from a stone," "Calls for repeal," "Collections continue," "A punch in the heart" and "Priority creditor"
March 2022
ACLU of Connecticut sues over the cost-of-incarceration law
Claim
The ACLU of Connecticut and formerly incarcerated plaintiffs Teresa Beatty and Michael Llorens sued Governor Ned Lamont and Attorney General William Tong in federal court, arguing the law's collection of settlements, inheritances and other windfalls violates the Eighth Amendment's ban on excessive fines.
[02]Beatty v Lamont (case page)
Source excerpt
As of October 2024, the state surrendered to the final plaintiff in this case, withdrawing its demand to collect any of our clients' liens. With the state having abandoned its demands for payment from all plaintiffs, we and our clients claimed victory in Beatty v. Lamont.
ACLU of Connecticut's own case page for Beatty v. Lamont (D. Conn. No. 3:22-cv-00380), the federal class-action lawsuit challenging Connecticut's cost-of-incarceration law under the Eighth Amendment's excessive fines clause. States the filing date, the defendants, the March 2023 ruling, the plaintiffs who joined in April 2023, and the October 2024 outcome, and carries first-person statements from plaintiffs Teresa Beatty and Natasha Tosado.
Beatty v Lamont (case page)Full case page, including the "Summary" section and the profiles of Teresa Beatty, Natasha Tosado and Doug Johnson under "Meet the People Fighting to End Prison Debt"Judiciary Committee approves full-repeal bill
Connecticut's Judiciary Committee voted to advance HB 5390, which proposed repealing incarceration-cost liability. The proposal did not become the full repeal advocates sought.
[03]Connecticut Judiciary Committee report on HB 5390
Connecticut's Judiciary Committee voted to advance HB 5390, which proposed repealing incarceration-cost liability. The proposal did not become the full repeal advocates sought. The committee recorded Jess Zaccagnino urging abolition of prison debt, describing it as unjust and harmful to families. The committee recorded Barbara Fair supporting repeal because incarceration liens add an unjust burden after release. The committee recorded Lisa Foster urging repeal, arguing that incarceration fees are regressive and undermine reentry. The Division of Criminal Justice supported ending incarceration fees to help people return successfully to their communities.
Connecticut Judiciary Committee report on HB 5390Page 1, vote date and action; Page 2, ACLU-CT testimony summary; Page 3, Barbra Fair testimony summary; Page 5, Fines & Fees Justice Center testimony summary; Page 2, response from administration/agency
May 2022
Public Act 22-118 narrows the law's reach
A 2022 amendment took effect exempting the first $50,000 of most formerly incarcerated people's assets from collection and limiting the state's lien on lawsuit proceeds to a list of the most serious offenses.
[04]Reimbursement of Incarceration Costs in Connecticut (OLR Report 2022-R-0149)
Source excerpt
A new law additionally exempts up to $50,000 of an inmate’s other assets except those for inmates incarcerated for capital felony or murder with special circumstances, felony murder, 1st and 2nd degree sexual assault, 1st degree aggravated sexual assault, or aggravated sexual assault of a minor (PA 22-118, §§ 457-458, effective upon passage
Nonpartisan Connecticut General Assembly research report summarizing the state's cost-of-incarceration statutes (CGS SS 18-85a, 18-85b and 18-85c) and the 2022 amendments made by Public Act 22-118, including the $50,000 asset exemption, the narrowed lawsuit-proceeds lien and the 20-year collection windows for lawsuit proceeds, inheritances and estates.
Reimbursement of Incarceration Costs in Connecticut (OLR Report 2022-R-0149)Full report, including the "Property Subject to the State's Claim," "Lawsuit Proceeds" and "Inheritance" sections
March 2023
Federal court allows Beatty's lawsuit to proceed against new defendants
The U.S. District Court for the District of Connecticut ruled that Teresa Beatty could continue her lawsuit against the cost-of-incarceration law, but only after substituting a different set of state defendants.
