Religion in Prison

Legal Issues

The First Amendment of the U.S. Constitution states that “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof.” Because of this amendment, state and federal correctional institutions must provide inmates with certain legal rights concerning the practice of religion. Among these rights are the opportunity to assemble for religious services, attend different denominational services, receive visits from ministers, correspond with religious leaders, observe dietary laws, pursue name changes, and obtain, wear, and use religious paraphernalia. None of these rights, however, may supersede the security considerations of the institution.

Many of the leading court cases that provide current guidelines for the practice of religion in American prisons were decided during the 1960s and 1970s. Until then, legal issues related to religious inmates were rarely brought before the courts. Among the most important cases during this period were Fulwood v. Clemmer (1962), Cooper v. Pate (1964), and Cruz v. Beto (1972). In the Fulwood (1962) case, the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia ruled that correctional officials must recognize the Muslim faith as a legitimate religion and not restrict those inmates who wish to hold services. In Cooper v. Pate (1964), the courts recognized that prison officials must make every effort to treat members of all religious groups equally, unless they can demonstrate reasonableness to do otherwise. In Cruz v. Beto, which at the time was the first case about religion in prison to reach the Supreme Court, it was determined that Buddhist prisoners were entitled to practice their faith in comparable ways to those in the major Western religious denominations.

Not all court cases related to religion have been decided in favor of inmates. In 1977, for example, a federal court ruled in Theriault v. Carlson that the First Amendment does not protect so-called religions that are obvious shams, that tend to mock established institutions, and whose members lack religious sincerity. This case was one of the first to find against inmates' religious rights.

Courts have a difficult task when they are asked to decide between the legitimate interests of inmates and the correctional facility. As a result, the courts now rely on a “balancing test” that helps them decide how conflicting issues should be weighed. The U.S. Supreme Court came up with this test in 1987 in the case Turner v. Safley. It consists of four

...