In Jackson v. Federal Bureau of Prisons, 2006 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 59119 (D DC, Aug. 22, 2006), the D.C. federal district court dismissed RLUIPA claims against the federal Bureau of Prisons and its director by a Muslim prisoner who claims he was denied a pork-free diet as required by his religious beliefs. The court held that RLUIPA applies only to state and local governments, and not to the federal government.
In Scott v. California Supreme Court, 2006 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 59573 (ED Cal., Aug. 22, 2006), a California federal district court rejected claims by a Hebrew-Israelite prisoner that his First Amendment rights and his rights under RLUIPA were violated when the prison warden refused to permit him to legally change his name to a religious name.
Jackson v. Department of Corrections, 2006 Mass. Super. LEXIS 363 (Middlesex County, July 27, 2006), involved challenges by male Muslim prison inmates in Massachusetts to pat-searches by female guards and to provision of religious services only once every two weeks. A Massachusetts trial judge denied the state's motions for summary judgments on state statutory and RLUIPA claims, finding that facts remained in dispute. The court granted the state's motion to dismiss claims of cruel and unusual punishment and discriminatory treatment of Muslims.
In Carrio v. Texas Dept. of Criminal Justice, (5th Cir., Aug. 23, 2006), the U.S. Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals rejected a prisoner's claim that a prison's property-storage rules violated his free exercise rights under the First Amendment and RLUIPA. It rejected various other claims because they had not been raised in the trial court.
