A BILL to amend the Code of Virginia by adding a section numbered 53.1-35.3, relating to state correctional facilities; visitation privileges; Visitation Enhancement Program established.
HB1246 would create a new “Visitation Enhancement Program” for state correctional facilities in Virginia and require all state prisons to participate. The bill sets out a detailed framework for prison visitation, including a definition of “enhanced appropriate physical affection” that would allow brief kissing, embracing, holding hands, resting a head on a shoulder, and similar non-sexual physical contact during visits, while expressly prohibiting sexual conduct and other intimate touching.
The bill also ties visitation access to prisoner behavior and classification. Inmates would be placed into one of three phases based on their good-time earning status and length of time at the highest level, with each phase receiving progressively more visitation: at least one weekly visit for Phase I, at least three weekly visits for Phase II, and at least four weekly visits for Phase III. Phase III prisoners would also be eligible for holiday family meals, with food brought by visitors subject to security rules, and outdoor visitation where possible. The bill further requires visits to last at least two hours before termination for capacity reasons and limits early termination procedures when visitation areas are full.
If enacted, HB1246 would add a new section to the Code of Virginia, § 53.1-35.3, and would directly regulate visitation practices in all state correctional facilities. It would create enforceable minimum visitation frequencies, expand permissible physical contact during visits, and constrain prison discretion to deny or cut short visits except for documented safety risks, emergencies, or legal compliance. The bill would also interact with existing good-time and earned sentence credit provisions by using those classifications to determine visitation phase levels, thereby linking inmate conduct and sentence-credit status to family contact privileges.
The available record suggests the bill was not advanced out of committee, as it was stricken from the docket by the House Public Safety Committee on a 22-0 vote. That vote indicates unanimous committee opposition or at least unanimous agreement not to move the bill forward. No committee transcript is available, so the broader discussion is not documented here, but the voting history points to a lack of support for the proposal in committee.
The main points of contention likely concern prison security, administrative control, and the extent to which inmates should receive expanded physical contact and more frequent visitation. Supporters would likely frame the bill as promoting family connection, rehabilitation, and humane treatment, while opponents would likely focus on contraband risks, staffing and space constraints, and the loss of correctional discretion. The bill’s mandatory visitation minimums and limits on terminating visits for capacity reasons appear to be the most significant operational concerns for correctional administrators.