A recent federal law says prisoners' religious rights can be limited only when the government has a strong need to do that, and only as little as possible. The question is, did Congress go too far?
Tim O'Brien reports.
TIM O'BRIEN: The right to practice one's religion is one of the pillars of the Bill of Rights. But just how much of those rights does one retain in prison?
Fifty-two-year-old William Morehouse, who practices the Wicca religion, is serving a life term for murder at the Marion Correction Facility in Ohio.
WILLIAM MOREHOUSE (Inmate, Marion Corrections Facility): They would not allow me to have religious articles. They would not allow me to have books. They would not allow my high priest and priestess to come in and hold rituals for our religious holidays.O'BRIEN: Morehouse claims he is being denied privileges routinely allowed other inmates because his religion is out of the mainstream.
MOREHOUSE: The Wiccan faith is probably the very first faith -- religion -- that was ever practiced by man.
O'BRIEN: Wicca, associated with witchcraft, has an estimated 200,000 followers around the United States -- most of them women -- and perhaps four times that many around the world, although there are no reliable worldwide estimates. Wicca is a polytheistic, earth-based faith that emphasizes feminism, the environment, and diversity of beliefs.
Wiccans, and followers of other nonmainstream religions, sued the state of Ohio under a five-year-old federal law aimed at allowing greater religious freedom in prison. Under prior Supreme Court rulings, any regulations related to prison security would be upheld. The federal law is much more stringent, requiring limitations on an inmate's right to practice religion be justified by some "compelling government interest" and that the limitations be the "least restrictive means" of furthering that interest.
DOUGLAS COLE (Ohio Solicitor General): And what that means is, before a prison warden can deny a religious accommodation request, they have to show that there is no other way they can accomplish their safety need, or whatever compelling interest they can put up; usually it's prison safety.O'BRIEN: The First Amendment prohibits the government from making any law "respecting an establishment of religion." That has come to mean the government cannot even promote religion in general. Prison officials say the federal law does just that by giving religious inmates privileges and benefits not allowed other inmates, such as the right to meet or to wear religious garb.
The inmates are being represented by Ohio State University law professor David Goldberger.
Professor DAVID GOLDBERGER (Attorney for Inmates and Law Professor, Ohio State University): This law is an effort by Congress -- and I think a valid effort -- to require government officials to accommodate the exercise of religion and to stop imposing needless burdens on religious exercise. I think that's constitutional.
O'BRIEN: To Ohio and many other states, it's not just a question of government establishment of religion. They argue that Congress has no business telling the states how to run their prisons, and what Congress does tell the states is wrong -- that it could undermine prison security.Prison officials point to an 11-day siege at one of their prisons in 1993 in which nine inmates and a prison guard died. They say the efforts to accommodate Muslim inmates were a contributing factor.
O'BRIEN: When the U.S. Supreme Court took up the case last Monday (March 21), several justices appeared sympathetic to that security issue. Justice Ginsburg noted that some inmates might use religion as "a pretense for gang membership" and that some religions have "racist principles."
Prof. GOLDBERGER: The statute is very, very carefully put together so that if a particular religious exercise creates a security problem or unbearable administrative burden, then the statute doesn't apply.
O'BRIEN: The Bush administration, in defense of the federal law, found itself in the unusual position of siding with prison inmates and against the states. The law applies only to prisons receiving federal funds. Most do. Lawyers for the Justice Department told the court if Ohio doesn't want to play by Congress's rules, it should simply forego the federal money.
Mr. WILKINSON: The easiest thing to do is to just have no religion for anybody in prison. But that's not going to happen because we know the power of having religious services available -- faith-based services available -- these days in our correction facilities. It plays a major part in the rehabilitative effort. But we're also very careful; we try to understand what lines not to step over, and sometimes those lines are pretty blurred.
