In Cummings v. Darsey, 2007 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 4257 (D NJ, Jan. 16, 2007), a New Jersey federal district court permitted a Muslim prisoner to proceed with a challenge to a drug treatment program that he is required to attend. He claimed that it includes a religious component that is offensive to him as a Muslim and that attendance at the program prevents from attending most of the Muslim religious services that are available.
In Furnace v. Arceo, 2007 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 3725 (ND CA, Jan. 5, 2007), a California federal district court permitted a state prisoner to proceed with a free exercise and equal protection challenge claiming he was denied religious meals and refused a transfer to another prison that could provide him such meals.
Whitfield v. v. Illinois Dep't of Corrections, 2006 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 94779 (ND IL, March 20, 2006) is an older case that has just become available on Lexis. In it the court rejected a prisoner's claim that his right to practice his African Hebrew Israelite religion (including its dietary restrictions) was infringed, and that retaliation was practiced against him for filing a grievance. Plaintiff failed to prove that he was in fact affiliated with the African Hebrew Israelite religion.
Lawson v. McDonough, 2006 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 94681 (ND FL, Dec. 27, 2006) involved claims under RLUIPA and the Florida Religious Freedom Restoration Act by an Orthodox Jewish inmate who was serving a life sentence in Florida. He asserted that he was denied the right to observe over a dozen religious requirements. In a lengthy opinion, a federal magistrate judge in Florida federal district court recommended permiting him to move ahead with some of his claims, but dismissed others because plaintiff had not exhausted his administrative remedies or because of mootness or lack of standing to raise the claims.
