Body
A federal bench trial began Monday in Austin over whether the Texas Department of Criminal Justice failed to provide adequate air conditioning in prisons, with plaintiffs arguing that heat contributed to inmate deaths. The trial, expected to last about two weeks, is being heard by U.S. District Judge Robert Pitman rather than a jury.
The dispute grew out of a March 2025 ruling by Pitman, who said housing Texas prison inmates in sweltering facilities without air conditioning is “plainly unconstitutional,” according to court proceedings described in the federal case. In that decision, the judge declined at the time to order the immediate installation of temporary or permanent air conditioning, noting the state’s estimates that the upgrades could cost more than $1 billion, and pushed the case toward trial.
Plaintiffs’ attorneys, including Kevin Homiak of the plaintiffs’ legal team, opened the case by saying “TDCJ still refuses to treat this as an emergency,” and by describing a timeline of alleged heat-related deaths. Plaintiffs’ attorneys told the court that there were allegedly five such deaths over the last two summers, spanning July and August 2024 and again in July and August 2025, according to their presentation at the start of the trial.
Plaintiffs’ experts told the court they saw evidence of extreme heat around the time of the deaths, including heat indexes that rose well into the triple digits. Paul Uribe, a forensic pathologist testifying for the plaintiffs, said, “Anytime you have an elevated core body temperature and … elevated environmental temperatures, heat should be considered,” according to the Monday proceedings.
The trial also featured a narrower dispute over medical evidence. The plaintiffs argued that some alleged heat-related deaths did not have recorded body temperature data, and they told the court that the absence left gaps in how officials could determine the cause of death. Susi Vassallo, a medical toxicology specialist who testified for the plaintiffs, asked, “How can you have a medical examiner give you the right opinion (about) the cause of death when that medical examiner doesn’t know the body temperature?”
Texas Department of Criminal Justice defended its approach by disputing that heat was necessarily the cause in each alleged death. Wade Johnson, an attorney defending the department, said the agency is ramping up audits, mitigation efforts and the addition of cool beds, and he argued that the plaintiffs’ claim of deliberate indifference requires a showing that is an “extremely high standard to meet,” according to the trial opening.
Beyond the five deaths the plaintiffs highlighted, court documents discussed during the proceedings indicate that at least 23 people died from heat-related causes in TDCJ prisons between 1998 and 2012, according to plaintiffs’ account of the record. The case also encompasses reports of additional heat-related illnesses among inmates and staff.
Costs have emerged as a major point in the litigation. Court documents referenced in the proceedings say TDCJ estimates that installing permanent air conditioning in every unit would cost more than $1.1 billion, with annual operating costs close to $20 million, and former TDCJ Executive Director Bryan Collier has previously said he wanted air conditioning in every prison but did not have the funds to do so.
Plaintiffs argued that the agency could press harder for funding, and Jeff Edwards, an attorney for the plaintiffs, told the Texas Tribune, “It’s a lot and it’s expensive, but all it takes is money.” Edwards’ remarks were presented alongside the plaintiffs’ view that the state Legislature has repeatedly failed to pass legislation requiring air conditioning in all Texas prisons, while lawmakers have provided only part of the cost estimate—such as $118 million in 2025 for air-conditioning installation aimed at adding 18,000 cool beds.
As of March 25, TDCJ reported that there were 52,438 cool beds available, and Johnson told the court that the department expects to have 70,000 such beds ready by the end of summer 2027. The trial will test what each side says officials knew and did—along with how prosecutors and experts should interpret the alleged heat-related deaths under the standards at issue in the case.