Printer Friendly
The Free Library
14,669,463 articles and books
Member login
User name  
Password 
 
Join us Forgot password?

Appeals court upholds religious liberty law for prisoners.


A federal appeals court has ruled that a federal law intended to protect the religious liberty rights of prisoners does not violate the First Amendment.

On Dec. 8, a three-judge panel of the 4th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals found that the Religious Land Use and Institutionalized Persons Act The Religious Land Use and Institutionalized Persons Act, Pub.L. 106-274, 42 U.S.C.  2000cc-1 et seq. (RLUIPA) is a United States federal law that prohibits the imposition of burdens on the ability of prisoners to worship as they please, as well as making it easier  of 2000 (RLUIPA RLUIPA Religious Land Use and Institutionalized Persons Act of 2000 ) does not unconstitutionally favor religion.

Ira Madison, a Virginia convict To adjudge an accused person guilty of a crime at the conclusion of a criminal prosecution, or after the entry of a plea of guilty or a plea of nolo contendere. An individual who has been found guilty of a crime and, as a result, is serving a sentence as punishment for the act; , sued Virginia's Department of Corrections for denying him kosher kosher [Heb.,=proper, i.e., fit for use], in Judaism, term used in rabbinic literature to mean what is ritually correct, but most widely applied to food that is in accordance with dietary laws based on Old Testament passages (primarily Lev. 11 and Deut. 14).  meals in prison. Madison, a convert to Judaism, argued that corrections officials had subverted the portion of RLUIPA that prohibits government from placing substantial burdens on prisoners' exercise of their religious belief. RLUIPA applies to all prisoners in institutions that receive federal funding, which includes all Virginia state prisons This is a list of state prisons in Virginia. It does not include federal prisons or county jails located in the Commonwealth of Virginia.
  • Augusta Correctional Center
  • Baskerville Correctional Unit
  • Bland Correctional Center
  • Botetourt Correctional Unit
.

Virginia officials argued that RLUIPA violated the First Amendment by providing greater protection to inmates' religious liberty rights than other fundamental rights, such as free speech rights.

The 4th Circuit, however, ruled in Madison v. R. Riter that RLUIPA did not advance religion, but only lifted burdens from inmates trying to practicing their religions under prison regulations.

"It was reasonable for Congress to seek to reduce the burdens on religious exercise for inmates without, simultaneously enhancing, say, an inmate's First Amendment rights to pornography pornography

Depiction of erotic behaviour intended to cause sexual excitement. The word originally signified any work of art or literature depicting the life of prostitutes.
," Circuit Judge J. Harvie Wilkinson wrote for the unanimous court. "Free exercise and other First Amendment rights may be equally burdened by prison regulations, but the Constitution itself provides religious exercise with specific safeguards."
COPYRIGHT 2004 Americans United for Separation of Church and State
No portion of this article can be reproduced without the express written permission from the copyright holder.
Copyright 2004, Gale Group. All rights reserved. Gale Group is a Thomson Corporation Company.

 Reader Opinion

Title:

Comment:



 

Article Details
Printer friendly Cite/link Email Feedback
Title Annotation:Around The States
Publication:Church & State
Article Type:Brief Article
Geographic Code:1USA
Date:Feb 1, 2004
Words:239
Previous Article:Commandments crusaders target party platforms.(In The Capital)(Brief Article)
Next Article:Americans United opposes Legislative Prayer in Maryland.(Around The States)(Brief Article)
Topics:



Related Articles
Religion.
High court agrees to hear Commandments, prisoner cases.(In The Capital)(Brief Article)
Conscience clause: Supreme Court unanimously upholds federal religious liberty law in Ohio prison case.(Mitzi Hamilton)
Richards v. Dretke.(DISCIPLINE)(Brief Article)
Resnick v. Adams.(violation of Religious Freedom Restoration Act of 1993)(Brief Article)
Benning v. Georgia.(violation of religious rights)(Brief Article)
Shakur v. Selsky.(RELIGION)(Brief Article)
Sutton v. Rasheed.(Brief Article)
Free speech, expression, association.
Habeas corpus.(Brief Article)

Terms of use | Copyright © 2009 Farlex, Inc. | Feedback | For webmasters | Submit articles