Tuesday, October 02, 2007

More Prisoner Free Exercise Cases Decided

In Shilling v. Crawford, 2007 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 70694 (D NV, Sept. 21, 2007), a Nevada federal district court held that a Jewish prisoner's Free Exercise and Equal Protection rights were not violated when prison authorities informed him that to satisfy his request for kosher meals, he would need to be transferred to a different correctional facility.

In Oakden v. Bliesner, 2007 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 70948 (ND CA, Sept. 21, 2007), a federal district judge rejected a First Amendment claim by a prisoner who was a member of the white-supremacist Church of the Creator. It found that plaintiff's requested raw food diet is a recommendation, but not a central requirement, for members of the Church.

In Keesh v. Smith, 2007 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 71165 (ND NY, Sept. 25, 2007), a New York federal district court upheld against Free Exercise and RLUIPA challenges a Department of Corrections requirement that a religion within the prison must have an outside sponsor in order to be recognized and approved for congregate services and classes. Plaintiff Tyheem Keesh was the founder and leader of the Tulukeesh religion, and sought to require prison authorities to accommodate its requirements for a special type of vegan diet, martial arts training, specific hygiene requirements, possession of religious items and a ban on strip searches of Tulukeesh members by prison staff.

In Hardaway v. Haggerty, 2007 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 71814 (ED MI, Sept. 27, 2007), a Michigan federal district judge adopted the recommendations of a federal magistrate, holding that prison officials had qualified immunity from damage claims in connection with their seizure from plaintiff of religious material from the Nation of Gods and Earths (NGE). However, plaintiff was permitted to proceed with his claim for an injunction seeking removal of the "Security Threat" designation given to NGE and challenging the taking of his NGE religious literature.

In Jaspar v. Moors, 2007 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 72116 (ED CA, Sept. 27, 2007), a California federal Magistrate Judge concluded that RLUIPA is applicable to claims seeking redress for individual retaliatory conduct of a prison chaplain who, plaintiff claimed, took action against him because he is Jewish.

In Izquierdo v. Crawford, 2007 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 71608 (ED MO, Sept. 26, 2007), a Missouri federal district court rejected a prisoner's claims that his rights under the First Amendment and RLUIPA were violated when the prison refused to provide religious services and programs for Shiite Muslims separate from those offered for Muslims in general that were led by a Sunni inmate.