Recent Prisoner Free Exercise Cases

On Nov. 30, the U.S. Supreme Court denied certiorari in Chavis v. Fischer, Docket No. 09-7079 (Order List). In the case the U.S. 2nd Circuit Court of Appeals dismissed an inmate's claim that his free exercise rights were infringed when he was required to work on Sundays. (See prior posting.)

In Desimone v. Bartow, 2009 U.S. App. LEXIS 26687 (7th Cir., Dec. 8, 2009), the 7th Circuit rejected an inmate's free exercise and RLUIPA claims, finding that he did not establish a substantial burden on his free exercise of religion. Plaintiff complained that authorities had confiscated his encoded journals that he believed allowed him to maintain a separate realm of thought to conform to the teachings of Yahwism.

In Allen v. Passaic County Jail, 2009 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 113560 (ED PA, Dec. 4, 2009), a Pennsylvania federal district court refused to dismiss a former inmate's claim that his free exercise rights were violated when, because of jail overcrowding, he was unable to attend religious services.

In Hamilton v. Hernandez, 2009 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 113140 (ND CA, Nov. 19, 2009), a California federal district court dismissed an inmate's claims that prison authorities interfered with his practice of his House of Yahweh religion by placing him in a cell with an inmate that did not observe the same religion, by on occasion refusing to release him from his cell to attend Sabbath services, by interfering with House of Yahweh Sabbath services, by failing to provide him a religious diet, and by her infringements and retaliatory action.

In Stewart v. Klein, 2009 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 113040 (D AZ, Nov. 19, 2009), an Arizona federal district court refused to overturn a jury's verdict rejecting an inmate's claim that his free exercise of religion was substantially burdened by receiving meals containing meat and egg products. and that defendant, the kitchen manager, should have corrected the problem.

In Garrison v. Michigan Department of Corrections, 2009 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 114719 (ED MI, Dec. 9, 2009), a Michigan federal district court accepted most of a federal magistrate judge's recommendations (2009 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 114640, Oct. 16, 2009), and dismissed objections to various restrictions imposed by prison officials on plaintiffs' Native American Traditional Spiritual Ways religious ceremonies.

Recent Prisoner Free Exercise Cases

In Desimone v. Bartow, 2009 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 48689 (ED WI, June 10, 2009), a Wisconsin federal district court rejected an inmate's claims that his free exercise rights protected by RLUIPA were infringed when authorities seized various journals and documents written in Atlantean. The court held that while plaintiff's "religious conscience may impel him to separate himself from his peers ... through writing in an alien alphabet, he has failed to ... show that the proscription on writing in Atlantean creates a substantial burden on his right to exercise his religion. Further ... the policy prohibiting writing in Atlantean is the least restrictive means available to advance a compelling governmental interest."

In Elock v. Trancoso, 2009 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 49731 (CD IL, June 15, 2009), an Illinois federal district court dismissed for failure to exhaust administrative remedies an inmate's complaint that authorities searched her cell and threw away two of her prayer books. The court also expressed doubt that plaintiff could show a violation of her constitutional rights.

In Levy v. Holinka, 2009 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 49586 (WD WI, June 11, 2009), a Wisconsin federal district court permitted an inmate who followed the Hebrew Israelite faith to move ahead with free exercise, RFRA, establishment clause and equal protection challenges to federal prison authorities' refusal to permit him to observe his high holidays and to wear a kufi.

In Fletcher v. Vandyne, 2009 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 49877 (SD OH, June 11, 2009), an Ohio federal magistrate judge dismissed, for lack of evidence, an inmate's claim that prison authorities violated RLUIPA when they refused to serve him non-pork based products several times in the same week.

Recent Prisoner and Institutional Free Exercise Cases

In Desimone v. Bartow, 2008 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 97271 (MD GA, Oct. 27, 2008), a Georgia federal district court refused a request to appoint counsel in a pro se case in which plaintiff, confined in a mental health Department of Corrections facility, alleged that his free exercise rights were violated by authorities denying him the ability to write in a language he refers to as "Atlantean." (See prior related posting.)