[02]Beatty v Lamont (case page)
Source excerpt
As of October 2024, the state surrendered to the final plaintiff in this case, withdrawing its demand to collect any of our clients' liens. With the state having abandoned its demands for payment from all plaintiffs, we and our clients claimed victory in Beatty v. Lamont.
ACLU of Connecticut's own case page for Beatty v. Lamont (D. Conn. No. 3:22-cv-00380), the federal class-action lawsuit challenging Connecticut's cost-of-incarceration law under the Eighth Amendment's excessive fines clause. States the filing date, the defendants, the March 2023 ruling, the plaintiffs who joined in April 2023, and the October 2024 outcome, and carries first-person statements from plaintiffs Teresa Beatty and Natasha Tosado.
Beatty v Lamont (case page)Full case page, including the "Summary" section and the profiles of Teresa Beatty, Natasha Tosado and Doug Johnson under "Meet the People Fighting to End Prison Debt"
April 2023
Two more plaintiffs join the federal lawsuit
Natasha Tosado and Doug Johnson joined Beatty v. Lamont as plaintiffs, adding claims that the state sought part of a wrongful-death settlement and inherited family property to satisfy their incarceration debts.
[02]Beatty v Lamont (case page)
Source excerpt
As of October 2024, the state surrendered to the final plaintiff in this case, withdrawing its demand to collect any of our clients' liens. With the state having abandoned its demands for payment from all plaintiffs, we and our clients claimed victory in Beatty v. Lamont.
ACLU of Connecticut's own case page for Beatty v. Lamont (D. Conn. No. 3:22-cv-00380), the federal class-action lawsuit challenging Connecticut's cost-of-incarceration law under the Eighth Amendment's excessive fines clause. States the filing date, the defendants, the March 2023 ruling, the plaintiffs who joined in April 2023, and the October 2024 outcome, and carries first-person statements from plaintiffs Teresa Beatty and Natasha Tosado.
Beatty v Lamont (case page)Full case page, including the "Summary" section and the profiles of Teresa Beatty, Natasha Tosado and Doug Johnson under "Meet the People Fighting to End Prison Debt"
February 2024
Meyer limits the prison-debt lawsuit but allows overcharge claims
Judge Jeffrey Meyer dismisses the broader Excessive Fines Clause challenges. He allows Beatty and Johnson to pursue claims that the state sought more than the statute permitted.
[05]Beatty v. Lamont: February 27, 2024 order on motion to dismiss
The court dismisses broader excessive-fines challenges while allowing two plaintiffs to pursue claims that the state sought more than the statute authorized.
Beatty v. Lamont: February 27, 2024 order on motion to dismissDocket 107, conclusion on pages 32-33
May 2024
Connecticut approves Public Act 24-81, ending debt claims tied to erased records
Connecticut approves Public Act 24-81. Effective July 1, 2024, Section 31 ends state incarceration-cost claims for time served on criminal records that were later erased. It does not refund payments made before that date.
[06]Connecticut Public Act 24-81: incarceration-debt provisions
The act addresses claims tied to erased records, inheritance exemptions and estate claims. The cited sections state a July 1, 2024 effective date.
Connecticut Public Act 24-81: incarceration-debt provisionsSections 31-33, pages 63-65; approval date on page 351
July 2024
Public Act 24-81 incarceration-debt sections take effect
Sections 31-33 take effect. Section 31 ends claims for time served on later-erased records; Sections 32 and 33 replace the inheritance-lien and estate-claim provisions.
[06]Connecticut Public Act 24-81: incarceration-debt provisions
The act addresses claims tied to erased records, inheritance exemptions and estate claims. The cited sections state a July 1, 2024 effective date.
Connecticut Public Act 24-81: incarceration-debt provisionsSections 31-33, pages 63-65; approval date on page 351
October 2024
State withdraws its claims against the Beatty v. Lamont plaintiffs
Reaction
By October 2024, the state had withdrawn its demand to collect incarceration debt from all four plaintiffs in the federal lawsuit, and the ACLU of Connecticut said the case ended in a win for its clients.
