In Cordero v. Kelley, (3rd Cir., March 19, 2026), the U.S. 3rd Circuit Court of Appeals held that prison officials who refused to allow an inmate to receive a bulk mailing of religious pamphlets had qualified immunity in a damage action against them alleging violation of the 1st Amendment. The court said in part:
Cordero asserts that his Christian religion requires him to spread the Word of God by sending religious pamphlets, or tracts, to friends and family. Prior to 2015, Cordero was able to receive hundreds of pamphlets at a time via mail at NJSP without incident. However, from 2015 to 2017, Gregory Kelley, a correctional officer working in the NJSP mailroom, rejected multiple bulk mailings containing 100 or more religious pamphlets....
We agree with the District Court that the defendants were entitled to qualified immunity on Cordero’s First Amendment claim for damages. We have found no caselaw clearly establishing a right to either receive through the mail bulk quantities of religious materials, or the right to receive a yearly bulk order of Christian tracts....
Cordero also argues that the New Jersey Administrative Code mandates that he “be permitted to receive, retain and send out religious literature without quantity limitations.”... However, “[o]fficials sued for constitutional violations do not lose their qualified immunity merely because their conduct violates some statutory or administrative provision.” Davis v. Scherer, 468 U.S. 183, 194 (1984). Rather, the “clearly established right must be the federal right on which the claim for relief is based.” Doe v. Delie, 257 F.3d 309, 319 (3d Cir. 2001). And a “state statute cannot ‘clearly establish’ the federal right for qualified immunity purposes.” Id.