In Hawkins v. Ferriter, 2008 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 98220 (D MT, Dec. 4, 2008), a Montana federal district court dismissed a prisoner's free exercise claim against Montana Governor Brian Schweitzer. Plaintiff had alleged that the Governor holds authority over the workings of the Montana State Prison and harbors "anti-Catholic feelings."

In Marr v. Foy, 2008 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 97891 (WD MI, Dec. 3, 2008), a Michigan federal district judge affirmed a federal magistrate's order denying plaintiff prisoner's motion for appointment of counsel in a suit alleging free exercise and RLUIPA violations. The suit alleges that in retaliation for his requesting kosher food, authorities assigned plaintiff to work as a "midnight porter" which interfered with his daytime religious study and worship.

CBN News reports (Dec. 4) that the ACLU of New Jersey has filed a lawsuit against New Jersey prison authorities on behalf of inmate Howard N. Thompson Jr., an ordained Pentecostal minister, challenging a 2007 ban imposed by the New Jersey Corrections Department on preaching by inmates.

Recent Prisoner and Institutionalized Persons Free Exercise Cases

In Lewis v. Ryan, 2008 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 64335 (SD CA, May 1, 2008), a California federal district judge accepted the recommendations of a federal magistrate judge set out in a lengthy opinion at Lewis v. Mitchell, 2008 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 64333 (SD CA, March 6, 2008). The court permitted a Muslim inmate to move ahead with various claims for injunctive relief alleging violations of the 1st and 8th Amendments and RLUIPA. Plaintiff alleged that he was served food containing pork without the pork content being noted on the prison menu, and that he was subsequently denied medical treatment. Plaintiff also claimed the right to a Halal diet. (See prior related posting.)

DeSimone v. Bartow, 2008 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 64419 (ED WI, Aug. 12, 2008) is a lawsuit by plaintiff who has been civilly committed to a mental health facility operated in part by the Department of Corrections. A Wisconsin federal district court permitted him to proceed with a claim that his 1st amendment and RLUIPA free exercise rights were violated when he was prohibited from writing in his Atlantean language, a practice plaintiff said was central to his religious belief. Officials said it took too long to translate the writings, and untranslated writings posed security risks, even though they did not impose the same restrictions on others who wrote in different foreign languages.

In Wofford v. Williams, 2008 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 63946 (D OR, Aug. 20, 2008), and Oregon federal district court granted a preliminary injunction ordering prison officials to provide a Seventh Day Adventist inmate with a kosher diet. The court found that plaintiff would probably succeed on the merits of his 1st Amendment, RLUIPA and equal protection claims. Prison officials had asserted that kosher meals were available only to Jewish inmates and that plaintiff's faith does not require him to limit himself to a kosher diet.

In Linehan v. Crosby, 2008 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 63738 (D FL, Aug. 20, 2008), a Florida federal district judge accepted the recommendations of a federal magistrate and denied the claims of a Seventh Day Adventist prisoner to a kosher diet. The court held: "Since the Jewish Dietary Accommodation Program was discontinued several years ago, the only person Plaintiff can show is being treated differently is one Jewish inmate who receives kosher food pursuant to a settlement agreement.... Both the excessive cost, as well as administrative and logistic difficulties, of implementing a kosher meal plan in the Florida prison system are compelling state interests, and the current vegan and vegetarian diets are the least restrictive means of addressing this compelling interest ."

In Woods v. Chiarelli, 2008 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 64455 (MD PA, Aug. 21, 2008), a Pennsylvania federal district court held that a prison policy preventing a Muslim inmate from attending communal religious services did not violate his 1st Amendment rights. Plaintiff, held as a federal prisoner in a state prison, was subject to a separation order from the United States Marshal's Service requiring him to be separated from three other federal inmates being held at the same facility.

Four Charged With Using Religious Schools To Steal State Voucher Funds

In Bartow, Florida yesterday, four defendants went on trial accused of using two private religious schools to siphon off funds from Florida's school voucher program for their personal use. The Lakeland (Fla.) Ledger reports that the four are charged with using the Faith Christian Academy in Bartow and Cathedral of Faith Christian Academy in Lakeland as conduits for some $200,000 from the voucher program and the National School Lunch and Breakfast Programs.