Supreme Court takes up religious claim by Rastafarian whose dreadlocks were cut by prison officials
At the time of the incident in 2020, Damon Landor had kept a religious vow not to cut his hair for almost 20 years.
Landor had served all but three weeks of his five-month sentence imposed for a drug-related criminal conviction in Louisiana when he was transferred to the Raymond Laborde Correction Center.
He was holding a copy of a court ruling that made it clear that practicing Rastafarians should be given a religious accommodation allowing them to keep their dreadlocks.
But a prison officer dismissed his concerns and Landor was handcuffed to a chair while two officers shaved his head.
Upon his release, Landor filed a lawsuit raising various claims, including the one at issue at the Supreme Court, which he brought under a federal law called the Religious Land Use and Institutionalized Persons Act.
At issue is whether people who sue under that statute can win money damages.
Louisiana Attorney General Elizabeth Murrill said in court papers that the state does not contest that Landor was mistreated and noted that the prison system has already changed its grooming policy to ensure that other Rastafarian prisoners do not face similar situations.
But she contests whether Landor can get get money damages for his claim.
A federal judge and the New Orleans-based 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals both ruled in favor of the state, saying that money damages are not available.
Landor's lawyer point to a 2020 Supreme Court ruling that allowed such damages in claims arising under a similar law called the Religious Freedom Restoration Act. The laws have "identical language," they said in court papers.
The court will hear oral arguments and issue a ruling in the case in its next term, which starts in October and ends in June 2026.
This article was originally published on NBCNews.com
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
24 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Texas Democrats Weigh Return to State in Redistricting Fight
(Bloomberg) -- Democratic lawmakers from Texas say they're considering their options amid a report they could return to the state as soon as this weekend, a move that may end a standoff in which more than 50 state representatives left in a bid to block controversial new congressional maps backed by President Donald Trump. While the Democrats vowed to stay out of Texas long enough to prevent a vote during a special session of the state legislature, Republican Governor Greg Abbott has pledged to call session after session to pass the redistricting proposal. Sunseeking Germans Face Swiss Backlash Over Alpine Holiday Congestion To Head Off Severe Storm Surges, Nova Scotia Invests in 'Living Shorelines' New York Warns of $34 Billion Budget Hole, Biggest Since 2009 Crisis Five Years After Black Lives Matter, Brussels' Colonial Statues Remain For Homeless Cyclists, Bikes Bring an Escape From the Streets That complicates efforts for the Democrats to stop the new maps, which could give the GOP five new Republican-leaning US House districts, strengthening their hold on Congress ahead of the 2026 midterm elections. ABC News reported Tuesday that the lawmakers are planning to return to Austin as soon as this weekend, citing multiple unnamed sources. The Texas state House Democratic caucus said in a post on social media that they were meeting and 'still assessing their strategies going forward,' declining to comment further. If the Democrats return, it's unclear what actions they would consider during any additional sessions. The Texas mapping duel has erupted into a national controversy as Republicans seek to protect their narrow majority in the US House of Representatives. While states across the country usually adjust district lines every 10 years to reflect population changes, Trump has pushed state lawmakers to redraw the maps now in a way that could add as many as five Republican-leaning House seats. Texas state House Democrats left the state in early August in a bid to stall the bill, scattering from Illinois to New York and depriving the Texas House of Representatives of the minimum number of lawmakers present to hold a vote — a tactic known as a quorum break. Absent members have racked up fines of $500 per day, a penalty established after Democrats similarly broke quorum in 2021. Abbott and Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton, who is running for the Republican nomination for US Senate, responded by filing lawsuits to remove some of the Democratic representatives from office, arguing they had vacated their seats. They also targeted Democratic fundraisers including former presidential candidate Beto O'Rourke, who helped cover expenses for the lawmakers, alleging the support constituted bribery. Previous Democratic quorum breaks in Texas have delayed redistricting efforts, but failed to stop Republicans from ultimately altering the maps. National Democrats, however, have said other states could retaliate in kind. California and New York Democrats have threatened to rewrite their own maps in a way that would risk Republican seats in those states, should Texas Republicans force through new district lines. Other Republican-controlled states, including Florida, Indiana, and Missouri, are similarly eyeing redistricting to add seats where possible. California's Governor Gavin Newsom said this week that Democrats in his state would back down from redistricting if Trump told Republican leaders to halt their plans. 'You are playing with fire, risking the destabilization of our democracy, while knowing that California can neutralize any gains you hope to make,' Newsom wrote to the president on Monday. The Texas state legislature was also scheduled to address other issues during the special session, including emergency response systems and property taxes. Democrats could try to demand the legislature prioritize its response to the deadly floods that tore through Central Texas in July before taking up redistricting. While they hold little power in the Republican-dominated House, they could leave again if those demands are not met. (Updates with Newsom warning in 12th paragraph.) Bessent on Tariffs, Deficits and Embracing Trump's Economic Plan Why It's Actually a Good Time to Buy a House, According to a Zillow Economist Dubai's Housing Boom Is Stoking Fears of Another Crash The Social Media Trend Machine Is Spitting Out Weirder and Weirder Results A $340 Million New York Office Makeover Is Converting Boardrooms to Bedrooms ©2025 Bloomberg L.P.
Yahoo
24 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Scott Bessent floats rolling out export tax to more industries
US Treasury secretary Scott Bessent has raised the prospect of the White House rolling out the unprecedented revenue-sharing agreement it
Yahoo
24 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Swiss see risk of tariffs increasing cost of U.S. F-35A jets
(Reuters) -Switzerland remains committed to buying Lockheed Martin F-35A Lightning II fighter jets from the United States despite an unclear total cost of procurement in part due to the impact of U.S. tariffs, the government said on Wednesday. The Swiss government reaffirmed its commitment to buying the jets a week after the United States imposed some of its highest tariff rates worldwide on Switzerland due to the size of the U.S. trade deficit with the European country. The price of the jets would ultimately depend on inflation in the United States, global commodity prices "and other factors such as price increases due to the tariffs imposed by the USA worldwide," the government said in a statement. Bern chose the F-35A as its next-generation fighter plane in 2021 for what it considered a fixed price of around 6 billion Swiss francs ($7.47 billion) for 36 jets. The U.S. has since said that sum was a misunderstanding. Talks with the United States to avert the total sum from potentially increasing by $650 million to $1.3 billion showed it was impossible for Switzerland to assert a fixed price, the Swiss government said. ($1 = 0.8028 Swiss francs) Error in retrieving data Sign in to access your portfolio Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data
