To support their argument that the policy is not a reasonable response to security concerns, and, thus, is invalid under Turner , they state that under the previous policy SCI-Graterford had not experienced any significant disciplinary problems with the Muslim community. Defendants respond that the presence of an outside cleric discourages the establishment of a hierarchy or leadership system within the inmate population. Although defendants have not submitted examples of security problems involving plaintiffs, they have introduced affidavits regarding two incidents at other institutions where inmate- led religious activities became disruptive and threatening. Defendants also have submitted declarations from five Islamic scholars, recognizing the reasonableness of prison officials' security concerns in light of an Islamic dictate disapproving of an individual who disobeys his Imam. Defendants argue that if a prisoner were the official Imam, he would exert tremendous influence over other inmate believers, which would extend to all areas, not just those related to religious views.
Defendants thus suggest that the new policy is a reasonable attempt to anticipate security threats.
For SCI-Graterford, and all other prisons under the Pennsylvania Department of Corrections, to have a rule requiring the cleric be an outsider is, in my view, reasonable. It makes security sense, a position embraced by many other courts, including the one that binds this one. The purpose of the prison rule, which I find to be proper, is to ensure that inmate activity is supervised by responsible individuals, lessening the possibility that inmate religious groups will subvert prison authority. Additionally, plaintiffs are able to continue to practice their religion. If an outside cleric is unavailable, an inmate may lead services as long as a chaplain supervisor is present.