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

Religion & Law

: Religion Clause

Recent Prisoner Free Exercise Cases

By Howard M. Friedman

In Isom v. Lowe, 2009 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 56922 (MD PA, July 6, 2009), a Pennsylvania federal district court held that prison officials were justified in taking a Muslim prisoner off the "Common Fare" diet after it was found that he was purchasing and consuming regular items from the Commissary that do not comply with the "Common Fare" diet.

In Riley v. Doe, 2009 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 56406 (MD TN, July 2, 2009), a Tennessee federal district court rejected a complaint that prisoners of the Christian Identity faith are not permitted to meet for group worship. The denial stemmed merely from the mistaken belief by the prison director of religious services that Christian Identity was classified as a Security Threat Group.

In Miska v. Middle River Regional Jail, 2009 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 56661 (WD VA, July 2, 2009), a Virginia federal district court rejected an inmate's complaint that his free exercise rights were violated when he was prevented from attending Communion and Confession one time while in segregated confinement.

In Caldwell v. Folino, 2009 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 56838 (WD PA, July 1, 2009), a Pennsylvania federal magistrate judge concluded that an inmate's free exercise rights were not violated when corrections officers searched his medicine bag and made disparaging comments about its contents.

In Mayo v. Briggs, 2009 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 57378 (ED VA, July 6, 2009), a Virginia federal district court adopted a magistrate's recommendations and dismissed an inmate's lawsuit for damages and a change in the jail's policy. Plaintiff claimed that authorities refused to permit him to attend Muslim Jumah services. The refusal was based on plaintiff's identifying himself as Christian, not Muslim, when he arrived at the jail.

In Mayne v. State, 2009 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 57678 (D NJ, July 7, 2009), a New Jersey federal district court permitted plaintiff to proceed with his complaint that while under house arrest and electronic monitoring, his parole officer refused to permit him to attend Catholic religious services.

In Thomas v. Little, 2009 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 57568 (WD TN, July 6, 2009), a Tennessee federal district court dismissed claims by an inmate that his free exercise rights, and his rights under RLUIPA were infringed by prison policy that allows Muslim inmates to buy prayer oil only from a single approved supplier.

In Anderson v. Harron, 2009 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 57986 (D NJ, July 7, 2009), a New Jersey federal district court rejected an inmate's complaint that his rights under the 1st Amendment and RLUIPA were infringed when he was temporarily removed from the jail's Ramadan meal program. The court also rejected his complaint that the jail did not facilitate weekly group Jumah prayers among the Muslim prisoners.

Full post as published by Religion Clause on July 12, 2009 (boomark / email).