[02]Beatty v Lamont (case page)
Source excerpt
As of October 2024, the state surrendered to the final plaintiff in this case, withdrawing its demand to collect any of our clients' liens. With the state having abandoned its demands for payment from all plaintiffs, we and our clients claimed victory in Beatty v. Lamont.
ACLU of Connecticut's own case page for Beatty v. Lamont (D. Conn. No. 3:22-cv-00380), the federal class-action lawsuit challenging Connecticut's cost-of-incarceration law under the Eighth Amendment's excessive fines clause. States the filing date, the defendants, the March 2023 ruling, the plaintiffs who joined in April 2023, and the October 2024 outcome, and carries first-person statements from plaintiffs Teresa Beatty and Natasha Tosado.
Beatty v Lamont (case page)Full case page, including the "Summary" section and the profiles of Teresa Beatty, Natasha Tosado and Doug Johnson under "Meet the People Fighting to End Prison Debt"
September 2026
Connecticut Mirror publishes investigation into the cost-of-incarceration law
Source release
An investigation found Connecticut has charged as much as $347 a day for incarceration, collected about $21 million from formerly incarcerated people from 2020 to mid-2026, and continued to pursue the debt from legal settlements despite two rounds of legislative changes.
[01]They served their time in prison. Then the bills arrived.
Source excerpt
The state has charged as much as $347 per day, meaning anyone who was imprisoned for a year in Connecticut racked up a tab of nearly $127,000. The state can collect on that debt for up to two decades after people are released from prison.
CT Mirror investigation into Connecticut's cost-of-incarceration collection law, published September 27, 2026. Based on a review of hundreds of probate-court cases filed from 2020 to 2026 and interviews with more than a dozen affected people, state officials, legislators and advocates. Anchors this case's account of the practice's scale, mechanics and the on-record positions of DAS, the Attorney General's office and named advocates and affected individuals.
They served their time in prison. Then the bills arrived.Full article, including the sections headed "Additional punishment," "The John Gottis of the world," "Blood from a stone," "Calls for repeal," "Collections continue," "A punch in the heart" and "Priority creditor"Monk discusses the prison-debt investigation on Long Story Short
Source release
In Long Story Short, Ebong Udoma interviews Ginny Monk about how the reporting began, what Connecticut collects and the financial effects on families.
[07]PODCAST: CT charges its prisoners and the financial impact can be life changing
The interview discusses the investigation's origins, collections, financial effects and earlier legislative efforts.
PODCAST: CT charges its prisoners and the financial impact can be life changingFull published interview transcript with Ginny Monk and Ebong UdomaLamont and legislative leaders seek prison-debt changes in 2027
Reaction
After CT Mirror's investigation, Lamont and leaders from both parties called for reconsidering the law in the 2027 session. Lamont also said officials were exploring administrative relief. They had not agreed on repeal.
[08]Lamont, lawmakers call for changes to CT prison debt law
CT Mirror reports Lamont's September 30 remarks supporting changes in 2027, while retaining possible charges for wealthy former inmates. The leaders had not settled on repeal.
Lamont, lawmakers call for changes to CT prison debt lawOpening account of Wednesday's remarks; paragraphs beginning 'Lamont said state officials' and 'Maybe if'; subsequent legislative-leader responses.
October 2026
CT Mirror publishes a guide to prison-debt collection
Source release
Monk explains how the state calculates incarceration costs, places inheritance liens and collects payments. The guide also describes the changes lawmakers are considering for 2027.
[09]What to know about CT Mirror's investigation into prison debt
Ginny Monk explains how the state assesses and collects the debt, the limits in state law and the changes lawmakers are considering.
What to know about CT Mirror's investigation into prison debtExplanatory sections on calculation, collection and proposed changes
Claims
Claims separate what was said from what is contested. Follow each source for the original wording and context.
What's disputed
Disputed claim
ACLU of Connecticut
Connecticut's prison-debt law, under which the state can seize up to half of a settlement, inheritance or other financial windfall for up to 20 years after release, violates the Eighth Amendment's ban on excessive fines.
