onlyTrustedInfo.comonlyTrustedInfo.comonlyTrustedInfo.com
Notification
Font ResizerAa
  • News
  • Finance
  • Sports
  • Life
  • Entertainment
  • Tech
Reading: Supreme Court to decide if prison officials can be sued over inmates’ religious rights
Share
onlyTrustedInfo.comonlyTrustedInfo.com
Font ResizerAa
  • News
  • Finance
  • Sports
  • Life
  • Entertainment
  • Tech
Search
  • News
  • Finance
  • Sports
  • Life
  • Entertainment
  • Tech
  • Advertise
  • Advertise
© 2025 OnlyTrustedInfo.com . All Rights Reserved.
News

Supreme Court to decide if prison officials can be sued over inmates’ religious rights

Last updated: June 23, 2025 10:40 am
Oliver James
Share
5 Min Read
Supreme Court to decide if prison officials can be sued over inmates’ religious rights
SHARE

WASHINGTON – The Supreme Court on June 23 said it will decide whether prison officials can be sued for violating the religious rights of an inmate in a case involving a Rastafarian whose dreadlocks were forcibly shaved by Louisiana prison guards.

The dreadlocks that Damon Landor had been growing for nearly two decades were supposed to be protected by a 2000 law related to the religious rights of prisoners.

Landor had shown prison officials a copy of a court ruling that dreadlocks grown for religious reasons should be accommodated.

But an intake guard threw the ruling in the trash and Landor was handcuffed to a chair while his knee-length locks were forcibly shaved off.

The state condemns what happened to Landor “in the strongest possible terms,” officials wrote in a filing which emphasized that the Louisiana Department of Corrections and Public Safety has amended its grooming policy to prevent a repeat of Landor’s ordeal.

But Louisiana contends that federal law doesn’t allow Landor to hold correction officials personally liable for having his dreadlocks cut off.

Otherwise, the state’s attorneys wrote, there would be “numerous unintended consequences,” including making it even more difficult to staff jails and prisons.

Landor – whose appeal was backed by more than 30 religious groups and the Justice Department − argues that monetary damages are often the only way to hold prison officials accountable when religious rights are violated.

“It is often damages or nothing,” his lawyers told the Supreme Court in asking for intervention.

The Justice Department agreed, saying the Supreme Court should take Landor’s case because the issue is “undeniably important” and “recurs with some frequency.”

Federal law bans unnecessary religious restrictions

Many inmates who try to defend their rights are released or transferred by the time their claim is heard – when it’s then dismissed as no longer relevant, according to religious groups that filed briefs supporting Landor.

“Unburdened by the threat of damages, prisons have little incentive to improve their policies and protect prisoners from future abuse,” lawyers for groups representing Christians, Muslims, Jews and Sikhs told the Supreme Court.

Landor was supposed to be protected by the Religious Land Use and Institutionalized Persons Act, passed unanimously by Congress in 2000 to prevent state and local prisons from placing arbitrary or unnecessary restrictions on religious practices.

Twenty years after enactment, the Department of Justice said in a 2020 report, some institutions continue to impose substantial burdens without showing they’re necessary.

Since the law was passed, the government has conducted dozens of investigations, and either brought or supported lawsuits against jails and prisons.

Most claims are raised by people practicing a religion other than Christianity, including Jews, Muslims, Sikhs, and Native Americans.

Nearly 30% of cases alleging violations in the first five years after the law went into effect were brought by Muslims, according to the Tayba Foundation, which supports incarcerated Muslims.

“In state prisons around the country, Muslims are targeted and deprived of basic accommodations for their faith – such as timely meals before and after religious fasts and the ability to pray without interference,” the group told the Supreme Court.

In 2020, the high court ruled that Muslim men who claimed their religious rights were violated for being placed on the government’s no-fly list after refusing to serve as FBI informants could sue the FBI agents for damages.

That case involved a different, though similar, federal law protecting religious expression.

Appeals court judges who were sympathetic to Landor’s situation said it’s not their role to say whether the Supreme Court’s 2020 ruling about federal officials should apply to state prison workers.

“Landor clearly suffered a grave legal wrong,” wrote Judge Edith Brown Clement in an opinion joined by eight other judges on the New Orleans-based 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals. “The question is whether a damages remedy is available to him under RLUIPA. That is a question only the Supreme Court can answer.”

This article originally appeared on USA TODAY: Supreme Court takes case on religious rights of prisoners

You Might Also Like

Kilmar Albrego Garcia was “traumatized” at CECOT, Sen. Van Hollen says after meeting in El Salvador

Trump administration asks Supreme Court to strip legal protections from 350,000 Venezuelan migrants

Russia to probe ‘sonic weapon’ incident – Serbia

House GOP passes first funding bill of fiscal 2026

Most travelers must have a REAL ID now to fly within the US

Share This Article
Facebook X Copy Link Print
Share
Previous Article Feeling the Heat? Know These Signs and Symptoms of Heat Stroke Feeling the Heat? Know These Signs and Symptoms of Heat Stroke
Next Article China plans to show off new equipment at parade marking 80th anniversary of Japan’s WWII surrender China plans to show off new equipment at parade marking 80th anniversary of Japan’s WWII surrender

Latest News

Vance plans to kick off admin efforts to tout Trump’s agenda bill with Pennsylvania visit
Vance plans to kick off admin efforts to tout Trump’s agenda bill with Pennsylvania visit
News July 9, 2025
Worried about extreme weather? Home insurance can provide a financial lifeline
Worried about extreme weather? Home insurance can provide a financial lifeline
Finance July 9, 2025
The White House just took its most aggressive stance yet against Jerome Powell
The White House just took its most aggressive stance yet against Jerome Powell
Finance July 9, 2025
Factbox-How a 50% US tariff rate could affect Brazilian exports
Factbox-How a 50% US tariff rate could affect Brazilian exports
Finance July 9, 2025
//
  • About Us
  • Contact US
  • Privacy Policy
onlyTrustedInfo.comonlyTrustedInfo.com
© 2025 OnlyTrustedInfo.com . All Rights Reserved.