Supreme Court agrees to hear case of Rastafarian man seeking to sue prison officials for cutting his dreadlocks

The Supreme Court agreed Monday to take up the case of a Rastafarian man seeking to sue prison officials in Louisiana who cut off his dreadlocks while he was incarcerated.
The case is the latest that involves religious rights to catch the high court's attention, and it could have significant implications by allowing prisoners to sue government officials for damages when their religious rights are burdened under a federal law enacted 25 years ago.
Damon Landor, a devout Rastafarian who began serving a five-month prison sentence in 2020 for drug possession, had taken a religious vow years earlier to not cut his locks.
But his situation took a turn for the worst after arriving at a new prison weeks before his release. He handed officials a copy of an appeals court ruling from 2017 that allowed prisoners to have dreadlocks. The guards tossed it in the trash. They then handcuffed him to a chair and forcibly shaved his head.
Following Landor's release, he sued Louisiana prison officials and guards for damages under a decades-old law that protects the religious interests of inmates. But lower courts dismissed his case, ruling that the law doesn't allow individuals to pursue damages against prison officials for alleged violations of it even though, in one court's view, he had the victim of a 'grave legal wrong.'
The conservative New Orleans-based 5th US Circuit Court of Appeals said in a unanimous decision last year that it 'emphatically' condemned 'the treatment that Landor endured,' but an earlier appeals court precedent settled the case against him. The full 5th Circuit divided on whether to hear the case.
President Bill Clinton signed the bipartisan law in 2000 that protects the religion interests of state prisoners but it's not clear whether that law allows people who were harmed to sue for money damages. The Supreme Court ruled in 2020 that a similar law with nearly identical language allows people whose religious rights have been burdened to seek damages against government officials acting in their individual capacity.
'Without a damages remedy,' lawyers for Landor told the justices in court papers, inmates 'will often be left without meaningful protection for their religious exercise.'
In other words, once Landor's head was shaved, the only way for him to have some legal remedy is through money damages.
'The no-damages rule ensured that respondent officials would not be held accountable for violating the religious rights of a prisoner set for release in just three weeks and prevented him from obtaining any relief for the abuse he suffered,' his lawyers said.
Attorneys for the Louisiana state officials urged the court to not take up the case, arguing among other things that Landor could bring his claims under state law. They also told the justices that permitting the lawsuit to move forward could hamper the state's ability to hire staff in its prisons.
Siding with Landor, they told the court, 'would almost certainly deepen the problem by driving down staffing levels and dissuading job applicants.'
'That, in turn, inevitably would lead to worse prison conditions and perhaps lessened protections for religious liberty, as understaffed prisons attempt to survive the growing prison populations,' they added. 'No one wins in that situation.'
The Trump administration, meanwhile, had asked the justices to take up the matter. Solicitor General D. John Sauer told the court in May that the federal government has an interest 'in ensuring that prisons or other institutions receiving federal funds do not substantially burden religious exercise, and damages liability is closely connected to that interest.'

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Learn with AIFact CheckingText to SpeechAI Summary

Related Articles

Bloomberg

22 minutes ago

• Bloomberg

Ford Escalates Battery Job Warnings as Congress Mulls EV Cuts

Ford Motor Co. intensified its campaign to preserve clean energy manufacturing subsidies Monday, warning jobs at its electric-vehicle battery plant in southwestern Michigan could be at risk if Republicans in Congress pare back tax credits in President Donald Trump's multi-trillion dollar economic package. The $3 billion plant in Marshall, about 100 miles west of Detroit, is slated to produce 20 gigawatt-hours of lithium iron phosphate, or LFP batteries, and employ 1,700 people after it starts production in 2026. The 2 million-square-foot site, which is still under construction, has drawn intense political scrutiny since it was announced in 2023 because Ford is licensing the technology to build the batteries from China's Contemporary Amperex Technology Co. Ltd, the world's largest battery manufacturer.

Fox News

22 minutes ago

• Fox News

Top Trump health official slams Democrats for 'misleading' claims about Medicaid reform

FIRST ON FOX: A top Trump White House official is looking to undercut Senate Democrats' talking points on Medicaid, arguing that the GOP's plan to reform the healthcare program would benefit rural hospitals, not harm them. Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services Administrator Dr. Mehmet Oz told Fox News Digital that "special interests are pushing misleading talking points to try and stop the most ambitious healthcare reforms ever." Oz's sentiment comes as Senate Majority Leader John Thune, R-S.D., and Senate Republicans sprint to finish their work on President Donald Trump's "big, beautiful bill" ahead of a self-imposed July 4 deadline. Part of the bill from the Senate Finance Committee aims to make good on the GOP's promise to root out waste, fraud and abuse within the widely used healthcare program by including work requirements and booting illegal immigrants from benefit rolls, among other measures. Tweaks to the Medicaid provider tax rate have ruffled feathers on both sides of the aisle. Indeed, Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y. and Sens. Ron Wyden, D-Ore., and Jeff Merkley, D-Ore., sent a letter to Trump and the top congressional Republicans last week warning that changes to the Medicaid provider tax rate would harm over 300 rural hospitals. And a cohort of Senate Republicans were furious with the change after the bill dropped last week. But Oz contended that "only 5%" of inpatient Medicaid spending happens in rural communities, and that the mammoth bill "instead targets abuses overwhelmingly utilized by large hospitals with well-connected lobbyists." "We are committed to preserving and improving access to care in rural communities with a transformative approach that bolsters advanced technology, invests in infrastructure, and supports workforce — rather than propping up a system that mostly benefits wealthier urban areas," Oz said. Schumer's letter included data from a study recently conducted by the Cecil G. Sheps Center for Health Services Research at the University of North Carolina at his behest. He warned that if the bill is passed as is, millions of people would be kicked off of their healthcare coverage, and "rural hospitals will not get paid for the services they are required by law to provide to patients." Fox News Digital reached out to Schumer, Wyden and Merkley for comment. However, another report from the Trump-aligned Paragon Health Institute argued similarly to Oz that special interest groups and healthcare lobbyists were "flooding the airwaves with claims" that Republicans' changes to Medicaid would shutter rural hospitals. For example, they argued that a recent report from the Center for American Progress warned that over 200 rural hospitals would be at risk of closure, but that the findings were based on changes to the federal medical assistance percentage, or the amount of Medicaid costs paid for by the federal government. Changes to that percentage were mulled by congressional Republicans but were not included in the "big, beautiful bill." Still, the changes to the Medicaid provider tax rate, which were a stark departure from the House GOP's version of the bill, angered the Republicans who have warned not to make revisions to the healthcare program that could shut down rural hospitals and boot working Americans from their benefits. The Senate Finance Committee went further than the House's freeze of the provider tax rate, or the amount that state Medicaid programs pay to healthcare providers on behalf of Medicaid beneficiaries, for non-Affordable Care Act expansion states, and included a provision that lowers the rate in expansion states annually until it hits 3.5%. However, Sen. Susan Collins, R-Maine, is working on a possible change to the bill that would create a provider relief fund that could sate her and other Republicans' concerns about the change to the provider tax rate.

Washington Post

26 minutes ago

• Washington Post

NATO is worth paying for. Trump is right that Europe needs to do more.

President Donald Trump will attend the first NATO summit of his second term Tuesday, at a time when the alliance's 21st-century relevance has never been clearer — but when its sustainability is also in question, with a NATO-skeptical American president back in the Oval Office. Given these realities, Europe needs to show it will contribute its share to ensure the alliance is stable and strong.