Sources (1)
- Beatty v Lamont (case page)Full case page, including the "Summary" section and the profiles of Teresa Beatty, Natasha Tosado and Doug Johnson under "Meet the People Fighting to End Prison Debt"
Disputed claim
Under the law as revised in 2022, about 98 percent of Connecticut inmates no longer have to pay any of the costs of their incarceration after they get out.
Sources (1)
Disputed claim
The Attorney General's office is required to assist the Department of Administrative Services in collecting prison debts if the statutory criteria and facts of each case warrant it.
Sources (1)
- They served their time in prison. Then the bills arrived.Full article, including the sections headed "Additional punishment," "The John Gottis of the world," "Blood from a stone," "Calls for repeal," "Collections continue," "A punch in the heart" and "Priority creditor"
Response record
Responses
Choose one response filter, or select All responses to see the full record.
1 matching response. Newest first.
Ned LamontGovernor of ConnecticutDirectly involvedBefore this statement
He said officials were exploring administrative relief and he would support legislative changes in 2027.
"Maybe if it's Gordon Gekko or some Wall Street titan, yeah, I think they should contribute to the cost of their incarceration. But I think for the other 90% of people, I want to make sure when they've served their time, they get back out, they're not stuck with an incredible burden that is impossible for them to pay off"
Mixed or conditionalCase context: Should Connecticut collect per diem incarceration fees from former inmates' settlements and windfalls?
Full statement and sources
Lamont supported changing the law to protect people unable to repay prison debt, while saying wealthy former inmates should contribute to incarceration costs.
After the statement
Legislative leaders had not agreed whether to repeal the law or change its exemptions.
Lamont, lawmakers call for changes to CT prison debt lawOpening account of Wednesday's remarks; paragraphs beginning 'Lamont said state officials' and 'Maybe if'; subsequent legislative-leader responses.Why this label?
He rejects unaffordable charges but retains a possible exception for people with substantial means.
This label describes the statement's response within the context above.
Sources
(17)
Reporting
They served their time in prison. Then the bills arrived.
Relevant passage: Full article, including the sections headed "Additional punishment," "The John Gottis of the world," "Blood from a stone," "Calls for repeal," "Collections continue," "A punch in the heart" and "Priority creditor"
Excerpt
"The state has charged as much as $347 per day, meaning anyone who was imprisoned for a year in Connecticut racked up a tab of nearly $127,000. The state can collect on that debt for up to two decades after people are released from prison."
About this source
CT Mirror investigation into Connecticut's cost-of-incarceration collection law, published September 27, 2026. Based on a review of hundreds of probate-court cases filed from 2020 to 2026 and interviews with more than a dozen affected people, state officials, legislators and advocates. Anchors this case's account of the practice's scale, mechanics and the on-record positions of DAS, the Attorney General's office and named advocates and affected individuals.
- Author
- Ginny Monk and Andrew Brown
- Published
- Accessed
Reporting
CT seeks to claim money from Mimi Torres-García's father
Relevant passage: Barrett response to the state claim and explanation of incarceration-debt collection
About this source
CT Mirror reports the state claim against a potential settlement and interviews Dan Barrett about incarceration-debt collection.
- Author
- Ginny Monk and Laura Tillman
- Published
- Accessed
Reporting
What to know about CT Mirror's investigation into prison debt
Relevant passage: Explanatory sections on calculation, collection and proposed changes
About this source
Ginny Monk explains how the state assesses and collects the debt, the limits in state law and the changes lawmakers are considering.
- Author
- Ginny Monk
- Published
- Accessed
Interview
PODCAST: CT charges its prisoners and the financial impact can be life changing
Relevant passage: Full published interview transcript with Ginny Monk and Ebong Udoma
About this source
The interview discusses the investigation's origins, collections, financial effects and earlier legislative efforts.
