MIM(Prisons) is a cell of revolutionaries serving the oppressed masses inside U.$. prisons, guided by the communist ideology of Marxism-Leninism-Maoism.
Department of Corrections
ATTN: Library Service Administrator
501 S Calhoun St
Tallahassee, FL 32399-2500
June 3, 2015
RE: Impounding of Chican@ Power and the Struggle for Aztlan at Mayo Correctional Institution
Dear Ms. Morrison,
This letter is in response to a notification we recently received from Mayo Correctional Institution dated 5/15/2015 regarding the impounding of A BOOK we mailed to Mr. XXX. The purpose of this letter is to appeal this decisions and have the magazines delivered to Mr. XXX.
The Supreme Court decision governing the First Amendment in prisons in the United States (Thornburgh, 490 U.S. at 416 n.14) is clear that regulations barring writings that "express 'inflammatory political, racial, religious or other views'" were not sufficiently "neutral" or "unrelated to the suppression of expression" to be legally allowable.
The Mayo C.I notice states about this book: "It is not conducive to the rehabilitation of inmates." The reasons cited for this are:
pg. 143 - crime photos - riots/gang violence
p. 143 is the first page of "Section 3: Why Revolutionary Proletarian Nationalism?" There are no crime photos.
pg 188-193 inciteful
These pages contain a review of the book Youth, Identity, Power. This is an academic book and our discussion of the content.
pg 99-107 inciteful
These pages come from articles titled "Padillas: Our Red Guards" and "Barrios Wrapped in Razor Wire". These are history articles about organizations and events.
For both of the above we are going to have to insist on some information about what specifically in these pages is “inciteful.” There is nothing illegal or against prison policy in this book.
Pg 65, 138, 142, 182, 190, 213 - photos/artwork inflammatory or encourages group disruption
The art on page 65, for instance, has nothing to do with group disruption. It is a picture of a Mexican man and woman and a car. Behind them is a skull with a military hat on it. What is encouraging group disruption or inflammatory about this?
Page 138 does not have any artwork or photos on it.
Page 142 has art that is a political commentary about the border with Mexico. Again, there is nothing about group disruption. It is a political statement about the U.S.-Mexico border and immigration.
Page 190 has art depicting Mexican history. There is nothing related to gangs in that art, nor is there any depiction of riots. And certainly no crime photos.
Page 213 has artwork depicting women from all around the world and celebrating the strength of women. Again nothing that could be construed as encouraging disruption.
This is a history book. It provides facts about various events in the history of both Mexico and the U.S. By this very loose definition of "inciteful" we conclude that the Assistant Warden, Mr. Jeffcoat, who signed the censorship notification, is violating the legal standard set by the Supreme Court Thornburgh ruling.
There is nothing in this publication that meets the criteria listed for censorship of publications. It may be the case that those reviewing this publication disagreed with the perspective presented, but the rejection of publications that one finds disagreeable is a violation of the Constitution of the United States, which your department is bound to uphold. The reasons given for denial of these publications does not pass the standard set by Thornburgh for censoring mail to prisoners.
I am requesting that you allow Mr. XXX to receive this impounded book.
Department of Corrections
ATTN: Library Service Administrator
501 S Calhoun St
Tallahassee, FL 32399-2500
April 27, 2015
RE: Impounding of MIM Theory 14 and What is MIM? pamphlet at Mayo Correctional Institution
Dear Ms. Morrison,
This letter is in response to a notification we recently received from Mayo Correctional Institution dated 4/17/2015 regarding the impounding of two magazines we mailed to Mr. XXX. The purpose of this letter is to appeal this decisions and have the magazines delivered to Mr. XXX.
The Supreme Court decision governing the First Amendment in prisons in the United States (Thornburgh, 490 U.S. at 416 n.14) is clear that regulations barring writings that "express 'inflammatory political, racial, religious or other views'" were not sufficiently "neutral" or "unrelated to the suppression of expression" to be legally allowable.
The Mayo C.I notice cites multiple articles on several pages as justifying the denial of the "What is MIM" pamphlet because "it depicts, describes or encourages activities which may lead to the use of physical violence or group disruption". Below are the pages cited for this censorship and a description of their contents.
p10 "encourages hate behavior" - contains an article about why the MIM (an organization that no longer exists) did not respond to questions about details of it's organization's membership, size or personal details.
p12 "encourages group disruption" - contains a critique of organizations that want to take up armed struggle now in this country (a critique!), and a discussion of the merits of working within mass organizations for political change.
p18 "encourages hate and discriminatory behavior as well as inciteful" - contains the historical constitution of the Maoist Internationalist Movement, which is a list of theoretical points about history and unity.
p23 "inciteful" - does not exist in this publication which is only 18 pages long.
We are left with the distinct impression that Mr. Jeffcoat, the Assistant Warden who signed off on this censorship, did not even bother to look at, much less read, the publication.
