In Hill v. Snyder, 2006 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 50717 (SD IL, July 25, 2006), a state prisoner who adheres to the Hebrew Israelite faith, claimed various infringements of his free exercise rights. An Illinois federal trial court permitted him to proceed with claims relating to the provision of vegan meals, the contents of the food he is given, the discontinuance of his vegan meals, and the requirement that he provide written verification of his religious affiliation from an outside clergy member. However, the court found he had no right to variety in his meals, to trade food items with other inmates, nor to extra time to eat.
Greene v. Solano County Jail, 2006 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 50380 (ED CA, July 24, 2006), involved a challenge to the policy at Solano's Claybank facility that precluded maximum security inmates from attending group religious services. A California federal district court agreed with prison authorities that security concerns adequately justified the policy and rejected plaintiff's claims based on the First Amendment, RLUIPA, the Equal Protection Clause and the Eighth Amendment.
In Ha'min v. Montgomery County Sheriffs, 2006 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 50448 (MD TN, July 21, 2006), a Tennessee federal district court judge dismissed the First Amendment claims of a Muslim prisoner who challenged a Tennessee jail's failure to provide regular Friday Muslim religious services and its failure to have copies of the Quran in the jail library while the library did have donated copies of the Bible.
UPDATE: Here is the earlier magistrate's recommendation in the case, 2006 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 73223.
Johnson v. Rees, 2006 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 50556 (ED KY, July 20, 2006) involved rejection by a Kentucky federal district court of a somewhat unusual prisoner Free Exercise and RLUIPA claim. Inmate Johnny Johnson alleged that he is a Jehovah's Witness whose religious faith requires him to "witness" and to distribute religious literature to others. Prison rules permit outside organizations, including the Jehovah's Witnesses, to donate religious literature to the prison's chapel where other inmates are free to take extra copies. But Johnson is not allowed to take that literature and distribute it elsewhere directly to other inmates. The court said that since Johnson can distribute the literature inside the chapel library, he is not totally prevented from engaging in the conduct his faith requires. Only time and place are circumscribed.
