The Constitutional Fix
Blueprint Series: Ending the 13th Amendment's Exception Clause (Part 1)
Part 0 ・Part 1 ・Part 2 ・Part 3 ・Part 4
This series analyzes the 13th Amendment’s punishment clause through a structural and constitutional lens. It is independent work aimed at clarifying design flaws and possible reforms, not representing lived experience or prior scholarship.
The 13th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution has an exception. And those words preserved a constitutional pathway for slavery. They relocated it into the criminal punishment system.
Most Americans can’t quote the full text. They know it abolished slavery—that’s the story we tell. But the actual words say something else—slavery is abolished except as punishment for crime. That exception—those words tucked into Section 1—has shaped 160 years of American criminal justice. It’s time to remove them.
But removing them isn’t enough. Constitutional language has to be precise. Ambiguity creates loopholes, and loopholes get exploited. So we don’t just delete the exception clause. We add explicit protections that close every door to forced labor, establish clear standards for voluntary work, and give Congress the power to enforce those protections with teeth.
The Text That Failed Us
What the Constitution says right now:
Section 1. Neither slavery nor involuntary servitude, except as a punishment for crime whereof the party shall have been duly convicted, shall exist within the United States, or any place subject to their jurisdiction.
Section 2. Congress shall have power to enforce this article by appropriate legislation.
“Except as a punishment for crime.”
That’s not abolition. That’s relocation. Slavery didn’t end in 1865—it moved into the criminal justice system with constitutional permission. And what followed was predictable: convict leasing, chain gangs, and a modern prison system where hundreds of thousands of people work for pennies or nothing, with no right to refuse, under threat of solitary confinement or extended sentences.
The exception clause made all of it legal. It still does.
As of 2024, at least seven states have recognized this problem and fixed it at the state level: Colorado (2018), Nebraska (2020), Utah (2020), Oregon (2022), Vermont (2022), Tennessee (2022), and Nevada (2024). (Alabama’s 2022 constitutional revision is contested—some analyses conclude that operative language still permits involuntary servitude for criminal punishment.) Red states, blue states, purple states—they all looked at their constitutions and said, “We’re not doing this anymore.”
Now it’s time to do it federally. And when we do, we need to do it right.
What the Amendment Should Say
Here’s the revised text:
Section 1. Neither slavery nor involuntary servitude shall exist within the United States, or any place subject to their jurisdiction.
Section 2. No labor performed for the economic benefit of the state, its political subdivisions, or any private entity shall be compelled as a condition of confinement. All such labor must be voluntary, compensated at no less than the federal minimum wage, and conducted under conditions that respect human dignity and comply with all applicable labor, safety, and anti-discrimination protections.
Section 3. Congress shall have power to enforce this article by appropriate legislation.
Three changes. First, remove the exception—no “except as punishment for crime.” Just abolition, period. Second, add a new section that defines what “no forced labor” actually means in practice. Third, preserve Congress’s enforcement power (that becomes Section 3 instead of Section 2).
You might be wondering why we need Section 2 at all. Why not just remove the exception and call it done?
Because constitutional law doesn’t work that way. Courts interpret text. Opponents challenge interpretations. And when you leave questions open, bad-faith actors will find ways to exploit the ambiguity. We’ve seen this before—”separate but equal” stood for 58 years because the 14th Amendment didn’t explicitly prohibit segregation. We can’t make that mistake again.
Section 2 answers the questions before they’re asked.
What “Economic Benefit” Means—And Why It Matters
The key phrase in Section 2 is “labor performed for the economic benefit of the state, its political subdivisions, or any private entity.”
This targets exploitation specifically. It distinguishes between forcing someone to manufacture goods for sale or provide services that would otherwise require paid employees—work that generates economic value—and basic self-maintenance within a shared living environment.
Nobody is arguing that incarcerated people can’t clean their own cells, make their own beds, or maintain basic sanitation in common areas. That’s not economic exploitation. That’s living in community. But manufacturing license plates for the state, sewing garments for private companies, fighting wildfires for counties—that’s labor generating economic value. And if it’s compelled, it’s slavery.
Section 2 makes that distinction explicit. It says: if you’re asking someone to work for your economic benefit, that work must be voluntary, fairly compensated, and conducted under the same protections that apply to every other worker in America.
