Tracking Prison Censorship in the United States

Roy W. Cherry, Superintendent
Hampton Roads Regional Jail
2960 Elmhurst Lane
Portsmouth, VA 23701

October 13, 2009

Superintendent Cherry,

This letter is to follow up to a letter that was sent to you on April 22, 2009 regarding a complete ban on all mail sent from MIM Distributors or MIM(Prisons) into Hampton Roads Regional Jail. We have been attempting to communicate with your employees to remedy this issue since January of 2008 to no avail, with no response.

MIM(Prisons) is the publisher of a newsletter titled Under Lock & Key. The September/October 2009, issue 10 of this newsletter was denied from all prisoners at HRRJ, including X, Y, and Z. Actually, Under Lock & Key has not been allowed in HRRJ since the September 2008 issue #4.

The mail was returned to us with "Unauthorized Publication" written on the envelope. What steps should MIM Distributors take to authorize the newsletter Under Lock & Key as per HRRJ mail rules?

Thank you for your assistance.

Sincerely,

MIM(Prisons)

Roy W. Cherry, Superintendent
Hampton Roads Regional Jail
2960 Elmhurst Lane
Portsmouth, VA 23701
April 22, 2009
Superintendent Cherry,

This letter is in regard to the most recent acts of censorship based in your facility against MIM Distributors, San Francisco, CA. We have been attempting to communicate with your employees to remedy this issue since January of 2008 to no avail. Hopefully you can explain the matter to us clearly with legal reference.

Prisoner XXXXXX XXXXXX #XXXXXX at Hampton Roads Regional Jail has been having his mail returned to us with stamps or writing on the envelopes that state "Refused" and "Unauthorized Contents." Some envelopes have "Unauthorized Publication" hand-written on them when they are not even publications, but personal letters. Can you please explain to us what is "unauthorized" about the "content" of these materials?

We also received one notice of "unathorized property" receipt that was filled out by Mail Clerk P.L. Punilei on 03/11/2009. Clerk Punilei described the contents as "Unauthorized Publication of Material." A copy of this notice is included with this letter. Also for your reference we have included one of the envelopes that the returned mail was in.

The materials that have been returned to us are personal letters, MIM Distributors' newsletter Under Lock & Key, and a pamphlet titled What is MIM? Your assistance with this issue is greatly appreciated.

Sincerely,

Senior Mail Clerk
Hampton Roads Regional Jail
2690 Elmhurst Ln
Portsmouth, VA 23701

12 August 2008

Dear Sir/Madam,

This letter is in regards to the censorship of mail from MIM to XXXXXX XXXXXX (#19543) at Hampton Roads Regional Jail. Mail Clerk P.L. Pumlei returned a letter to Mr. XXXXXX and a copy of MIM?s newsletter Under Lock & Key, stating that they were ?Inappropriate material for the correctional environment? (see enclosed).

I am quite sure that upon review you will see that this was a violation federal law. The First Amendment to the Constitution still upholds freedom of speech and association, and THORNBURGH v. ABBOTT, 490 U.S. 401 (1989) upheld the First Amendment in the context of a prison setting with the exception if the material is found "to be detrimental to the security, good order, or discipline of the institution or if it might facilitate criminal activity." The ?appropriateness? of said literature is not a legal justification for censorship.

The second sheet of paper sent with the returned mail to MIM (also enclosed), is a list of things that cannot be sent to prisoners at Hampton Roads Regional Jail. The highlighting on this paper implies a threat of criminal prosecution for sending ?Gang Related Materials? to a prisoner at the jail. If this is a serious accusation, please cite the portion of the literature that is deemed ?gang related? by your staff, what gang it is related to, and what federal law we are violating. Otherwise, I expect Mr. XXXXXX, and others at Hampton Roads, to be allowed to receive mail and literature from MIM Distributors.

I look forward to your response in this matter.

Sincerely,

Roy Cherry
Hampton Roads Regional Jail
2690 Elmhurst Ln
Portsmouth, VA 23701

22 September 2008

Mr. Cherry,

Over a month ago I sent a letter to your facility requesting an explanation of illegal mail censorship and have not received a response. Just this week a personalized letter addressed to XXXXXX XXXXXX (#19543) at Hampton Roads Regional Jail from MIM Distributors? address was returned to sender without even being opened. The stated reason on the envelope was, ?unauthorized distribution of material per Dept. of Corrections.?

I am requesting an immediate explanation of this censorship of mail based on the return address. I personally correspond with a number of prisoners being held by the Virginia Department of Corrections, so I can assure you it is not their policy to censor anything coming from this address. As they are certainly aware, such a policy would be illegal.

Please advise me as to the status of our ability to send mail to prisoners at your facility. In addition, I am still awaiting answers to my inquiries in the enclosed letter from August 12, 2008.

Sincerely,

Senior Mail Clerk
Hampton Roads Regional Jail
2690 Elmhurst Ln
Portsmouth, VA 23701

12 August 2008

Dear Sir/Madam,

This letter is in regards to the censorship of mail from MIM to XXXXXX XXXXXX (#19543) at Hampton Roads Regional Jail. Mail Clerk P.L. Pumlei returned a letter to Mr. XXXXXX and a copy of MIM?s newsletter Under Lock & Key, stating that they were ?Inappropriate material for the correctional environment? (see enclosed).

I am quite sure that upon review you will see that this was a violation federal law. The First Amendment to the Constitution still upholds freedom of speech and association, and THORNBURGH v. ABBOTT, 490 U.S. 401 (1989) upheld the First Amendment in the context of a prison setting with the exception if the material is found "to be detrimental to the security, good order, or discipline of the institution or if it might facilitate criminal activity." The ?appropriateness? of said literature is not a legal justification for censorship.

The second sheet of paper sent with the returned mail to MIM (also enclosed), is a list of things that cannot be sent to prisoners at Hampton Roads Regional Jail. The highlighting on this paper implies a threat of criminal prosecution for sending ?Gang Related Materials? to a prisoner at the jail. If this is a serious accusation, please cite the portion of the literature that is deemed ?gang related? by your staff, what gang it is related to, and what federal law we are violating. Otherwise, I expect Mr. XXXXXX, and others at Hampton Roads, to be allowed to receive mail and literature from MIM Distributors.

I look forward to your response in this matter.

Sincerely,