Tracking Prison Censorship in the United States

Be otherwise detrimental to security, good order, rehabilitation, or discipline or it might facilitate criminal activity or be detrimental to mental health.

Other: Detrimental to safety and security of the facility. Disrupts order. Promotes organization and leadership.

Signed: C. Hurle

November 12, 2017

Illinois Department of Corrections
Office of the Director
PO Box 19277
Springfield, IL 62794-9277

Re: Appeal of Censorship of Publication
Under Lock & Key, Issue 58

To Whom It May Concern:

We are in receipt of a Rejection Notice (notice) for the above referenced issue of Under Lock & Key (ULK) addressed to the above reference prisoners. The notice states that the publication is being rejected based on boilerplate language. Such language does not provide the specificity required to sustain such censorship and does not allow us a reasonable opportunity to appeal such improper censorship The form fails to provide specific information as to the objectionable content, such as page numbers or quoted portions of the publication. The censorship form on its face is clear that no violation of prison policy has occurred, and the censorship is without merit.

Due process requires adequate notice of the reasons for censorship. Instructive is the District Court’s reasoning set forth in Prison Legal News v. Jones, “Procunier demands that the publisher "be given a reasonable opportunity to protest" the censorship. Id. at 418. For an opportunity to be reasonable, the publisher must know of the grounds upon which the publication has been censored. See Henry J. Friendly, "Some Kind of Hearing", 123 U. Pa. L. Rev. 1267, 1280 (1975) (explaining that it is "fundamental" to due process that "notice be given . . . that . . . clearly inform[s] the individual of the proposed action and the grounds for it"). This knowledge component of due process does not turn on whether the publication is the first copy or a subsequent copy. What matters is the basis for censorship. If a subsequent impoundment decision is based on a different reason not previously shared with [the publisher or distributor], due process requires that [the publisher or distributor] be told of this new reason.” 126 F. Supp. 3d 1233, 1258 (N.D. Fla. 2015).

As such, we object to the censorship on the grounds it does not violate FLDOC policy. We demand ULK be delivered forthwith to the prisoners it was addressed.

Please govern yourself accordingly.


Sincerely,


MIM Distributors

Denial - The publication be disapproved as it contains material determined to:

Be otherwise detrimental to security, good order, rehabilitation, or discipline, or it might facilitate criminal activity or be detrimental to mental health.

Other(specify): Safety and security concern, disrupt order, promotes leadership and organization, promotes hunger strikes.

Reviewed by C. Hunter 10/25/17
Concur: Randy Pfister 10/25/17
Concur: Leslie McCarty 11/13/17