In Pasco v. Donald, 2007 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 22809 (MD GA, March 28, 2009), a Georgia federal district judge accepted a Magistrate’s recommendation to dismiss an Islamic inmate’s claim challenging his prison diet. The inmate argued that, for religious reasons, his diet should include fish. The judge also held that the dismissal should be with prejudice, instead of without prejudice as the Magistrate had recommended.
Sample v. Lappin, 2007 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 21777 (D DC, March 28, 2007), is a D.C. district court case in which a Jewish prisoner claims he should have the right to consume wine on the Sabbath and at a Passover seder. In an earlier decision, the court held that Bureau of Prison regulations substantially burden the inmate's sincerely held religious beliefs, but that the government has a compelling interest in controlling alcohol consumption in prisons. It ordered a trial on whether a complete ban was the least restrictive means to carry out that interest. In this decision the court rejected motions asking it to reconsider various portions of its earlier decision and to dismiss the case as moot or for failure to exhaust administrative remedies.
In Keal v. Washington, 2007 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 20961 (WD WA, March 23, 2007), a Washington federal district court upheld a Magistrate Judge's recommendations, dismissing a series of claims against a number of correctional officials. The suit by two prisoners challenged denial of a Halal diet, denial of a Muslim sponsor, claims regarding prayer at work, interference with the ability to observe Ramadan, and a prohibition on wearing dreadlocks.
In Smith v. Bruce, 2007 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 21220 (D KA, March 23, 2007), a Kansas federal district court permitted a prisoner to move ahead with his claim that his free exercise rights were violated when defendants repeatedly served him gelatin containing animal by-products, in violation of his religiously mandated vegetarian diet.
In Porter v. Caruso, 2007 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 21244 (WD MI, March 26, 2007), a Michigan federal district court, accepting the conclusions of a magistrate judge, permitted an inmate to proceed to trial on his claim that prison authorities violated RLUIPA by barring him from purchasing a replacement ankh cross, which he says is the primary symbol of his practice of the religion of Kemetic Spiritual Science.
In Thompson v. Scott, 2007 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 21742 (SD TX, March 27, 2007), a Texas federal district court permitted a prisoner to move to trial on his claim that the prison's grooming standards infringed his free exercise rights and his rights under RLUIPA. He alleged that he was forced to cut his hair in violation of his Native American Cherokee-Blackfoot religious traditions.
In Christiansen v. Walker, 2007 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 22215 (SD IL, March 28, 2007), a Muslim prisoner alleged that the defendants did not provide him a diet or hygiene supplies free of animal products, that they forced him to attend Christian religious programs , and that they did not permit him adequate time or space to observe his prayer rituals and participate in fasting rituals. An Illinois federal district court dismissed claims against three of the defendants because they were not involved in the decision to deny plaintiff religious accommodation. As to the other defendant, the court granted him summary judgment on plaintiff's dietary claims, but not on his other claims.
