In brief
In a 6‑3 decision, the Supreme Court upheld that the Religious Land Use and Institutionalized Persons Act does not permit a prison inmate to sue state officials for cutting his dreadlocks. The ruling marks a shift from earlier rulings that favored religious‑freedom claims, underscoring that federal statutes rarely extend personal liability to individual prison staff. The case highlights how dreadlocks, integral to Rastafarian spirituality, became a focal point for legal debate over religious expression in institutions. The decision raises questions about the protection of cultural identity for marginalized groups within the penal system.
The US Supreme Court, on Tuesday, ruled in a 6‑3 decision that a former Louisiana inmate, Damon Landor, cannot sue prison officials who forcibly shaved his dreadlocks, citing that the Religious Land Use and Institutionalized Persons Act (RLUIPA) does not provide for individual civil liability against state employees.
Landor, a Rastafarian, had argued that cutting his hair violated his religious rights. He had seen and kept his dreadlocks for the first four months of his incarceration, but was shaved in the last month after being moved to Raymond Laborde Correctional Center.
The justices noted that while the federal law obliges state‑run institutions receiving federal funding to respect religious exercise, it does not create personal liability for individual prison staff. Justice Neil Gorsuch wrote that Congress could not attach liability to staff “without their consent.”
In a dissent written by Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson, the coalition argued that the RLUIPA was designed to protect prisoners’ rights to religious exercise, and that failing to provide damages would leave offenders “remediless.”
The case follows a 2020 Supreme Court decision that allowed Muslim men, who faced no‑fly‑list restrictions, to sue federal officials under the Religious Freedom Restoration Act. However, the current ruling limits that protection within state‑driven correctional facilities.
Dreadlocks, central to Rastafarian identity, symbolize devotion and growth, and the court’s decision highlights a broader tension between institutional conformity and the preservation of cultural and religious heritage in custodial settings.
