AVAILABLE FOR INTERVIEW

Supreme Court to review constitutionality of RLUIPA prisoner provisions; Becket Fund, leading RLUIPA litigator, available for comment in support of law

The Supreme Court announced Tuesday that it will review the constitutionality of the prisoner provisions of the Religious Land Use and Institutionalized Persons Act (RLUIPA). This federal law, signed by President Clinton in September 2000, requires state prisons receiving federal funds to accommodate inmates’ religious practices unless they have a compelling interest against the accommodation.

The Becket Fund for Religious Liberty attorneys, who are experts on RLUIPA and religious freedom law, are available for comment.

The Becket Fund —an international, interfaith, public-interest law firm dedicated to protecting the free expression of all religious traditions—has been the country’s leading litigator of RLUIPA cases, and has maintained a website (www.rluipa.com) dedicated exclusively to the law. The Becket Fund has argued in scores of cases in front of courts across the country, including this one, that the law is completely constitutional.

In Cutter v. Wilkinson (03-9877), the Court will determine whether the prisoner provisions of the law violate the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment. The plaintiffs are Ohio prisoners who assert unconventional religious beliefs. They maintain that Ohio prison regulations denying them access to religious literature and the opportunity to conduct religious services are violations of RLUIPA and the Ohio Constitution.

The Becket Fund maintains an updated information page on Cutter v. Wilkinson at rliupa.com.

“The issue in Cutter is much bigger than RLUIPA—it’s about whether government can pass any law that specially accommodates religious exercise,” notes Becket Fund President and General Counsel Anthony R. Picarello, Jr. “The Court's decision will affect what are literally thousands of accommodations for religion only—a tradition dating back to at least the Founding—contained in federal, state, and local laws nationwide. The accommodations range from the U.S. military's allowing Jews in the armed forces to wear yarmulkes, to Ohio's own exemption of minors from underage drinking laws for religious purposes.”