Has the Fifth Circuit violated the dictates of Monell and its progeny by exposing Young County to liability based on a theory of respondeat superior?

QUESTIONS PRESENTED FOR REVIEW In Monell v. Dep’t of Soc. Servs. and subsequent precedent, the Court articulated stringent requirements for imposing liability on municipalities under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. Municipal liability cannot be based on a_ respondeat superior theory. When evaluating the constitutionality of prison conditions, the Court held in Bell v. Wolfish that liability can only be imposed if the condition amounts to punishment of the pretrial detainee. The Court also warned that the judicial branch cannot become enmeshed in the minutiae of operating jails or prisons which should be left to local officials who are better equipped to run their facilities. In reversing Petitioner’s summary judgment in this case challenging certain alleged “conditions of confinement” at the Young County Jail, the Fifth Circuit discarded Supreme Court principles and imposed extraordinary burdens on local jails to detect when detainees, who have denied being suicidal, are in fact suicidal and prevent them from killing themselves. Indeed, the Fifth Circuit has become an outlier in analyzing the constitutionality of prison conditions with an approach that conflicts with at least the First, Third, Sixth, Tenth and Eleventh Circuits. 1. Has the Fifth Circuit violated the dictates of Monell and its progeny by exposing Young County to liability based on a theory of respondeat superior? 2. Has the Fifth Circuit undertaken the seriously ii destructive micro-management of county jails by ignoring legitimate, non-punitive procedures in violation of Bell v. Wolfish?