Print

Email story

Comment

Email editor

Prison reading curbs debated

By wire services
Published March 28, 2006

WASHINGTON - The Supreme Court grappled Monday with whether withholding newspapers and magazines from inmates as a disciplinary action violates the First Amendment.

The court heard oral arguments in the case concerning a Pennsylvania prison unit that denies access to such publications as part of a program to encourage better behavior by disruptive prisoners.

Inmates in the unit are allowed to possess materials such as paperback books and religious or legal journals, but not secular newspapers or magazines. State officials, backed by the Bush administration, say it is part of an incentive program for good conduct.

A civil rights lawsuit was filed in 2001 on behalf of the unit by Ronald Banks, a prisoner then being held in Pittsburgh who was kept from receiving his subscription to the Christian Science Monitor .

A lawyer for the inmates argued that there is no practical reason for denying access to such materials and that prisoners have a right to know what is happening outside prison.

"They can read about an ancient battle in the Bible, but they can't read about Iraq," said Jere Krakoff, who represented the prisoners. "I'm not sure that's a healthy situation."

Lawyers for the state pointed out that inmates would still be able to receive information through visits from lawyers and family members, and added that newspapers have frequently been cited as a security risk by corrections officials, sometimes being used to start fires.

The justices asked how broad the First Amendment standard could be applied. If prisons could no longer deny inmates access to newspapers, could they also be prohibited from using similar types of punishments?

"Under the argument you just gave, they have to give the TV rights back, they have to give the magazine rights back, and so forth," said Justice David Souter, responding to Krakoff.

The case could have an impact on how prisons across the country deal with unruly behavior.

--In other action Monday, the court declined to stop a lawsuit accusing a bank of improperly buying Florida motor vehicle records.

At issue is whether drivers whose information was shared had to prove actual damages to recover money under the federal Driver's Privacy Protection Act.

Fidelity Federal Bank & Trust paid a penny each for names and addresses of more than a half-million people who registered vehicles with the state from 2000 to 2003. The company hoped to interest the car owners in refinancing their debt.

A federal judge sided with the bank, but the 11th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals said that the lawsuit filed by one driver on behalf of himself and others should proceed.

[Last modified March 28, 2006, 03:01:29]