In Helling v. McKinney, an inmate alleged that being stuck in a small cell with a heavy smoker constituted cruel and unusual punishment, thus violating the eighth amendment to the Constitution. The Supreme Court, ruling in favor of the plaintiff, set objective and subjective standards by which to determine whether such a violation has indeed occurred. Plaintiffs must prove objectively that the ETS level is unreasonably high, that their future health is at risk as a result, and that such exposure violates evolving standards of decency. They must also show that prison officials have acted with deliberate indifference, using such factors as officials¦ attitudes and conduct, and prison operational constraints and smoking policies. The ruling does not absolutely guarantee inmates the right to be free from ETS; rather, it encourages prison officials to make a good-faith effort to provide a smoke-free prison environment, with budgetary and other considerations taken into account. 44 endnotes