- Author
- CT Mirror's Long Story Short
- Published
- Accessed
Original text
Connecticut Public Act 24-81: incarceration-debt provisions
Relevant passage: Sections 31-33, pages 63-65; approval date on page 351
About this source
The act addresses claims tied to erased records, inheritance exemptions and estate claims. The cited sections state a July 1, 2024 effective date.
- Author
- Connecticut General Assembly
- Published
- Accessed
Original text
Beatty v. Lamont: February 27, 2024 order on motion to dismiss
Relevant passage: Docket 107, conclusion on pages 32-33
About this source
The court dismisses broader excessive-fines challenges while allowing two plaintiffs to pursue claims that the state sought more than the statute authorized.
- Author
- U.S. District Court for the District of Connecticut
- Published
- Accessed
Reporting
Lamont, lawmakers call for changes to CT prison debt law
Relevant passage: Opening account of Wednesday's remarks; paragraphs beginning 'Lamont said state officials' and 'Maybe if'; subsequent legislative-leader responses.
About this source
CT Mirror reports Lamont's September 30 remarks supporting changes in 2027, while retaining possible charges for wealthy former inmates. The leaders had not settled on repeal.
- Author
- Ginny Monk
- Published
- Accessed
Original text
Benedict Daigle's testimony supporting HB 5390
Relevant passage: Page 1, testimony dated March 25, 2022
About this source
Benedict Daigle urged repeal on behalf of the Office of Chief Public Defender, arguing that prison debt undermines rehabilitation and takes compensation intended to help people recover from harm.
- Author
- Office of Chief Public Defender
- Accessed
Original text
End prison debt, for me and my family
Relevant passage: Published full testimony, opening policy argument
About this source
Brian Sullivan urged repeal of prison debt, arguing that people who complete their sentences should not face additional financial punishment.
- Author
- Brian K. Sullivan Sr.
- Published
- Accessed
Original text
Connecticut Judiciary Committee report on HB 5390
Relevant passage: Page 1, vote date and action; Page 2, ACLU-CT testimony summary; Page 3, Barbra Fair testimony summary; Page 5, Fines & Fees Justice Center testimony summary; Page 2, response from administration/agency
About this source
Connecticut's Judiciary Committee voted to advance HB 5390, which proposed repealing incarceration-cost liability. The proposal did not become the full repeal advocates sought. The committee recorded Jess Zaccagnino urging abolition of prison debt, describing it as unjust and harmful to families. The committee recorded Barbara Fair supporting repeal because incarceration liens add an unjust burden after release. The committee recorded Lisa Foster urging repeal, arguing that incarceration fees are regressive and undermine reentry. The Division of Criminal Justice supported ending incarceration fees to help people return successfully to their communities.
- Author
- Connecticut General Assembly
- Accessed
Original text
Connecticut state defendants' memorandum supporting dismissal, June 17, 2022
Relevant passage: Pages 1-2, introduction to June 17 motion
About this source
The state defendants defended incarceration-cost recovery in court, arguing that it compensates the government rather than imposes an excessive fine. They also sought dismissal on standing and jurisdictional grounds.
- Author
- Office of the Connecticut Attorney General
- Accessed
Interview
Liman Center and Coalition Lessen Harm of Connecticut's Incarceration Lien Law
Relevant passage: May 26 interview, final Carroll quotation
About this source
Jenny Carroll welcomed the 2022 limits on incarceration liens but said the coalition remained committed to full repeal.
- Author
- Yale Law School
- Published
- Accessed
Original text
Arthur Liman Center testimony supporting HB 5390
Relevant passage: Page 1, testimony for March 25, 2022 hearing
About this source
The Arthur Liman Center urged repeal of the incarceration lien, citing burdens on families, obstacles to reentry and constitutional concerns. The heading gives an inconsistent year; the text identifies the March 25, 2022 hearing.
