ROANOKE TIMES
Copyright (c) 1996, Roanoke Times
DATE: Thursday, June 6, 1996 TAG: 9606060078
SECTION: VIRGINIA PAGE: C-3 EDITION: METRO
SOURCE: JAN VERTEFEUILLE STAFF WRITER
A federal judge has ordered a Virginia prison to temporarily stop enforcing a new state policy that makes it harder for inmates to get special religious diets.
U.S. District Judge Samuel Wilson issued a temporary restraining order on behalf of Muslim prisoner Rahim X, saying the policy violates inmates' First Amendment religious rights.
The order lasts for 10 days, until a hearing can be held.
The policy, enacted May 7, allows Jewish and Muslim prisoners religious meals only if they provide a written statement from a rabbi or an imam indicating that "the inmate sincerely holds these religious beliefs and requires a kosher or Nation of Islam diet,'' according to a Department of Corrections memo.
Clergy submitting written statements on behalf of inmates must also submit "credentials" to the Department of Corrections documenting their "qualifications," according to the memo.
In his order, Wilson said the policy violates the First Amendment by conditioning inmates' "free exercise of religious beliefs upon the intervention of religious clerics."
The order applies only to Buckingham Correctional Center in Dillwyn, which was the only state prison providing the special diets. Virginia prison officials said they enacted the policy because they were being swamped with inmate requests for special Jewish and Islamic diets. The Corrections Department must pay more for the meals and has to transfer approved inmates to Buckingham for the diets.
A department spokesman said Wednesday he couldn't comment on the judge's order specifically because the Attorney General's Office had not yet briefed him.
David Botkins said the department enacted its policy in May because of the costs involved, not to interfere with prisoners' religious beliefs.
"The department does not want to deprive anyone of a diet needed for particular religious beliefs, but wants verification to make sure the inmate's request is motivated by sincerely held beliefs," he said.
The verification is necessary because officials don't always believe the prisoners' requests are genuine.
"Who knows why convicted felons do some of the things they do? Many like to just get attention, and many like to just create problems for staff," Botkins said. "But the department does take religious requirements very seriously."
Three inmates filed suit in U.S. District Court in Roanoke over the policy, but two cases were resolved before court action. One inmate was granted a kosher diet; another decided not to pursue the request.
Of the almost 400 inmates who received religious diets at Buckingham before the policy went into effect, 231 got kosher meals and 151 got food appropriate for Muslims. In comparison, only 88 inmates were getting religious diets at the end of 1994, according to statistics provided by the Department of Corrections.
Jewish dietary law prohibits consumption of pork and shellfish, among other foods, and dictates that meat and dairy products be served separately. It also regulates the manner in which food animals are slaughtered, how they must be examined for disease and how soon afterward they are to be eaten.
Islamic law also forbids consuming pork and animal blood. As under Jewish law, animals must be slaughtered by cutting their throats while saying a blessing.
The Department of Corrections buys frozen kosher meals that cost $7 per day per inmate, according to Janice Dow, Department of Corrections community resource manager. Islamic meals cost about $4 a day. The price of a regular diet is about $3 a day, she said.
Under the new policy, inmates who were transferred to Buckingham specifically for the diet and who are unable to get an outside clergy member to vouch for them could be transferred to another prison.
Wilson issued the temporary restraining order Tuesday evening, after the state failed to respond to an earlier order that it explain by May 31 why X's request shouldn't be granted. In that order, Wilson said, "This court is not the appropriate forum to adjudicate the dietary restrictions of inmates. Federal courts should not intervene in the daily management of state prisons. requires the intervention of religious clerics or spiritual leaders as a precondition to the exercise of First Amendment freedoms, even by those incarcerated."
The court order does not necessarily mean Islamic meals will be provided to X, a new transfer to Buckingham who was not receiving a special diet before the policy went into effect.
Wilson's order says the prison is not required to provide a special diet to any inmate because of religious beliefs, but only that it cannot enforce the new policy's requirement that a cleric vouch for an inmate.
The old policy required inmates interested in religious diets to appear at a hearing before a committee of prison personnel. That committee then decided whether an inmate should be transferred to Buckingham.
Staff writer Betty Hayden Snider contributed to this story.
LENGTH: Medium: 92 linesby CNB