By John Q. Hosedrinker 
The Supreme Court has agreed to hear the appeal of Damon Landor, a former Louisiana inmate whose dreadlocks were forcibly shaved by prison guards, allegedly violating his religious beliefs as a Rastafarian. Landor sought damages under a federal law protecting prisoners’ religious rights, but lower courts dismissed the case, citing the law’s limitations on monetary claims. The Supreme Court will now review the appellate ruling, considering arguments that align with a previous decision concerning religious freedom under a similar statute. The case, *Landor v. Louisiana Department of Corrections*, will be argued in the fall.
Read the original article here
SCOTUS to hear case of Rastafarian whose dreadlocks were shaved by prison guards. This situation is a real head-scratcher, isn’t it? You’ve got a Rastafarian man, Landor, who’d been growing his dreadlocks for nearly two decades, entering prison with his religious beliefs intact. He’s nearing the end of his sentence, only to have his dreadlocks forcibly shaved off by prison guards, with the warden’s direct order. The fact that he was nearing release at this point just makes the whole thing seem more malicious, as if there was no practical reason for it other than to humiliate him.
SCOTUS to hear case of Rastafarian whose dreadlocks were shaved by prison guards. Adding insult to injury, Landor possessed a copy of a previous court ruling that explicitly stated shaving religious prisoners’ dreadlocks violated their religious rights. And what did the prison guard do? Threw the ruling in the trash! That’s a level of blatant disregard for both religious freedom and established legal precedent that’s hard to fathom. This wasn’t a spur-of-the-moment decision; it was a calculated act.
SCOTUS to hear case of Rastafarian whose dreadlocks were shaved by prison guards. It’s easy to see why many are shocked. The Trump administration, while in office, filed a brief supporting Landor’s right to sue and urged the court to hear the case. This is the unexpected part! You might think, given the current political climate, this would be an easy win for the prison. But the administration saw this as a chance to strengthen the legal precedent surrounding religious freedom, which in turn, may favor their conservative base.
SCOTUS to hear case of Rastafarian whose dreadlocks were shaved by prison guards. Some are quick to point out that the location, Louisiana, adds another layer to this story. It’s a state in the Deep South, an area often seen as having a history of religious bias, which may have played a role here. It’s hard to ignore the potential for racial undertones when a black man’s religious practice is so blatantly disregarded, especially considering the context of prison life. It’s not unreasonable to suspect the guards acted out of prejudice.
SCOTUS to hear case of Rastafarian whose dreadlocks were shaved by prison guards. The core legal question at hand centers on whether the prison officials can be held liable for infringing on Landor’s religious rights. The fact that Landor had respected his beliefs at his first two stops in the prison system, and this treatment began during his final three weeks, makes the situation more blatant. In essence, it seems the guards deliberately chose to trample on his rights.
SCOTUS to hear case of Rastafarian whose dreadlocks were shaved by prison guards. Some might wonder if there was a safety concern, considering the length of the dreadlocks. The fact that the prison allowed them to stay intact for a time prior removes any possible argument about this. The timing of the haircut, right before his release, leaves only the possibility of the guards seeking to humiliate him. It’s difficult to rationalize this action other than as an act of hostility and religious discrimination.
SCOTUS to hear case of Rastafarian whose dreadlocks were shaved by prison guards. What makes it so compelling, is the lack of any reason why this was done other than to be spiteful. His rights were clearly violated, and any remedy, if granted, would probably be financial, meaning that those who violated his rights simply wanted to be cruel.
SCOTUS to hear case of Rastafarian whose dreadlocks were shaved by prison guards. Many seem to agree that this case is heading to the Supreme Court for the right reasons. While the Trump administration’s support might seem strange, the legal precedent at stake regarding religious freedom is likely what truly motivated them. The administration sought to create legal precedent which would benefit white Christians, which is likely the reason they supported this case.
SCOTUS to hear case of Rastafarian whose dreadlocks were shaved by prison guards. Given the current composition of the Supreme Court, there’s a lot of speculation about how the justices will rule. People on both sides are expressing that it will either be an incredible victory for freedom of religion, or a sign that religious freedom is not equal across all religions, or for all people.
SCOTUS to hear case of Rastafarian whose dreadlocks were shaved by prison guards. The fact that the case even needs to go to SCOTUS is questionable. The case is so clearly in favor of the Rastafarian. It should have been an open-and-shut case. His religious freedom was violated. Prison officials and guards disregarded a clear legal precedent. The lack of respect for Landor’s religious rights reflects badly on everyone involved in this case.
SCOTUS to hear case of Rastafarian whose dreadlocks were shaved by prison guards. Ultimately, this case is a snapshot of the challenges of religious freedom within the prison system and beyond. It touches on race, religious discrimination, and the exercise of power. It’s a complicated case with serious implications, and it’ll be interesting to see how the Supreme Court navigates it.