×
You've used up your 3 free articles for this month. Subscribe today.
RFRA Case Set for Trial
Loaded on Feb. 15, 1996
published in Prison Legal News
February, 1996, page 5
A federal district court in Pennsylvania held that a factual dispute existed as to whether a jail's policy banning detainees from wearing religious headgear substantially burdened the exercise of religion under the Religious Freedom Restoration Act (RFRA), 42 U.S.C. § 2000bb(b). In its ruling, denying the defendants' summary judgment motion ...
Filed under:
Civil Procedure,
Mootness,
Religious Freedom Restoration Act,
Religious Property.
Location:
Pennsylvania.
Full article and associated cases available to subscribers.
As a digital subscriber to Prison Legal News, you can access full text and downloads for this and other premium content.
Already a subscriber? Login
More from this issue:
- How the Florida DOC Circumvents Prisoners' Rights to Meaningful Access to the Courts, by Van Poyck, William
- Jury Awards $39,000 in Texas Scalding
- From the Editor, by Dan Pens
- RFRA Case Set for Trial
- Washington DOC Costs Policy Enjoined
- Ohio Update, by John Perotti
- Unrest in NY Prisons, by EO E
- Suspect Peppers in LA, by Clay Huff
- An Angry White Man, by C L
- U.S.P. Lewisburg Lockdown
- Washington Court Access Suit Settled, by Paul Wright
- New Jersey Takes Computers
- Jurors Challenge Tennessee Constitution
- Alaska Overcrowding Fines Increase
- Attorney Fee Award Affirmed
- ISRB Can't Change Rules to Avoid Compliance with Court Order
- Washington Prisoners Have Liberty Interest in Good Time
- No Jurisdiction for Some Appeals
- Kidnapping and Extortion, Texas Style, by Dan Pens
- Irish POWs in the US
- Peru Political Materials
- It's About Time: Americas Imprisonment Binge, by Linda Wilson
- Weight Lifting Info Available on the Internet
- No Immunity for Retaliatory Discipline
- Fifth Circuit to Require Administrative Exhaustion
- Georgia Prisoner Strangled by Guards
- Colorado Prisoners Riot in Texas Jail
- $7,639.20 Awarded in Retaliatory Transfer
- No Immunity for AIDS RA Claim
- Partial Filing Fee Allowed
- BOP Multiple Cell May Violate Constitution
- Failure to Provide Medical Treatment Unlawful
- Court Access in Massachusetts DDU Challenged
- CDC Hobby Shop Ruling Affirmed
- NC Prisoners Riot in Tennessee
- Fabricated Charges State Claim
- Ninth Circuit Rejects Disciplinary Double Jeopardy
- Sandin Applied Retroactively
More from these topics:
- Third Circuit Unhappy with Federal Detainee’s Denied Marriage Request at Pennsylvania GEO Group Lockup, April 1, 2024. GEO Group/Wackenhut, Religious Freedom Restoration Act, Marriage, Public versus Private Employees, State Actions.
- Fifth Circuit: Texas Prison Property Rules Withstand Scrutiny Under Religious Free-Exercise Clause, March 1, 2023. Religious Freedom, Religious Property.
- Fourth Circuit Says Virginia May Require Muslim Prisoner to Purchase Prayer Oil From Vendor Also Selling Pork and “Idols”, Sept. 1, 2022. Food/Commissary (Private Prisons), Religious Freedom Restoration Act, Religious Practices.
- California Court of Appeal Holds Prisoner May Challenge Administrative Disciplinary Violation Already Served, March 1, 2022. Disciplinary Appeals, Mootness.
- Connecticut Supreme Court Overrules Aquino, Holding Appeal Not Moot Where Defendant Deported During Pendency but Unclear Whether Appealed Conviction Sole Basis for Deportation, Feb. 15, 2022. Mootness, Appeals/Appellate Jurisdiction, Deportation/Removal/Exclusion.
- Prison Officials Actions to Correct Inhumane Cell Conditions Merit Judgement in Their Favor, Nov. 1, 2021. Conditions of Confinement, Mootness.
- California Appeals Court Holds Habeas Action Over Censorship of Tattoo Magazine Mooted By Delivery, Sept. 1, 2021. Mootness, Habeas Corpus, Censorship.
- Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court Rules on Medical Parole Despite Death of Prisoners Who Sought Judicial Review, Sept. 1, 2021. Mootness, Medical Care/Treatment.
- SCOTUS: RFRA’s ‘Appropriate Damages’ Includes Monetary Awards, Feb. 15, 2021. Retaliation, Settlements, Religious Freedom Restoration Act.
- Dismissal Not Authorized for Oregon Victim’s Refusal to Comply With Subpoena, Oct. 4, 2020. Civil Procedure, Subpoenas, Fair Trial.