In Larson v. Schuetzle, (N.Dak. Sup. Ct., April 19, 2006), the North Dakota Supreme Court upheld prison officials’ confiscation of religious magazines given to inmate Reuben Larson by other inmates, and officials’ order to Larson to remove from his cell wall a picture of an American flag that he had cut out of a newspaper. The court found that prison rules prohibiting possessing various types of contraband were valid and did not violate Larson’s constitutional rights. The case was covered by the Grand Forks Herald last Wednesday. Larson is serving a 28-year sentence for a 1992 shooting of a judge in his courtroom while he was hearing Larson’s child support case.
In Earl v. Gould, 2006 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 19861 (WD NC, April 11, 2006), a North Carolina federal district court rejected a number of claims by a Muslim prisoner brought under the First amendment and RLUIPA. For various reasons, the court rejected inmate Vincent Earl’s claims that he was denied the right to participate in Ramadan services, that he did not receive the specific version of the Quran that he requested, that Friday Jumah Prayer Services were held at the wrong time, and that the prison refused to recognize his name change. The court also rejected Earl’s complaint that Muslim inmates were required to file an "Inmate Request for Religious Assistance Fact Sheet”, while Christian prisoners were not, and that more Christian than Muslim services were held at the correctional facility. The court said that the Constitution permits allocation of religious resources based on the different numbers of prisoners in each religious group.
In Walls v. Schriro, 2006 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 19833 (D Ariz., April 13, 2006), an Arizona federal district court denied a preliminary injunction to an inmate of the Hare Krishna faith who claimed the lacto-vegetarian diet provided to him in prison did not meet his religious requirements because it include caffeinated beverages, garlic and onions, and was not prepared by a member of the Krishna sect. The court found it unlikely that inmate Rex Walls would succeed on the merits of his First Amendment or RLUIPA claims, given the high costs of the prison’s further tailoring diets to inmates’ religious needs.
