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

Religion & Law

: Religion Clause

Recent Prisoner Free Exercise Cases

By Howard M. Friedman

In Yates v. Painter, (3d Cir., Jan. 13, 2009), the U.S. 3rd Circuit Court of Appeals remanded a prisoner's RLUIPA and first amendment challenges in light of an intervening decision by the 3rd Cirucit defining "substantial burden" under RLUIPA. Basil Allah Yates claimed that prison officials confiscated Nation of Islam materials taht he is required to study as part of his religion.

In Hensley v. Kampshaefer, 2009 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 1478 (WD KY, Jan. 9, 2009), a Kentucky federal district court dismissed for failure to exhaust administrative remedies a prisoner's complaint that his Native American Ceremonial Religious properties were desecrated by being tossed on the cell floor and bunk during cell searches.

In Worthen v. Oklahoma Department of Corrections, 2009 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 1843 (WD OK, Jan. 12, 2008), an Oklahoma federal district court agreed with a magistrate's conclusion that a prisoner had not alleged a substantial burden on the exercise of his religion in his complaint that he was cut off from communication with fellow Unitarian-Universalist believers when he was denied access to email.

In Taylor v. Bruno, 2008 Conn. Super. LEXIS 3133 (CT Super., Nov. 25, 2008), a Connecticut trial court rejected a prisoner's request for a temporary injunction based on allegations that his free exercise and equal protection rights had been violated. Prison authorities had denied Taekwon Taylor access to oils, incense and parchment paper that he claimed were necessary to practice his religion of Santeria, and had denied his request to perform certain religious rituals outside.

Full post as published by Religion Clause on January 18, 2009 (boomark / email).