The New Era of Supermax Confinement: A Review of States’ Extended Restrictive Housing Policies

Supermax housing—long-term segregation of individuals in prison deemed too dangerous to be safely managed any other way—arose as a common practice in the United States and became a point of substantial debate in recent decades based on different views of whether the housing is needed or humane and its potential benefits or harms. This term is not consistently used, however, and now is typically characterized as a form of restrictive housing. The change in terminology and the variety of other types of restrictive housing units (e.g., disciplinary segregation, protective custody) obscure the nature and use of this extreme form of confinement. This study advances knowledge about contemporary state-level policies for supermax housing (i.e., lengthy periods of segregation for individuals who prison systems may view as unmanageable) and stated adherence to standards endorsed by correctional accreditors, by describing, for each state as of 2025, the terminology used and the policies in place for this type of confinement. It finds that most states now use the term “extended restrictive housing” to describe supermax incarceration, detailed policy descriptions are minimal, and many states’ policies do not adhere to the standards recommended by the American Correctional Association, the leading accreditor of prison systems. Implications of the findings for research and policy are discussed.