A few months ago, I wrote about Damon Landor, a Rastafarian adhering to the biblical Nazarite Vow, who had his head forcibly shaved by Louisiana Department of Corrections officials, even after he handed them a copy of the Fifth Circuit’s decision establishing his right to wear religious dreadlocks behind bars.
Landor is currently appealing a lower-court ruling that he has no claim because the Religious Land Use and Institutionalized Persons Act (RLUIPA) doesn’t authorize money damages. This week, one of the attorneys representing Landor, Josh Halpern of Weil, Gotshal & Manges, convincingly made the case to the Fifth Circuit that damages can be awarded against state-prison officials who violate RLUIPA’s protections.
At the center of the case is the Supreme Court’s decision in Tanzin v. Tanvir, which held that the Religious Freedom Restoration Act (RFRA) authorizes damages against federal officials, including prison officers. The lawyer for the Louisiana state defendants argued that “RFRA is not RLUIPA” and that Tanzin shouldn’t control. But as Halpern noted, the language in the two statutes is identical, and the two “have always been construed in lockstep.”
Without damages as a deterrent, prison officials would continue tossing judicial precedent aside and violating the religious-liberty statute with impunity. The judges expressed some concern about being the first appellate court to recognize a damages remedy against state officers under RLUIPA. Still, Halpern explained that this was “truly the first appeal” to squarely raise the issue since the Supreme Court’s 2020 decision in Tanzin.
The lawyer for the defendants struggled mightily to defend what happened to Landor. After acknowledging that it wasn’t “fair” or “right” for prison officials to violate RLUIPA in this way, she nonetheless insisted that the panel was bound to follow its pre-Tanzin precedent.
Pathbreaking cases like Landor’s matter because they can significantly impact the law’s development and future application in prisons and for religious believers everywhere (for example, RLUIPA protects churches, synagogues, and mosques in disputes with local zoning boards).
That’s likely why dozens of religious groups and leading scholars filed briefs in Landor’s support. Those who care deeply about freedom of conscience, a fundamental right and an essential component of human dignity, should be watching this case closely.