United States Ninth Circuit

In an action alleging prison officials violated the Religious Land Use and Institutionalized Persons Act, the Free Exercise Clause, and the Equal Protection Clause by denying a Muslim inmate-s request for a religious dietary accommodation, summary judgment for defendants is reversed and remanded where: 1) for purposes of a free exercise claim, the district court made insufficient findings with respect to certain factors of the Turner analysis; 2) on the RLUIPA claim, summary judgment was inappropriate as there was a factual dispute as to the extent of the burden on plaintiff's religious activities, the extent of the burden that would be created by accommodating his request, and the existence of less restrictive alternatives; and 3) the district court applied the wrong standard of review on an Equal Protection claim, and the identified penalogical interest was insufficient for summary judgment.

Appellate Information

• Argued 08/14/2007
• Decided 01/23/2008
• Published 01/23/2008

Judges

• Before: DIARMUID F. O'SCANNLAIN, MICHAEL DALY HAWKINS, and KIM McLANE WARDLAW, Circuit Judges.

Court

• United States Ninth Circuit

Counsel

• For Appellant:
  
• Derek L. Shaffer, Constitutional Law Center, Stanford Law School, Stanford, CA, argued the cause for the appellant and was on the briefs;  Kathleen M. Sullivan, Maaren A. Choski, David J. Strandness, and Rhett O. Millsaps, II, Constitutional Law Center, Stanford Law School, Stanford, CA, were on the briefs.


• For Appellees:
  
• Cathy Stewart, Arizona Attorney General's Office, Phoenix, AZ, argued the cause for the appellees;  Attorney General Terry Goodard, Darrin J. DeLange, and Kelley J. Morrissey, Arizona Attorney General's Office, Phoenix, AZ, were on the brief.