by David M. Reutter

On June 30, 2022, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit affirmed judgment for Georgia prison officials in a lawsuit alleging the policy governing prisoner shower escorts violated their First Amendment rights.

Hjalmar Rodriguez was imprisoned at Hays State Prison after being convicted of involuntary manslaughter. While there, he fatally stabbed another prisoner during a fight. He was then moved into the Special Management Unit (SMU) at the Georgia Diagnostic and Classification Prison, which handles “offenders who commit or lead others to commit violent, disruptive, predatory, or riotous actions, or who otherwise pose a serious threat to the security of the institution.”

Rodriguez was housed in single-occupancy cells for most of his time in SMU. The cells were not equipped with showers, so each prisoner was escorted to separate showers three times per week. Prisoners were allowed to wear only boxer shorts and shower slides during escort and were handcuffed behind the back. A search was conducted upon leaving the cell and the shower. Those steps ensure “that the escorting officers were safe and that the prison remained secure,” the Court recalled.

However, Rodriguez disagreed with those policies, believing they infringed upon his religious rights. As a Muslim, he practiced ghusl, a ritual bathing that involved washing the whole body multiple times and must be completed every 24 hours. He asserted it was impossible to practice ghusl using the sink and towel in his cell because it “requires a large amount of water” that would cause a slipping hazard. However, he conceded he could practice a simpler and more frequent religious washing called wudu.

Rodriguez also complained that his religious beliefs required him to dress modestly “by wearing garments that cover from mid-stomach or the navel to the bottom of the knees” unless he was around immediate family. The shower policy obviously did not allow that much clothing.

Defendants moved for summary judgment, asserting the shower policy satisfied the First Amendment. In the alternative, they argued they were entitled to qualified immunity. The U.S. District Court for the Middle District of Georgia granted the motion. Rodriguez appealed.

The Eleventh Circuit said that under the First Amendment, the “question is not whether the prison accommodated every aspect of [Rodriguez’s] religious practice, but whether he was allowed other means of practicing his religious beliefs.” The Court noted he could perform wudu, the other method of religious washing. He was allowed to participate in “Friday Jumu’ah service” by having the Muslim chaplain “go cell by cell to individual inmates for their Friday prayer.” The prison also adjusted the meal schedule during Ramadan to allow observance of the religious fast for those who wanted to participate.

Next, the Court found that allowing daily showers would be “a severe drain on the prison’s limited resources, forcing prison officers to more than double the time they spent making shower transports.” Rodriguez’s alternative to move him to a cell with a shower was not an alternative policy, but an individual exemption to the current policy.

Finally, Rodriguez conceded there existed no materially similar case which might establish that these kinds of policies violate prisoners’ First Amendment rights. As such, the district court’s order was affirmed. See: Rodriguez v. Burnside, 38 F.4th 1324 (11th Cir. 2022).

Subscribe today

Already a subscriber? Login