Home -> Law Blog Directory -> Religion & Law Blogs -> Religion Clause

Religion & Law

: Religion Clause

Recent Prisoner Free Exercise Cases

By Howard M. Friedman

In Seneca v. Arizona, (9th Cir., Aug. 19, 2009), the U.S. 9th Circuit Court of Appeals reversed part of a district court's decision to dismiss an inmate's free exercise and RLUIPA claims. The appellate court held that plaintiff's challenge to the requirement for a verification letter to change religions was not moot. It also held that the trial court must reconsider whether prison policy limiting inmates to seven religious items had a compelling justification and was the least restrictive means of furthering the Arizona Department of Corrections' interests.

In King v. Sims, 2009 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 71669 (SD MS, Aug. 14, 2009), a Mississippi federal magistrate judge rejected a challenge by a Rastafarian prisoner to the state's grooming policy that prevented him from wearing his hair in dreadlocks.

In Carson v. Riley, 2009 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 73328 (WD MI, Aug. 19, 2009), a Michigan federal district court upheld a prison's denial of a strictly vegetarian Buddhist diet to an inmate after he displayed only minimal knowledge about Buddhism and its dietary requirements in an interview by the prison chaplain. Subsequently plaintiff was transferred to another facility where a vegetarian diet was more available.

In Nieves v. Patrick, 2009 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 73492 (ED CA, Aug. 19, 2009), a California federal magistrate judge recommended dismissal of a generalized allegation by an inmate that religion was not allowed into her prison unit.

In Mincy v. Deparlos, 2009 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 73604 (MD PA, Aug. 19, 2009), a Pennsylvania federal district court allowed plaintiff to move ahead with his free exercise and RLUIPA claims that various actions by prison officials denied him the ability to observe Ramadan.

Full post as published by Religion Clause on August 23, 2009 (boomark / email).