In
Grayson v. Schuler , (7th Cir., Jan. 13, 2012), the U.S. 7th Circuit Court of Appeals in an opinion by Judge Posner reversed a district court's grant of summary judgement for defendant in a damage claim by an African Hebrew Israelite inmate who took a Nazirite vow not to cut his hair. He was forced to cut his dreadlocks. The court held that it is impermissible for a prison to allow "Rastafarians to wear long hair and without justification forbid a sincere African Hebrew Israelite of Jerusalem to do so, even if he is more zealous in his religious observances than his religion requires him to be." The court also rejected defendant's claim of qualified immunity since he could not reasonably have thought that an exclusion from grooming requirements only for Rastafarians was constitutional. Interestingly, for illustrative purposes Judge Posner included as part of the opinion a photo of Jamaican musician Bob Marley with dreadlocks of "formidable length and density."
In
Burriola v. Nevada Department of Corrections, (9th Cir., Jan. 12, 2012), the U.S. 9th Circuit Court of Appeals held that authorities did not violated an inmate's rights under the free exercise clause, the due process clause or RLUIPA when they confiscated some of his religious magazines.
In
Countryman v. Baca, (9th Cir., Jan. 11, 2012), the U.S. 9th Circuit Court of Appeals rejected an inmate's claim that his free exercise and equal protection rights and his rights under RLUIPA were violated when he was denied access to a hardbound book to study the Greek New Testament.
In
Cookson v. Commissioner, Maine Department of Corrections,
2012 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 6842 (D ME, Jan. 4, 2012), a Maine federal magistrate judge recommended rejecting a Satanist inmate's request to hold group Satanist rituals, finding that this would create a risk to prison security despite the individual plaintiff's rejection of violence. There is no evidence that others who might join the group similarly reject vengeance and violence. UPDATE: The court adopted the magistrate's recommendations at
2012 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 35053, March 15, 2012).
In
Puckett v. Richland County Commissioners,
2012 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 1845 (ND OH, Jan. 6, 2012), an Ohio federal district court held that plaintiff had not alleged enough facts to support his claim that his free exercise rights are violated by a jail's refusal to permit pretrial detainees to participate in religious services.
In
Parker v. Trent,
2012 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 3042 (ND WV, Jan. 10, 2012), a West Virginia federal district court adopted a magistrate's recommendations (
2011 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 151089, Dec. 21, 2011) and dismissed a Muslim inmate's complaint, finding that prison authorities had not intentionally set improper meal and prayer times for Ramadan. They believed they were accommodating plaintiff's Ramadan requirements. Authorities also had legitimate penological reasons to refuse to allow Muslims to pray together.
In
In re Garcia, (CA App., Jan. 11, 2012), a California state appellate court held that prison officials violated the free exercise and RLUIPA rights of a Messianic Jewish inmate when it refused to allow him to participate in an existing kosher meal program. The refusal was based on the Jewish chaplain's statement that the inmate was not a traditional Jew. In part of its opinion, the court concluded that state courts have concurrent jurisdiction with federal courts over RLUIPA claims.
In
Ruffin v. Commissioner,
2011 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 151358 (D ME, Jan. 19, 2012), a Maine federal magistrate judge recommended dismissing a complaint by Muslim inmate who wanted to conduct his one-person Friday religious service in a commons areas, instead of only in the privacy of his room as prison officials permitted.
In a
press release issued on Jan. 10, the U.S. Department of Justice announced that it has entered into a consent injunction with the Berkeley County, S.C., Sheriff’s Office as to claims raised in
Prison Legal News v. DeWitt that detainees were being denied access to books, magazines, and newspapers and denied the right to practice their religion, in violation of the1st Amendment and RLUIPA. The consent decree provides for detainees to have appropriate access to religious and reading materials.
