Download
1 / 10
100 likes | 211 Views
Thornburgh v. Abbott, 490 U.S 401 (1989). Evan Liwosz Korey Freyermuth Julian Taylor. Legal Issue .
E N D
Thornburgh v. Abbott, 490 U.S 401 (1989) Evan Liwosz KoreyFreyermuth Julian Taylor
Legal Issue • In summary, this case argued that the regulations set forth by the Federal Bureau of Prisons on what publications that are being received by inmates are unconstitutional. Certain inmates and publishers argue that these regulations are in violation of their First Amendment rights.
Facts • The Federal Bureau of Prisons regulations generally permit prisoners to receive publications from the “outside,” but authorize wardens, pursuant to specific criteria, to reject an incoming publication if it is found to be “detrimental to the security, good order, or discipline of the institution or if it might facilitate criminal activity.” Wardens may not reject publications “solely because its content is religious, philosophical, political, social or sexual, or because its content is unpopular or repugnant.” (Justic Blackmun, p.517) • Prisoners argued that the regulations both on their face and as applied to 46 specifically excluded publications, violated their First Amendment rights under the standard set forth in Procunier v. Martinez. • The District Court refrained from adopting the Martinez standard in favor of an approach more deferential to the judgment of prison authorities, and upheld the regulations without addressing the propriety of the 46 exclusions. http://www.justice.gov/osg/briefs/1987/sg870205.txt
Holding • This regulation is valid under the reasonableness standard of scrutiny.Agreed with part what the district court said and part of the court of appeals. • 10 day bench trial that district court refrained from adopting the Martinez standard which was favored an approach more deferential to judgment of prison authorities and upheld with 46 regulations. • The court of Appeals utilized the Martinez standards fount the regulations wanting and remanded the individual determination of constitutionality of the 46 exclusions. • No evidence that would endanger prison security. • The regulation is valid under the reasonableness standard of scrutiny. (pg 516 , pg 521)
Reasoning of Holding • Mainly Turner’s reasonableness standard is applied regulations at issues. Remand for examination of validity of regulations as applied to any 46 publications introduced at trial that remains a live controversy. Judgment of the Court of Appeals is vacated the ease is remanded for further proceedings consistent with opinions. (Pg. 516) • First Amendment rights either free citizens or a prison inmates. The Bureau’s administrative convenience Justification its insufficient as a matter if law under either the Martinez standard or “reasonableness standard.
Concurring Opinion and Dissenting Opinion • Justice Stevens, Justice Brennan and Justice Marshall join, concurring in part and dissenting in part (PG. 520)
Informed Opinion (Evan) • In my opinion, I agree that there does need to be regulations on what the prisoners see and read in their publications. Violent stories or photos could set a prisoner off on a violent rampage, or at least give them the bad ideas needed to do so. Once a mind reads/sees something, the mind then thinks about it, and just thinking about something can lead to the actions actually happening.
Informed Opinion (Korey) • I agree with having regulations in the prisons, because if something was said wrong, we would take it the wrong way and rage about it. I know if I took something wrong I would go crazy. People always say the wrong thing and actions come across. There’s always something bad going to happen afterwards.
Informed Opinion (Julian) • I personality agree with the appeal of the decision that was made on the Thornburgh vsabbott case because I feel that everyone should be entitled to there rights. The 1st amendment protects all citizens to have the freedom to express themselves in anyway that isn’t harmful to others. People should be allowed to also read listen or interpret things how they want. In America people write things for people to read so they can make comments about it. so I feel that even if prisons should be allowed to receive materials from outside world and have views toward what ever it is going on in the world.
