Document: 405 U.S. 319 92 S.Ct. 1079 31 L.Ed.2d 263 Fred A. CRUZv.George J. BETO, Director, Texas Department of Corrections. No. 71—5552. March 20, 1972. PER CURIAM. 1 The complaint, alleging a cause action under 42 U.S.C. § 1983, states that Cruz is Buddhist, who in prison. While prisoners are members other religious sects allowed to use the prison chapel, not. He shared his Buddhist material with and, according allegations, retaliation was placed solitary confinement on diet bread and water for two weeks, without access newspapers, magazines, or sources news. also alleged he prohibited from corresponding advisor sect. Those isolation unit spend 22 hours day total idleness. 2 Again, encourages inmates participate programs; providing at state expense chaplains Catholic, Jewish, Protestant faiths, copies Jewish Christian Bibles, conducting weekly Sunday school classes services. According points good merit given as reward attending orthodox services, those enhancing prisoner's eligibility desirable job assignments early parole consideration.1 Respondent answered, denying allegations moving dismiss. 3 Federal District Court, 329 F.Supp. 443, denied relief hearing any findings, saying complaint an area should be left 'to sound discretion administrators.' It went say, 'Valid disciplinary security reasons not known this court may prevent 'equality' exercise practices prison.' Court Appeals affirmed. 445 F.2d 801. 4 courts sit supervise prisons but enforce constitutional rights all 'persons,' including prisoners. We unmindful officialsmust accorded latitude administration affairs, necessarily subject appropriate rules regulations. But persons prison, like individuals, have right petition Government redress grievances which, course, includes 'access purpose presenting their complaints.' Johnson v. Avery, 393 483, 485, 89 747, 749, 21 718; Ex parte Hull, 312 546, 549, 61 640, 641, 85 L.Ed. 1034. See Younger Gilmore, 404 15, 250, 30 142, aff'g Gilmore Lynch, 105 (ND Cal.). Moreover, racial segregation, which unconstitutional outside prisons, within save 'the necessities discipline.' Lee Washington, 390 333, 334, 88 994, 19 1212. Even more closely point Cooper Pate, 378 84 1733, 12 1030, where we reversed dismissal brought 1983. said: 'Taking true they must motion dismiss, stated action.' Ibid. allegation made by petitioner solely because beliefs permission purchase certain publications privileges enjoyed 5 said Conley Gibson, 355 41, 45—46, 78 99, 102, 80, 'a dismissed failure claim unless it appears beyond doubt plaintiff can prove no set facts support would entitle him relief.' 6 If if reasonable opportunity pursuing faith comparable afforded fellow adhere conventional precepts, then there palpable discrimination State against religion, established 600 B.C., long before era.2 First Amendment, applicable States reason Fourteenth Torcaso Watkins, 367 488, 492—493, 81 1680, 1682, 982, prohibits government making law 'prohibiting free (of religion).' assumed true, has violated Amendments. 7 leave proceed forma pauperis granted. certiorari granted, judgment vacated, remanded findings. 8 Vacated remanded. 9 Mr. Justice BLACKMUN concurs result. 10 Chief BURGER, concurring 11 I concur result reached even though borderline necessary compel evidentiary hearing. Some claims frivolous; others do present justiciable issues. There cannot possibly legal requirement provide materials every religion sect practiced diverse country. At most, someone offers supply them. REHNQUIST, dissenting. 13 Unlike am persuaded petitioner's opinion vacated trial conduct upon complaint.1 14 Under neither 'establish religion' nor 'impair exercise' thereof. Petitioner alleges voluntary services available facilities so Protestants, Catholics, Jews attend church choice. None our prior holdings indicates such program part officials amounts establishment religion. 15 prisoner serving years robbery penitentiary. understandably practice were walls. intimation pleadings being punished views, case 1030 (1964), receipt mail about presented question interference type involved here retaining chaplains, scheduling facilities, timing activities various 16 Amendment requires that, addition freedom belief, freely evangelize views among indication dealt strictly efforts convert convicts Buddhism than communicants faiths make similar conversions. 17 By status, obviously limited extent assuredly choice fact system particular does not, circumstances pleaded demonstrate impaired. Presumably obligated denominational although once undertake them some only distinctions survive analysis Equal Protection Clause. 