Everyday thousands of humans and millions of nonhumans endure solitary confinement. Human prisoners held in this way are confined for 22 to 24 hours a day for weeks, months, or even years on end in cells the size of a parking space. For these humans, the experience is tortuous. Captive animals held in solitary confinement similarly spend much of their lives locked into tiny spaces, isolated, and deprived of the types of interactions and environment essential to their wellbeing. And, like humans, they are driven mad. In human and nonhuman settings, the agony of solitary is chillingly alike and harmful. And, in neither setting is it justifiable or necessary.
In their article, Powerless Beings: Solitary Confinement of Humans and Non Humans in America, published in Nebraska Law Review, Haub Law Professors Michael Mushlin and David Cassuto use a comparative format to examine the moral, penological and scientific shortcomings of solitary confinement across species. The article sheds light on the importance of empowering all creatures subjected to solitary confinement. “If we adequately protect all vulnerable beings, the unnecessary suffering inflicted by solitary confinement will finally end,” they write.
Daniel Khieninson ’26 has distinguished himself as an exceptional student leader during his time at the Elisabeth Haub School of Law at Pace University, earning recognition for his exemplary academic achievement and his commitment to the Law School community. In recognition of his accomplishments, Dan will deliver the student address at the 2026 Commencement.
In coverage by CBS News, Perry Carbone, a professor at the Elisabeth Haub School of Law at Pace University, weighed in on the legal implications of charges against former FBI Director James Comey. Carbone warned that prosecuting ambiguous expression as a threat could have serious consequences for free speech, emphasizing that expanding criminal liability in such cases may put First Amendment protections at risk. His comments come as legal experts broadly question whether the case meets the high bar required to qualify as a “true threat” under constitutional law.
Haub Law Professor Bennett Gershman is featured in Injustice Watch. Professor Gershman raises concerns about efforts to tighten standards for certificates of innocence in wrongful-conviction cases, warning that requiring “irrefutable” proof would set an unrealistically high bar for exonerated individuals seeking relief.