Sunday, April 22, 2007

Recent Prisoner Free Exercise Decisions

In Sanders v. Ryan, 2007 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 29070 (D AZ, March 19, 2007), an Arizona federal district court rejected First Amendment and RLUIPA claims by a Baptist prisoner that his rights were violated when prison officials limited him to possessing 10 audiotapes at a time, insisting that he send back his old tapes before adding new ones.

In Hawk v. Alameida, 2007 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 28740 (ED CA, April 17, 2007), a federal Magistrate Judge recommended dismissal of a Native American prisoner's objections to enforcement of prison grooming regulations against him. Plaintiff alleged first amendment and Equal Protection violations. Dismissal of his retaliation claim was recommended for failure to exhaust administrative remedies.

In Roddy v. West Virginia, (4th Cir., April 16, 2007), the U.S. 4th Circuit Court of Appeals vacated the district court's dismissal of a prisoner's free exercise claim in light of the U.S. Supreme Court's January 2007 decision in Jones v. Bock that liberalized exhaustion requirements under the Prison Litigation Reform Act.

In Muhammad/Smith v. Freyder, 2007 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 27717 (ED AK, April 12, 2007), a federal Magistrate Judge dismissed a prisoner's claim that his rights under RLUIPA were violated when he was not served the same meal as other Muslim inmates were served to celebrate the end of the Ramadan fast. The court found that prison authorities had a compelling interest in not serving meals catered from outside (here from Popeye's restaurant) to inmates confined to administrative segregation for violation of prison rules.

In King v. Bennett, 2007 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 27702 (WD NY, March 30, 2007), a federal Magistrate Judge rejected a claim by a Sh'ia Muslim prisoner that he was denied the right to free exercise of religion by virtue of the New York Department of Corrections' policy of holding joint Friday prayer services for both Shi'a and Sunni Muslims. Prison officials said that granting plaintiff's request would pressure them to provide separate services for numerous Protestant and Jewish subgroups. That in turn would increase fiscal and administrative burdens and encourage rivalries by promoting power struggles and competition for new members and converts.