Spyke
chaogomu
lemmy.world

The court ruled that the guards were likely in the wrong, but that the man had to sue them in state court because the prison had never received federal funding and thus federal jurisdiction and the particular federal law allowing lawsuits didn't apply.

90
gAlienLifeformreply
lemmy.world

The court ruled that the guards were likely in the wrong

That's just empty language, not any kind of ruling with legal force behind it

the man had to sue them in state court because the prison had never received federal funding

TIL the first amendment has no effect if you're transferred to the wrong state prison

In 2020, near the end of ‌a five-month prison sentence for drug possession, Landor was transferred to the Raymond Laborde correctional center in Cottonport, Louisiana.

There, Landor reminded officials that the New Orleans-based fifth US circuit court of appeals had ruled in a 2017 case that Louisiana’s policy of cutting the hair of Rastafarians violated the 2000 law. Landor even handed over a copy of that ruling, but a guard threw it in the trash, according to court documents in the case.

Landor was then handcuffed to a chair, held down and shaved.

So the majority opinion is that a state agency can willfully violate a federal law but federal judges can't do anything about it. If that sounds stupid and racist to you that's because it is.

50
chaogomureply
lemmy.world

It's worse when you look at the history of that federal law, section 1983.

The court keeps gutting it because it was a law made to help protect former slaves from southern racists in positions of power.

30
Triumphreply
fedia.io

Jurisdiction matters. That's what this is about.

-7
chaogomureply
lemmy.world

The court is still participating in a miscarriage if justice, because the law this man sued under was meant for situations exactly like this. Section 1983 was added to the federal code just after the civil war, and is how you sue the government over violated rights.

The court is abdicating their power here, because of racism and authoritarianism.

18
usernametbd
lemmy.zip

They only care about one religion’s “rights” and they’ve made that pretty clear.

25
village604reply
adultswim.fan

Except buddy didn't sue at the state level first. The SC is supposed to be the final appeal.

4
gAlienLifeformreply
lemmy.world

Also, there is no state law prohibiting this in Louisiana. There's a federal law that federal courts have previously ruled prohibits this exact thing, but the Supreme Court just ruled that there's no way for individuals to enforce it.

Jackson filed the dissenting opinion, which was joined by fellow liberal justices.

She wrote that prisoners “like Landor who suffer violations of their religious freedom in state prisons – no matter how blatant – will often be left remediless. And encroachments on prisoners’ statutory rights are likely to happen with fair frequency, as state-empowered prison officials will have little incentive to abide by federal law, even if it is handed to them on a piece of paper.”

That's not a figure of speech, btw, he literally handed them a copy of a court ruling telling them this was illegal

15
MountingSuspicion
reddthat.com

The Trump administration backed Landor, urging the supreme court to revive the case.

Not surprising that they'd want the court to rule in favor of suing individuals over violating religious freedom, but I am surprised they lost.

The article does not specify who can be held legally responsible for this violation or if the prison itself was already held responsible.

12
gruereply
lemmy.world

The article does not specify who can be held legally responsible for this violation or if the prison itself was already held responsible.

That's because the answer is now "nobody."

5
MountingSuspicionreply
reddthat.com

Per the ABC article linked from this article:

"We support the principles behind protections of religious freedom and the laws that have been enacted both by Congress and our state," Louisiana Attorney General Liz Murrill told ABC News. "But in a prison setting, this becomes a lot more complicated. It could crush the entire state budget if we were subjected to damages in a situation like this."

What a hellscape. "We can't be held accountable for breaking the law, it'd be too expensive."

5

You reached the end

US supreme court blocks Rastafarian man’s lawsuit over forced head-shaving in prison | Spyke