Written by Don Byrd
On Friday, the 7th Circuit ruled that prison officials must treat fairly atheist prisoner requests for religious study groups dedicated to atheism. Overturning the trial court’s dismissal of the inmate James Kaufmann’s case, the appeals court said atheists must be given a chance to demonstrate there are enough of them to warrant creation of a group.
From the opinion:
a closer look at Kaufman’s submissions in both the district court and this court reveals that Kaufman is challenging the finding that he was one of a group of only two. He contends that the prison made it impossible to know how many inmates would have joined such a group, because it ignored “write‐in” votes for atheism (or related schools of thought) and re‐characterized them as “No Preference.” He does not challenge the prison’s interest in using umbrella groups; to the contrary, he would like a non‐theistic, secular umbrella group. He points to general evidence such as almanacs suggesting that as many as 10 to 14% of the population self‐identifies as atheistic, and he suggests that hidden in the mass of “No Preference” inmates are enough people to justify a group that would meet once or twice a month.
Many systems are in place to handle and anticipate the diverse religious needs of a prison population these days. The court’s ruling Friday makes clear that: a) requests for a-theistic study or devotion are to be treated as religious requests; and b) prison officials must have systems in place to actually allow an atheist inmate to claim so.
