What is the applicable standard for conditions of confinement claims brought by detainees who have not been convicted of a crime?

The applicable standard for conditions of confinement claims brought by detainees who have not been convicted of a crime is not the more restrictive deliberate indifference standard for cruel and unusual punishment under the Eighth Amendment, but rather, the "more protective" Fourteenth Amendment standard. Jones v. Blanas, 393 F.3d 918, 931 (9th Cir. 2004); id. at 933 (a civil detainee "retains greater liberty protections than his criminal counterpart.") (citing Youngberg v. Romeo, 457 U.S. 307, 321 (1982)).

Under this standard, "the nature and duration of commitment must bear some reasonable relation to the purpose for which the individual is committed." Id.; see also Seling v. Young, 531 U.S. 250 (2001) ("due process requires that the conditions and duration of confinement . . . bear some reasonable relation to the purposes for which persons are committed.").

"At a bare minimum" a civil detainee awaiting civil commitment proceedings "cannot be subjected to conditions that 'amount to punishment.'" Jones, 393 F.3d at 932 (quoting Bell v. Wolfish, 441 U.S. 520, 536 (1979)). Where a restriction is excessive in relation to its non-punitive purpose, or is intended to punish, it is "punitive." Id. at 933-34. Conditions are presumptively punitive if "the individual is detained under conditions identical to, similar to, or more restrictive than those under which pretrial criminal detainees are held, or where the individual is detained under conditions more restrictive than those he or she would face upon commitment." Id. at 934.