Source: https://www.criminallegalnews.org/cln-litigation/WA/prison-legal-news-v-lehman-ninth-circuit-opinion-affirming-injunction-washington-doc-censorship-2005/
Timestamp: 2019-04-21 20:31:09+00:00

Document:
NEWS, a Washington corporation; ROLLIN A. WRIGHT, Plaintiffs-Appellants, v.
Prison Legal News v. Lehman, 272 F.
Supp. 2d 1151, 2003 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 11915 (W.D.
Seattle, Washington, for the plaintiffs-appellees.
General, Salem, Oregon, for the amicus.
JUDGES: Before: Arthur L. Alarcon, William A.
Fletcher, and Johnnie B. Rawlinson, Circuit Judges.
COUNSEL: Shannon Elizabeth Inglis and Carol A.
Olympia, Washington, for the defendants-appellants.
laid out in Turner v. Safley, 482 U.S. 78, 89-90, 96 L.
inmate in a Washington state correctional facility.
against the DOC. The previous cases are Miniken v.
MacFarlane v. Walter, No. 96-cv-03102-LRS (E.D.
No. 97-cv-05499-FDB-JKA (W.D. Wash. 1999).
that is not a subscription publication."
rejection and may appeal the decision.
person . . . .
Id. at 1161 (citations omitted).
amenable to summary determination." Id. at 1162.
should ultimately prevail on its claim regarding thirdparty legal materials. Id. at 1163 n.14.
only asserted qualified immunity with regard to the nonsubscription bulk mail and catalog claims. We disagree.
Saucier v. Katz, 533 U.S. 194, 201, 121 S.
Ct. 2151, 2156, 150 L. Ed. 2d 272 (2001).
restrictions were lawful. See Sorrels v.
McKee, 290 F.3d 965, 971 (9th. Cir.
2002) [*9] (citing Prison Legal News v.
nonmoving party is correct." Id.
the district court's denial of qualified immunity.
Paul McNally Realty, 216 F.3d 827, 830 (9th Cir. 2000).
v. Cedarapids, Inc., 164 F.3d 1218, 1221 (9th Cir. 1999).
law. Lopez v. Smith, 203 F.3d 1122, 1131 (9th Cir.
356 F.3d 969, 976 (9th Cir. 2004).
catalogs was unconstitutional. In Prison Legal News v.
unconstitutional as applied to such mail. Id. at 1152-53.
for-profit bulk mail was likewise unconstitutional.
F.3d at 1149 (citing Thornburgh v. Abbott, 490 U.S.
401, 408, 104 L. Ed. 2d 459, 109 S. Ct. 1874 (1989)).
security." Walker v. Sumner, 917 F.2d 382, 385 (9th Cir.
"reasonably related to legitimate penological interests."
Turner v. Safley, 482 U.S. at 89.
at 1151 (same); Morrison, 261 F.3d at 904 (same).
902-03. We rejected each contention in those cases.
not rationally related to the goal of reducing contraband.
of volume [*15] control." Morrison, 261 F.3d at 90304.
Labor Union, Inc., 433 U.S. 119, 53 L. Ed. 2d 629, 97 S.
purposes of first amendment protection . . ." Miniken v.
(quoting Brooks v. Seiter, 779 F.2d 1177, 1180) (6th Cir.
relevant to the First Amendment analysis.
issue in PLN I, an amount which we held was "minimal."
PLN I, 238 F.3d at 1151.
periodical, or subscription bulk rate mail. PLN II, 272 F.
whether state actors are entitled to qualified immunity.
clearly established at the time." Id. (citing Saucier v.
Katz, 533 U.S. 194, 201, 150 L. Ed. 2d 272, 121 S. Ct.
290 F.3d 965, 970 (9th Cir. 2002).
receipt of non-profit bulk mail was unconstitutional."
Bahrampour, 356 F.3d at 977 (emphasis in original).
to other circuits in light of binding precedent.
that prohibits prisoners from "possessing .
receipt of unsolicited junk mail.
improperly motivated." Crawford-El v. Britton, 523 U.S.
evidence that they acted with impure motives.
deliver more than one hundred specific legal documents.
the DOC and educate inmates on how to file their claims.
banning the receipt of the third-party legal materials.

References: v.

 v. 
 v. 
 v.

 v. 
 v. 
 v.

 v.

v. 
 v. 
 v.

 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v.

 v. 
 v.

 v.