Legal Issues

We are not lawyers so cannot - and would not - give any legal advice. But we try to follow legal cases that relate to vegetarian life in prison. Below are some cases we find relevant - please contact us and let us know if you know of other cases you think we should include.

Summer 2008: Inmate Wins Case Over Diet By Jonathan Saltzman Boston Globe Staff June 19, 2008 Fourteen years ago, Henry Boateng was sentenced to life in prison for murder. Boateng recently won a legal victory: a federal judge found that the state prison system violated his civil rights by denying him a vegan diet. US Chief District Judge Mark L. Wolf concluded that the system violated a 2000 federal statute that protects religious freedom in prison. Use this link to read the Boston Globe article.

The Religious Land Use and Institutionalized Persons Act  (RLUIPA) RLUIPA is a federal statute that was passed in 2000 to provide stronger protection for religious freedom in the land-use and prison contexts. The U.S. Senate summary of the bill states the following: Religious Land Use and Institutionalized Persons Act of 2000 - Prohibits any government from imposing or implementing a land use regulation in a manner that imposes a substantial burden on the religious exercise of a person, including a religious assembly or institution, unless the government demonstrates that imposition of the burden on that person, assembly, or institution: (1) is in furtherance of a compelling governmental interest; and (2) is the least restrictive means of furthering that compelling governmental interest. Prohibits any government from imposing a substantial burden on the religious exercise of a person residing in or confined to an institution, as defined in the Civil Rights of Institutionalized Persons Act, even if the burden results from a rule of general applicability, unless the government demonstrates that imposition of the burden on that person: (1) is in furtherance of a compelling governmental interest; and (2) is the least restrictive means of furthering that compelling governmental interest. States that nothing in this Act shall be construed to amend or repeal the Prison Litigation Reform Act of 1995 (including provisions of law amended by that Act). Read the Religious Land Use and Institutionalized Persons Act  (RLUIPA).

Koger v Bryan Koger v. Bryan:  Koger brought suit against prison officials claiming that failure to accommodate his religious-based dietary request was a violation of his rights under the Religious Land Use and Institutionalized Persons Act (RLUIPA), and the First and Fourteenth Amendments. Summary judgment for defendants and other rulings are reversed and remanded for further proceedings where: 1) the record established that prison officials violated plaintiff's rights as secured under RLUIPA, and judgment for plaintiff on his claim brought under that statute was warranted; and 2) the district court abused its discretion in failing to exercise the discretion available to it under Fed. R. Civ. P. 4. Read the Koger v Bryan case.