On The Front Lines
TRI Asks U.S. Supreme Court to Affirm Religious Rights of Prisoners, Uphold Constitutionality of RLUIPA Statute
WASHINGTON, DC--Attorneys for The Rutherford Institute have filed an amicus brief with the U.S. Supreme Court in Jon B. Cutter, et al. v. Reginald Wilkinson, et al., one of three cases before the high court that challenge the constitutionality of the Religious Land Use and Institutionalized Person Act of 2000 (RLUIPA), a federal statute that requires state prisons receiving federal funds to accommodate inmates' religious practices unless they have a compelling interest against the accommodation. The other cases are Gerhardt v. Lazaroff and Miller v. Wilkinson; all three cases were consolidated before the Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals. In requesting that the high court uphold the constitutionality of RLUIPA, Rutherford Institute attorneys have asked the justices to overturn the Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals' ruling that RLUIPA holds a "message of endorsement," which "has the effect of encouraging prisoners to become religious in order to enjoy greater rights" and thereby violates the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment. In their brief, Institute attorneys point to rich historic precedents dating back to James Madison, the principal author of the First Amendment, that set the standard for the protections of religious freedom afforded by the U.S. Constitution and RLUIPA: "Providing a remedy to permit the exercise of the principal liberty upon which our nation was founded was deemed to serve the important purposes of rehabilitation, personal motivation and the advancement of moral standards in the prison environment and, therefore, deserving of accommodation within reason." A copy of the Institute's brief is available here."It is vital that those who are incarcerated and otherwise restricted in their freedoms possess the ability to practice their religious beliefs," said John W. Whitehead, president and founder of The Rutherford Institute. "It is commendable that Congress has seen fit to protect the religious beliefs of prisoners, and it is our hope that the U.S. Supreme Court will do likewise."
In all three cases, Ohio prisoners challenged state prison regulations that denied them access to religious literature and the opportunity to conduct religious services. Arguing in support of RLUIPA's constitutionality and the need to protect the religious rights of prisoners, Institute attorneys point out that even in colonial days, legislative bodies in the United States recognized the special need for the protection of religious exercise. Prisoners of society, for example, were no exception to this protection. Though sometimes jailed for the very beliefs they sought to propagate, preachers were permitted to practice their religious beliefs behind bars. "Today, the Congress of the United States has affirmed the importance of these rights by granting prisoners a procedural remedy to protect religious liberties from infringement based on the whims and personal fancies of correctional personnel." In doing so, Institute attorneys reason that Congress is advancing the general welfare of prisoners, insuring that congressionally appropriated funds are not used to deny protected liberties, and safeguarding for all citizens the interest of religious freedom that the Framers identified as special in the First Amendment.
The Rutherford Institute is an international, nonprofit civil liberties organization committed to defending constitutional and human rights.
Related links:
Sign-up to receive The Rutherford Institute's Insider Report E-newsletter!
Sign-up to receive John W. Whitehead's Weekly Column today!
Sound Off! Tell us what you think about this news story!
Get your free copy of the Bill of Rights!
Support the Fight! Give Today!
Rutherford News Archives
Recent Victories!
The Rutherford Institute
|
