A panel of the 9th U.S. Denying cataract surgery “on the basis of an administrative policy that ‘one eye is good enough for prison inmates’ is … the very definition of deliberate indifference,” the court said Thursday in a 2-1 ruling reinstating a lawsuit by a 67-year-old inmate who has been refused surgery since 2002. Colwell, 67, was admitted to the prison in 1991 to begin a life without possibility of parole term for a murder in Douglas County. He had cataract removal surgery for his left eye in 2001 but developed a cataract in his right eye later that year and has been blind in that eye since 2002. Colwell, according to the court, suffered physical injuries due to the blindness including running his hand through a sewing machine on two occasions in the mattress factory, regularly hitting his head on the upper bunk of his cell and bumping into other inmates, which resulted in fights. Silverman said a reasonable jury could find prison officials denied treatment because of the policy to “endure reversible blindness in one eye if he can see out of the other.” 
 
 Judge Jay Bybee dissented, saying there was no evidence that the prison had a “one good eye” policy or that the state was deliberately indifferent to Colwell’s condition. “Although blindness in one eye is not life-threatening, it is no trifling matter,” said Judge Barry Silverman in the majority opinion. “His mishaps are not unexpected given the vicissitudes of life, the aging process, and his incarceration.” 
 
 “Being blind in one eye may be considered a disability (but) it is not crippling,” Bybee said, listing such notables as Theodore Roosevelt, James Joyce, Alice Walker and Sammy Davis Jr. among those who managed with monocular vision. He said Nevada’s decision to deny surgery to Colwell was “reasonable” and also contended the Ninth Circuit’s legal test for “deliberate indifference,” established in 1992, is too lenient and is out of step with other courts.
– Sure, having two eyes is nice, but "one eye is good enough for prison inmates." That was the policy apparently in play when the state of Nevada denied a partially blind prisoner cataract surgery—but such a policy is also "the very definition of deliberate indifference," a federal appeals court ruled yesterday. The court has allowed John Colwell's lawsuit to go forward after the convict, serving life in prison for murder, accused the state of inflicting cruel and unusual punishment, the Las Vegas Sun and San Francisco Chronicle report. Colwell says he's been blind in his right eye since 2002 but was denied cataract removal surgery despite doctors' recommendations. Though Colwell's lawsuit was initially thrown out because he couldn't prove the state was acting in "conscious disregard of an excessive risk to his health," the appeals court said yesterday that "the evidence shows the Nevada Department of Corrections denied cataract surgery on him as he had one good eye," and the state may be guilty of cruel and inhumane punishment. A judge in favor of the 2-1 decision to reinstate the lawsuit added, "although blindness in one eye is not life-threatening, it is no trifling matter." Colwell says he's suffered numerous injuries as a result of his partial blindness, including getting into fights with other prisoners after he accidentally bumped into them.