Olone v. Estate of Shabazz essays

O'lone v. Estate of Shabazz essays Facts: Muslim inmates brought suit under 42 USCS 1983, stating that policies newly adopted by New Jersey prison officials prevented them from attending a weekly Muslim congregational service, and therefore were violating their rights under the Free Exercise Clause of the First Amendment. The first policy, Standard 853, required prisoners of the respondents class to work outside the buildings in which they were housed and in which the services took place. The second policy prohibited inmates in that class to return to those buildings during the day. The Federal District Court ruled that no constitutional violation was present. The Court of Appeals vacated and remanded however, stating that the policies could only be sustained if the State showed the challenged policies were intended for security purposes, and that no reasonable method exists by which prisoners religious rights can be accommodated without creating bona fide security problems. Legal Question: Should a prisoners religious rights take priority over prison policies made to ensure security? Decision: The decision of the United States Court of Appeals was reversed. (5-4) Holding: (1) The prison regulations did not violate the free exercise of religion clause. (2) The prison officials did not have the burden of proving that no reasonable alternative method existed by which the inmates religious rights could be accommodated without creating bona fide security problems. The court must resolve the present issue by determining whether a prisoners religious rights takes precedence over prison policies made to ensure security. In Price v. Johnston, 334 U.S. 266, 285 (1984), it was ruled that lawful incarceration brings about the necessary withdrawal or limitation of many privileges and rights, a retraction justi ...