18 What basic provided religions numerous followers, denial equal protection laws. how many practicing Buddhists facility incarcerated, demand activities. Neither decisions after full argument, summarily reversing civil complaint2 ever consideration proper balance struck between prisoners' extensive administrative rest correction officials. apply rule deference been overwhelmingly accepted appeals.3 Failing least hear argument what govern. A line recognized 'equal laws' guaranteed applied precisely equivalent way multitudinous situations confront courts.4 On one hand, held classifications 'invidious' 'suspect.'5 think quite consistent intent framers whom doubtless surprised know came its ambit, treat end spectrum discrimination. Absent showing difference treatment practitioners denominations adherents could reasonably justified rational hypothesis, matter hands officials.6 20 treated standard 80 (1957), permit grant Fed.Rule Civ.Proc. 12(b)(6). require district inflexibly general principle inmate, respects different litigating posture unconfined. inmate stands gain something lose nothing stating ultimately unable prove.7 Though relief, will nonetheless obtained short sabbatical nearest federal courthouse.8 To expand availability courtroom appearances requiring construe inmate's liberal Gibson deprives process ever-increasing species complaint.9 Finally, factual imperative remand grounds relief. evident record us might well 'frivolous malicious,' vested 28 1915(d).10 This power impaired strictures Rule 12(b). Fletcher Young, 222 (CA4 1955). Although based 12(b)(6) grounds, frivolous. State's answer showed identical issues freedoms litigated another same institution, claiming impairment attorney employed inmates. clear whether party suit, suits filed was, instant barred doctrine res judicata. In event, adjudication substantial factor decision dismiss 23 addition, had cases shortly action, judge exposed myriad previous actions, found 'voluminous, repetitious, duplicitous instances deceitful.'11 Whether raised these several actions joined plaintiffs foundation finding malicious.' Whatever never flooded repetitive claims, recently adjudicated proceeding, believe frivolous us. amended alleges, inter alia: 'Plaintiff Corrections member Churches America. time filing incarcerated Eastham Unit since transferred Ellis Unit. number either Faith wish explore gospel Buddhism; however, Defendants refused past, continue refuse, hold disseminate teachings Buddha. Plaintiff prevented borrowing lending books weeks sharing 'Despite repeated requests chapel holding denials thereof promulgated customs regulations maintain penal which: 'A. Consecrated Protestant, Roman Catholic assigned units. 'B. Copies Holy Bible (Jewish Christian) distributed 'C. Religious regularly erected 'non-denominational' purposes. 'D. Records maintained participation 'E. encouraged steps toward rehabilitation. 'F. Points enhance promotions class, assignment parole. 'Because Defendants, class represents subjected arbitrary unreasonable exclusion lawful justification invidiously discriminates violation denies laws.' suggest, group prison—however few number—must personnel. special place worship need regardless size; chaplain, priest, minister regard demand. oportunities fear penalty. 'remand(s) findings,' ante, page. But, procedural vehicle findings litigation litigant entitled, inasmuch problems suits. Fed.Rules Haines Kerner, 519, 594, 652 (1972); 142 (1971); Houghton Shafer, 392 639, 2119, 1319 (1968); 1212 (1964). Douglas Sigler, 386 684, 688 (CA8 1967); Carey Settle, 351 483 1965); Carswell Wainwright, 413 1044 (CA5 1969); Walker 356 502 (CA7 1966) read 718 (1969), concerned traditional remedy habeas corpus, reach issue statutory generally McGowan Maryland, 366 420, 1101, (1961); Dandridge Williams, 397 471, 90 1153, 25 491 (1970); F. S. Royster Guano Co. Virginia, 253 412, 40 560, 64 989 (1920); Levy Louisiana, 391 68, 1509, 436 Carrington Rash, 380 89, 775, 675 (1965), examples review standards. Loving 388 1, 87 1817, 1010 (1967); Korematsu United States, 323 214, 65 193, 194 (1944). (represented lawyer drafted complaint) excluded programs 'arbitrary . justification.' Holding counsel standards pleading conclusions arbitrariness insufficient, e.g., Williams Dunbar, 377 505 (CA9 ex rel. Hoge Bolsinger, 311 215 (CA3 1962). 'The last writ-writer discussed writes writs economic gain. comprised unscrupulous manipulators interested acquiring money, cigarettes, merchandise purchased canteen. Once 'client's' interest aroused determine ability pay, keep 'hook.' commonly done deliberately misstating appears, surface, entitled documents client role sympathetic protagonist. After reading them, elated able favorably. willing pay lie created him.' Larsen, Prisoner Looks Writ-Writing, 56 Calif.L.Rev. 343, 348—349 (1968). 'When help writ-writer, employ handful tricks damage image courts. too subtle subterfuges used small minority writ-writers tax credulity lawyer. One simply up own citations when ran actual ones. California Adult Authority involving application law, following citations: Aesop Fables, Baptist Church Sally Stanford, Doda Forty-four Inch Chest, Dogood Planet Earth. references volumes page numbers nonexistent equally fantastic, 901 Penal Review, 17,240. accompany each case, composed eloquent selected acts unconstitutional. 'decisions' circulated writ-writers, gullible ones began citing also.' Id., 355. '(T)emporary always alluring prospect, hardened criminal possibility escape lurks excursion walls.' Price Johnston, 159 234, 237 1947). Cf. 334 266, 284—285, 68 1049, 1059, 1356 (1948), giving appeals argue corpus person: 'If apparent request personally reflects mere desire freed temporarily confines capable intelligent responsible presence secured undue inconvenience danger, issuing writ.' Here, permitted file range pretrial discovery, commence (including presumably jury) appear witnesses. summary reversal effected permitting guidance accommodation fair determination complaints 1983 rightfully filed. Reece 310 139 1962); Conway Oliver, 429 1307 1970). R. 30.

Category: 2