What about required self-maintenance? The phrase “labor performed for the economic benefit” is drawn from established legal concepts in contract, tax, and labor law. It excludes narrowly-tailored self-maintenance duties essential to institutional safety and hygiene—keeping one’s own cell clean, participating in communal sanitation, basic facility upkeep that doesn’t generate revenue or replace paid staff. The amendment targets exploitation, not reasonable expectations of maintaining shared living spaces.
What Changes Immediately
Constitutional amendments can take effect immediately upon ratification—no legislation required. Legal scholars call this “self-executing.” The revised 13th Amendment is written to be self-executing in all its core prohibitions and protections.
The day this amendment is ratified, five things become constitutional law:
First, all forced prison labor becomes unconstitutional. Not bad policy. Not something Congress should address. Unconstitutional. The moment 38 states ratify this amendment, no facility anywhere in the United States can compel anyone to work. The prohibition is absolute, immediate and written directly into the Constitution, which means the core prohibitions are self-executing on day one, while Congress is tasked with building enforcement machinery.
Second, prisoners gain a constitutional right to refuse work. Facilities can offer jobs. They can provide job training, vocational programs, work opportunities. People can choose to participate or not. But refusal cannot be punished. No loss of “good time” credit. No solitary confinement or retaliation. The right to say no is constitutionally protected.
Third, any compensation below federal minimum wage violates the amendment. If someone chooses to work, they get paid what any other worker gets paid—at minimum, the federal minimum wage. States can set higher wages. But the constitutional floor is clear: minimum wage, period. Paying $0.12 per hour becomes a constitutional violation.
Fourth, labor protections become constitutionally required. OSHA safety standards apply, workers’ compensation for injuries is included. Anti-discrimination protections are required. All the safeguards that protect workers everywhere now apply to incarcerated workers too.
Fifth, self-maintenance remains permissible. The amendment explicitly targets “labor performed for economic benefit,” which means basic self-care isn’t prohibited. People can still maintain their own living spaces, participate in communal upkeep, handle their own needs. Courts will still police the boundary; facilities cannot launder forced labor through ‘maintenance’ language when it is in fact revenue-generating or staff-replacing.
What Congress Must Build
But constitutional rights without enforcement mechanisms are just words on paper. The amendment creates the floor. Congress has to build the infrastructure to protect it.
Section 3 gives Congress the same enforcement authority it has under the 14th and 15th Amendments—the power to pass “appropriate legislation” to make constitutional mandates real. Courts have upheld this authority for over a century, as long as the legislation is “congruent and proportional” to the constitutional violation it addresses.
Forcing people to work for pennies under threat of punishment is a clear constitutional violation. Creating oversight bodies to monitor compliance, establishing penalties for violations, requiring corporate transparency, and funding enforcement infrastructure is congruent and proportional. This isn’t novel constitutional theory. This is established doctrine applied to a newly ratified amendment.
So what does Congress need to build?
Enforcement mechanisms. An independent federal oversight body—call it the Bureau of Correctional Labor Standards and Human Dignity—with authority to inspect facilities, investigate complaints, issue violations, levy fines, and shut down non-compliant operations. Transparency through public databases tracking facility compliance. Whistleblower protections for people reporting violations.
Penalties that matter. Criminal penalties for facility administrators who compel labor. Civil penalties for systematic violations—significant enough to deter, proportional enough to survive Excessive Fines Clause challenges. Private right of action so individuals can sue facilities directly for constitutional violations.
Transition protocols. Facilities currently running forced labor programs need clear guidance on how to phase them out, what timeline they’re working with, what support is available. Change is hard. Implementation takes planning. Congress needs to provide the roadmap.
Corporate accountability. Reporting requirements for companies using prison labor. Supply chain transparency. Standards that make it clear what’s permissible (voluntary work at minimum wage with full protections) and what’s not (coerced labor at exploitative wages).
Funding. Enforcement costs money. Oversight bodies need staff, training, resources. Congress has to appropriate the funds to make this real.
This is the machinery that turns constitutional text into lived reality. The amendment is the foundation. Legislation is the structure built on top.
What Happens in Practice
Let’s walk through what this actually means in real situations people face right now.
Scenario: Private company contracts with a state prison to use incarcerated workers for manufacturing.
Under current law with the exception clause, the company pays workers $0.25 per hour. Workers who refuse are placed in solitary confinement. This is constitutional because the exception clause permits forced labor as punishment for crime.
