McKune v. Lile

McKune v. Lile (2002) 536 U.S. 24, was a fractured decision, with the plurality and Justice O'Connor agreeing that the alteration in the inmate's prison conditions did not amount to compulsion under the Fifth Amendment. (McKune, supra, 536 U.S. at p. 29 plurality; id. at pp. 48-49 O'Connor, J..) Although "not all pressure necessarily 'compels' incriminating statements" (id. at p. 49), Justice O'Connor recognized that a penalty involving longer incarceration would not be constitutionally permissible. (Id. at p. 52.) The treatment program in McKune required participants to divulge all prior sexual activities regardless of whether they constituted uncharged criminal offenses. (Id. at p. 30.) Refusal to participate in the program would result in transfer to a maximum security housing unit and reduced privileges such as visitation, work opportunities, and television access. Inmate Lile refused and asserted the privilege against self-incrimination. (Id. at pp. 30-31.)