In America, citizens are guaranteed the freedom from the government from establishing a national religion and or the freedom to practice a religion of their choosing, which is a fundamental civil right guaranteed under the First Amendment to the United States Constitution. “The First Amendment prohibits the government from making any law “respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof” (FindLaw, 2015). Penal institutions are seeing an increase in inmates claiming some sort of religious freedom for a variety of reasons. It appears many inmates are attempting to circumvent the established rules and or practices within correctional facilities and or jails in order to gain some special exemption, freedom, special privilege, and or to challenge the status quo. This issue has become a controversial topic over the years on both sides of the political spectrum for a variety of reasons and “Congress has supported laws that expand religious liberty” (Wasserman, Connolly, & Kerley, 2018). “One such example is the Religious Land Use and Institutionalized Persons Act (2000), which significantly enhanced prisoners’ right to religious exercise above the minimum provided by the First Amendment” (Wasserman, Connolly, & Kerley, 2018).
“In the 2015 case of Holt v. Hobbs, the Supreme Court ruled in favor of a Muslim prisoner who had been denied his request for religious accommodations under RLUIPA because the prison failed to satisfy the act’s strict scrutiny standard before it denied accommodations to a prisoner to practice his faith” (Wasserman, Connolly, & Kerley, 2018). When an inmate enters the penal institution, they obviously lose some of their constitutional rights due to them being remanded to a penal institution as a result of them being convicted of a crime. Administrators should be cautioned when considering any cases concerning or regarding an inmate’s religious freedom claims in order to stop frivolous suits by inmates. Therefore, it is imperative and or paramount that policies and procedures be established within the institution to handle religious freedom requests to ensure transparency and consistency. Religious freedom does not give an inmate the right to do whatever they want and not follow the rules within the facility, because they claim religious freedom and or exemption and common sense should be used when evaluating and or handling these situations. One of the basic principles when considering a specific inmate religious freedom claim and or exemption would be to ensure that the religious freedom does not infringe on the rights and safety of others, the integrity and safety of the facility, and ensure that it does not place an undue financial burden on the institution and or taxpayers with the accommodation.
Save your time!
We can take care of your essay
- Proper editing and formatting
- Free revision, title page, and bibliography
- Flexible prices and money-back guarantee
If an inmate's religious freedom claims and or the exemption is denied by the penal institution, then it should be placed in writing to the inmate and cite each specific statutory exemption as the basis for the denial of the request. The penal institution should be cautioned to ensure that they are not catering to a type and or form of religion and that each religious freedom claim or request is handled and given the same level of consideration and not just accommodating certain types of religious freedoms. An example of a frivolous inmate religious freedom claim, or exemption would be that they cannot wear a prison uniform and or jumpsuit because it is against their religion or somehow brands them or infringes on them. As an administrator of a penal institution, it would be imperative that when considering a request from an inmate regarding some type of religious freedom that all federal, state and local laws be followed and or considered in evaluating the request in order to preserve the basic constitutional rights of all citizens, including inmates, staff and or employees. In conclusion, all religious freedom claims and or exemptions should be evaluated on a case-by-case base integrating federal, state, and local laws and encompassing common sense, the safety and security of correctional officers, staff, and or other inmates. If it was not a safety concern and could be reasonably accommodated without jeopardizing the safety, security, and integrity of the facility then I believe it should be accommodated in order to comply with an inmate’s civil rights.
There have been previous lawsuits in reference to the diets of inmates due to religious preferences and inmates that starve themselves due to religious reasons. If my memory serves me correctly, I believe that the courts have ruled that the correctional staff is not to force feed the inmate in order to preserve their human life and that the diet if it can be reasonably accommodated should be granted; however, I could be wrong. The Bible gives guidance that we are to love God with all our heart and to also love thy neighbor as thyself. “And thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy mind, and with all thy strength: this is the first commandment” (Mark 12:30, KJV). “And the second is like, namely this, Thou shalt love thy neighbor as thyself. There is none another commandment greater than these” (Mark 12:31, KJV). Even though we may have different religious ideologies and or beliefs it is important that we love our neighbor and pray for them that the Lord reveals to them the error of the ways of their sin and or religion that they may be practicing and that they turn to the life and or religion that glorifies God and is pleasing to him.
References:
- Bible Gateway. (n.d.). Mark 12:30 - King James Version. Retrieved from https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=mark+12%3A30&version=KJV
- Bible Gateway. (2006, November 25). Mark 12:31 - King James Version. Retrieved from https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=mark+12%3A31&version=KJV
- FindLaw. (2015, April 4). Federal Religious Freedom Restoration Act Overview - FindLaw. Retrieved from https://civilrights.findlaw.com/discrimination/federal-religious-freedom-restoration-act-overview.html
- Wasserman, L., Connolly, J., & Kerley, K. (2018). Religious Liberty in Prisons under the Religious Land Use and Institutionalized Persons Act following Holt v Hobbs: An Empirical Analysis. Religions, 9(7), 210. https://doi.org/10.3390/rel9070210
Stuck on your essay?
