Opinion ID: 217826
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 3

Heading: McCOLLUM'S CLAIMS

Text: The essence of McCollum's appeal is that the internal prison process for determining paid chaplaincy positions is flawed and that, as a Wiccan chaplain, he was denied the opportunity to compete for such a position. He challenges the program under the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment and claims that CDCR officials violated his free exercise and equal protection rights, as well as the inmates' religious rights under the Religious Land Use and Institutionalized Persons Act (RLUIPA). He also appeals dismissal of his claims under Title VII, the California Fair Employment and Housing Act (FEHA), and 42 U.S.C. § 1983. Finally, McCollum alleges that a CDCR official retaliated against him in violation of the Establishment Clause. McCollum's claims fall into three categories: (1) claims that are derivative of the inmates' free exercise rights; (2) claims that stem directly from McCollum's position as a volunteer chaplain and potential paid chaplain; and, (3) a statutory claim under RLUIPA. We address each category in turn.
Although McCollum complains that he is not eligible to be hired as a prison chaplain, the introduction to his brief highlights the gravamen of his complaint: By only hiring a chaplain of the Five Faiths, this policy has the pernicious effect of depriving inmates of other religious accommodations, including access to services, worship spaces and religious items, that are afforded to Five Faith inmates. This statement underscores that the entire chaplaincy program derives from the inmates' rights, not those of any putative chaplains.