After this amendment, the same situation becomes a constitutional violation. The work must be voluntary—no punishment for refusal. The compensation must meet minimum wage. The conditions must comply with labor protections. If the facility or company violates any of these requirements, they face penalties under enforcement legislation passed by Congress.
Scenario: State assigns prisoners to road crews with no compensation.
After this amendment, the work must be voluntary and compensated at minimum wage. Punishing someone for refusing work violates their constitutional right. The state faces enforcement action.
Scenario: Prisoner maintains their own cell and participates in communal cleaning.
After this amendment, it remains permissible. Section 2 explicitly distinguishes “labor performed for economic benefit” from self-care within communal living. The amendment doesn’t prohibit people from maintaining their own spaces. It prohibits exploitation.
Scenario: Facility offers voluntary vocational training program where participants learn a trade, receive minimum wage, and can leave the program anytime.
After this amendment, it’s not just permissible—it’s constitutionally protected as the model for how prison labor should work. Voluntary participation, fair compensation, skill development, dignity respected. This is what the amendment requires.
Why Precision Matters
Every word in this amendment is deliberate.
“Neither slavery nor involuntary servitude shall exist”—no exceptions, no conditions, no loopholes. This is the promise the 13th Amendment should have made in 1865.
“No labor performed for the economic benefit”—targets exploitation specifically, distinguishes from self-maintenance, gives courts a clear standard rooted in established legal concepts.
“Compelled as a condition of confinement”—makes clear this is about coercion, not voluntary participation. If someone chooses to work, that’s their right. If they’re forced, that’s slavery.
“Voluntary, compensated at no less than the federal minimum wage”—sets the floor. States can go higher. But exploitation below that floor is constitutionally prohibited.
“Respect human dignity and comply with all applicable labor, safety, and anti-discrimination protections”—incorporates existing worker protections, ensures incarcerated workers have the same rights as all workers, makes dignity a constitutional requirement not a policy aspiration.
“Congress shall have power to enforce”—gives explicit authority for oversight, penalties, compliance mechanisms. Constitutional rights need enforcement infrastructure.
The Foundation to Build
This amendment doesn’t solve everything. Amendments rarely do.
Removing the exception clause ends the constitutional permission for slavery, but the incentive structures that feed mass incarceration remain. The pipeline that criminalizes poverty, eliminates alternatives, and funnels people into detention doesn’t disappear because we change the Constitution. That requires structural reform.
Part 2 shows you those reforms—how we dismantle the pipeline, end criminalization of survival, eliminate for-profit detention, and build rehabilitation systems instead of punishment extraction. Part 3 walks through implementation—how amendments actually get passed, what the timeline looks like, what legislation must follow.
But everything else builds on this foundation: a constitutional amendment that completes the abolition the 13th Amendment started.
The work isn’t small. The timeline isn’t short. But the path is clear, and as of 2024, seven states have already shown it’s possible.
This Blueprint is my attempt, as a designer and researcher, to make the legal mechanics and stakes of the 13th Amendment’s exception clause clearer for readers who may never wade through case law, reports, or organizing toolkits. It draws on the public sources cited in the Technical Appendix and should be read alongside, not instead of, the work of directly impacted people, Black abolitionist organizers, and legal advocates. Any gaps, misframings, or omissions are mine, and I’m committed to correcting them.
This is Part 1 of the Blueprint series:
Closing the 13th Amendment’s Exception Clause.
Sources & Documentation
For comprehensive citations, legal documentation, and scholarly sources supporting all claims in this Blueprint, see the Technical Appendix: “Ending the 13th Amendment’s exception clause.”
Implementation Resources
The structural reforms referenced in this Part are detailed in comprehensive federal legislation available in the Documentation / Legislation / Package 1 directory of our GitHub repository:
Decriminalization of Survival Act – Prevents criminalization of homelessness when no shelter is available
Survival Security Act – Strengthens safety nets (SNAP, housing, healthcare, employment)
Detention Accountability Act – Phases out for-profit detention and establishes labor protections
Rehabilitation and Reintegration Act – Funds education, treatment, and reentry support
Complete Abolition of Involuntary Servitude Act – Creates the Bureau of Correctional Labor Standards and Human Dignity with enforcement authority
Each Act includes constitutional grounding, enforcement mechanisms, cost estimates, and implementation timelines.