Insurance Matters By Jason Shroot: jason brian shroot

JEFFERSON CITY, MO —United States District Judge Nanette Laughrey granted a preliminary injunction yesterday that requires all Missouri prisons to notify senders whenever written materials they send are censored, seized and withheld from prisoners. The judge also ordered that after getting such notice, senders must have an opportunity to appeal the censorship.

The American Civil Liberties Union of Eastern Missouri and the ACLU Foundation of Kansas & Western Missouri filed a lawsuit in August on behalf of Bobbie Y. Lane, owner of the publishing business named Caged Potential, against officials of the Missouri Department of Corrections. Starting in late 2010, Caged Potential received nine orders from inmates at Crossroads Correctional Center in Cameron, Missouri, for a prisoner-authored book. Crossroads mailroom staff seized the novels and refused to deliver them to the inmates but never gave Caged Potential notice that the books had been seized or an opportunity to challenge the seizures.

“Inmates and publishers were denied their constitutional right to communicate ideas because publishers weren’t given notice that the prison had seized or censored their publications and other mailings,” added Doug Bonney, legal director of the ACLU Foundation of Kansas and Western Missouri. “We successfully argued that without notice, someone who writes or sends a prisoner written material has no way of knowing that their communication has not reached its intended recipient and therefore they cannot appeal the decision to censor it,” said Tony Rothert, legal director of the ACLU of Eastern Missouri.

“This decision will have a significant positive impact not only for publishers, but for anyone who communicates with prisoners,” notes Brenda L. Jones, executive director of the ACLU-EM. “They’ll now know with certainty if their letters reach their intended recipients and have some recourse if they don’t.”

The case was tried in the United States District Court, Western District of Missouri, Central Division. The ACLU attorneys included Bonney, Rothert and Grant Doty. Copies of the court documents can be found on the ACLU-EM’s website.

campaign

Safe Communities, Fair Sentences Blog of RightsRelated PostsBreaking the Addiction to Incarceration: Weekly HighlightsMarty Atencio (1967-2011): Another Victim of Sheriff Joe Arpaio’s JailsBreaking the Addiction to Incarceration: Weekly HighlightsSee AllTrending Topics Police Surveillance Video Surveillance Freedom of Expression Government Surveillance Online Privacy Civil Liberties in the Digital Age Internet Free Expression Twitter Single-Sex Education War on Drugs

See All

Features Big Profits, Broken Dreams Let People Vote: Removing Restrictions and Barriers to Voting in America We Can Stop Solitary See All» Take Action Ensure Due Process for the Incarcerated

The Prison Litigation Reform Act (PLRA) imposes insurmountable obstacles to justice. The PLRA was intended to stem “frivolous” lawsuits by prisoners, but too often it denies justice to victims of rape, assault and other rights violations. Take Action Now

Related Links CasesLettersReportsACLU CentersPress ReleasesMiscellaneous Our History

View the Original article

Legal Challenge Filed Against Policy Excluding Women from Combat

Share PrintEmailFacebookTwitterShareBookmark & ShareXGoogleDeliciousDiggRedditStumbleUponTechnoratiCurrentPermalink November 27, 2012

Outdated Policy Fails to Recognize Women’s Service and Leadership in Iraq and Afghanistan Conflicts

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
CONTACT: (212) 549-2666; media

View the Original article

ACLU of Pennsylvania Files Brief in Support of City of Philadelphia in Boy Scouts Lawsuit

Share PrintEmailFacebookTwitterShareBookmark & ShareXGoogleDeliciousDiggRedditStumbleUponTechnoratiCurrentPermalink November 28, 2012

Friend-of-the-Court Brief Argues Government Is Not Obligated to Fund Discrimination by Private Organizations

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
CONTACT: (212) 549-2666; media

View the Original article

Massachusetts high court rules against prolonged solitary confinement without due process

Share PrintEmailFacebookTwitterShareBookmark & ShareXGoogleDeliciousDiggRedditStumbleUponTechnoratiCurrentPermalink November 28, 2012

Supreme Judicial Court reaffirms principle that use of solitary must be balanced with firm legal protections, including a 90-day limit without due process.

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
CONTACT: (212) 549-2666; media

View the Original article