In Peterson v. Price, 2007 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 75737 (ND WV, Sept. 28, 2007), a West Virginia federal district court accepted a magistrate judge’s recommendation to dismiss a federal prisoner’s Fist Amendment claims. Plaintiff complained that he had been removed from the prison’s kosher food program, but the court found that this was justified; he had purchased non-kosher food from the commissary. The court also agreed that the failure to furnish plaintiff a kosher bag lunch during two mock lockdowns did not rise to the level of a constitutional violation.
In Tafari v. Annets, 2007 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 76017 (SDNY, Oct. 15, 2007), a New York federal Magistrate Judge recommended that an inmate be permitted to proceed with his claim that his free exercise rights were violated when on five separate occasions he was denied kosher food while in transit between prison facilities. The magistrate recommended dismissal of a number of other claims.
In Farnsworth v. Baxter, 2007 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 72209 (WD TN, Sept. 26, 2007), a Tennessee federal district judge denied defendant’s motion to dismiss a RLUIPA claim brought by a prisoner who complained about the failure to provide Messianic Jewish religious services. Defendant had argued that damages are not available under RLUIPA in suits brought against officials in their individual capacities.
In Cruz v. Scribner, 2007 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 76423 (ED CA, Oct. 3, 2007), a California federal Magistrate Judge dismissed, subject to the right to file an amended complaint, claims by a Native American prisoner that he was denied the right to participate in the annual Pow-Wow, Banquet and Sweat Ceremony that is part of his religion. Plaintiff failed to allege any link between the named defendants and his free exercise, equal protection and RLUIPA claims.
In two nearly identical opinions, a California federal district court held that plaintiff prisoners must specifically allege how their religious rights are being violated in the institution where they are incarcerated instead of making broad and generic allegations about policies or practices at all other California prison facilities. The cases are Bonner v. Tilton, 2007 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 76932 (ED CA, Oct. 2, 2007) and Green v. Tilton, 2007 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 76925 (ED CA, Oct. 2, 2007).
In Jones-el v. Pollard, 2007 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 77505 (ED WI, Oct. 18, 2007), a Wisconsin federal district court permitted an inmate to move ahead with a variety of claims under the First Amendment and RLUIPA. Plaintiff charged that he was prevented from observing Ramadan, was deprived of Islamic publications, was prevented from possessing prayer oil and a prayer rug while in segregation, and was denied Halal meals. He also alleged that prison authorities favor Christianity over Islam by employing full-time Christian chaplains and using Christian chapels.