- Author
- Arthur Liman Center for Public Interest Law
- Accessed
Original text
UConn testimony supporting HB 5390
Relevant passage: Pages 1-2, joint testimony; Pages 3-6, separate joint testimony
About this source
Kiel Brennan-Marquez and Riley Breakell jointly urged repeal of Connecticut's incarceration lien, arguing that it undermines civil-rights remedies and imposes excessive, poorly disclosed punishment. Mumina Egal and Anna VanCleave jointly urged repeal, arguing that prison debt obstructs reentry and that taking inheritances and settlements harms families without a sound fiscal rationale.
- Author
- Kiel Brennan-Marquez, Riley Breakell, Mumina Egal and Anna VanCleave
- Accessed
Official statement
Beatty v Lamont (case page)
Relevant passage: Full case page, including the "Summary" section and the profiles of Teresa Beatty, Natasha Tosado and Doug Johnson under "Meet the People Fighting to End Prison Debt"
Excerpt
"As of October 2024, the state surrendered to the final plaintiff in this case, withdrawing its demand to collect any of our clients' liens. With the state having abandoned its demands for payment from all plaintiffs, we and our clients claimed victory in Beatty v. Lamont."
About this source
ACLU of Connecticut's own case page for Beatty v. Lamont (D. Conn. No. 3:22-cv-00380), the federal class-action lawsuit challenging Connecticut's cost-of-incarceration law under the Eighth Amendment's excessive fines clause. States the filing date, the defendants, the March 2023 ruling, the plaintiffs who joined in April 2023, and the October 2024 outcome, and carries first-person statements from plaintiffs Teresa Beatty and Natasha Tosado.
- Author
- ACLU of Connecticut
- Published
- Accessed
Reporting
At $249 Per Day, Prison Stays Leave Ex-Inmates Deep in Debt
Relevant passage: Full article
Excerpt
"Under the revised law, about 98% of Connecticut inmates no longer have to pay any of the costs of their incarceration after they get out, said state Rep. Steve Stafstrom, a Bridgeport Democrat and a sponsor of the repeal legislation."
About this source
Associated Press wire story republished by NBC Connecticut, reported around the time Connecticut's 2022 partial overhaul of the cost-of-incarceration law took effect. Quotes Sen. John Kissel defending the underlying policy, Rep. Steve Stafstrom describing the reform's effect, and affected individuals including Teresa Beatty, Fred Hodges and Da'ee McKnight.
- Author
- The Associated Press
- Published
- Accessed
Analysis
Reimbursement of Incarceration Costs in Connecticut (OLR Report 2022-R-0149)
Relevant passage: Full report, including the "Property Subject to the State's Claim," "Lawsuit Proceeds" and "Inheritance" sections
Excerpt
"A new law additionally exempts up to $50,000 of an inmate’s other assets except those for inmates incarcerated for capital felony or murder with special circumstances, felony murder, 1st and 2nd degree sexual assault, 1st degree aggravated sexual assault, or aggravated sexual assault of a minor (PA 22-118, §§ 457-458, effective upon passage"
About this source
Nonpartisan Connecticut General Assembly research report summarizing the state's cost-of-incarceration statutes (CGS SS 18-85a, 18-85b and 18-85c) and the 2022 amendments made by Public Act 22-118, including the $50,000 asset exemption, the narrowed lawsuit-proceeds lien and the 20-year collection windows for lawsuit proceeds, inheritances and estates.
- Author
- Michelle Kirby, Office of Legislative Research
- Published
- Accessed
Share or embed this case
The embed keeps its attribution link to The Dispute Index. Credit the image to The Dispute Index and link to the case page.
Cite this record
- Publisher
- The Dispute Index
- Title
- Should Connecticut collect per diem incarceration fees from former inmates' settlements and windfalls?
- First published
- Last updated
- Permalink
- https://disputeindex.com/cases/should-connecticut-collect-per-diem-incarceration-fees-from-former-inmates-settlements-and-windfalls
The Dispute Index. "Should Connecticut collect per diem incarceration fees from former inmates' settlements and windfalls?". First published: 2026-09-29. Last updated: 2026-09-29. https://disputeindex.com/cases/should-connecticut-collect-per-diem-incarceration-fees-from-former-inmates-settlements-and-windfalls