The notice regarding MIM Theory 14 claims that the publication is "dangerously inflammatory" and "depicts, describes or encourages activities which may lead to the use of physical violence or group disruption." This notification is equally embarrassing for it's lack of correspondence between the pages cited and any actual content on those pages.
Pg 73-74 "gangs" - this is not a description of content that is inadmissible, it is merely a word. In fact there is an article on those pages about gangs but it is a critique of the role of gangs in prisons which create violent conflicts behind bars and physically prevent members from leaving those organizations. What about this article is "not conducive to the rehabilitation of inmates."? Obviously having the word "gangs" is not sufficient to justify censorship.
p79-80 "dangerously inflammatory" - these pages contain a discussion of the term "political prisoner" and debate whether only those arrested for explicitly political crimes should be given this label. See the Thornburgh decision cited above for a clear repudiation of any legal standing the prison has for censoring this article.
p92-98 "Black Panther and gang related material" - here it seems, as with pages 73-74, the Assistant Warden of Mayo CI is under the mistaken impression that he can censor literature just because of the topics it addresses. This is clearly in contradiction to existing legal precedent.
p105-106 "encourages a book that instructs group disruption" - These pages have reviews of a few books:
• Malcolm X: Speeches at Harvard (by Malcolm X)
• Negro in the City (by Gerald Leinwand)
• Why We Can't Wait - Still! (by Martin Luther King, Jr.)
All three are widely available academic books. None are focused on "group disruption" unless this term is used to mean anything that describes issues of human rights and historical struggles against oppression. If that is cause for censorship we presume that Mayo C.I. does not allow any history books into the institution. Clearly this is a mistaken basis for censorship.
p129 "encourages a group that provides instruction on riots" - this page as a review of the now defunct publication "Prison Connections" which used to publish information about prisons in Massachusetts. Interestingly, this review focuses on criticizing both prisoner-on-prisoner violence and violence against the prison system and discusses other organizations that agree with this critique. As the primary focus of this publication review it's hard to see how anyone who actually read this page could have found information about a group that "provides instruction on riots".
Again, as with the other magazine, we have to conclude that Mr. Jeffcoat did not actually read the publication in question.
There is nothing in these publications that meet the criteria listed for censorship of publications. It may be the case that those reviewing this publication disagreed with the perspective presented in the articles listed, but the rejection of publications that one finds disagreeable is a violation of the Constitution of the United States, which your department is bound to uphold. The reasons given for denial of these publications does not pass the standard set by Thornburgh for censoring mail to prisoners.
I am requesting that you allow Mr. XXX to receive both impounded publications.
Scott Crews
Mayo Correctional Institution
8784 US Highway 27 West
Mayo, Florida 32066-3458
March 29, 2015
RE: Censorship of routine mail
Dear Warden Crews,
This letter is in response to an "Unauthorized Mail Return Receipt" dated 3/11/2015 addressed to MIM Distributors and signed by mail room personnel M. Engle for a package sent to Mr. XXX. It claims the content of the envelope "Otherwise presents a threat to the security, order or rehabilitative objectives of the Correctional System, or to the safety of any person."
The mail in question contained several essays on the topic of historical and dialectical materialism. This subject matter is clearly not related to violence, security or safety at your facility. Therefore I am requesting that this mail be delivered to Mr. XXX (a copy of which you have on file).
If you cannot complete my request to deliver this mail then please respond to me with an explanation of what portion of the material in question you find to be a threat.
Sincerely,
04/09/2015
Assistant Warden refuses to consider MIM(Prisons) request for explanation of censorship
Form Filed: Unauthorized Mail Return Receipt (sent from facility to MIM Dist)
Show Text
Reason(s):
Depicts, describes or encourages activities which may lead to the use of physical violence or group disruption
M. Engle, Mail Room Personnel
03/18/2015
MIM(Prisons) protests censorship
Show Text
Scott Crews
Mayo Correctional Institution
8784 US Highway 27 West
Mayo, Florida 32066-3458
18 March 2015
RE: Censorship of routine mail
Dear Warden Crews,
This letter is in response to an "Unauthorized Mail Return Receipt" dated 2/11/2015 addressed to MIM Distributors and signed by mail room personnel M. Engle for a letter sent to Mr. XXX. It claims the content of the letter "Depicts, describes or encourages activities which may lead to the use of physical violence or group disruption."
The letter in question includes articles on current events with a focus on news about prisons. This subject matter is not related to violence or group disruption at your facility. Therefore I am requesting that this letter be delivered to Mr. XXX (a copy of which you have on file).
If you cannot complete my request to deliver this letter then please respond to me with an explanation of what portion of the letter in question you find to be a threat.
MIM Distributors requests that letter is delivered or explanation given for censorship
Show Text
Scott Crews
Mayo Correctional Institution
8784 US Highway 27 West
Mayo, Florida 32066-3458
30 December 2014
RE: Censorship of routine mail
Dear Warden Crews,
This letter is in response to an "Unauthorized Mail Return Receipt" dated 12/15/2014 addressed to MIM Distributors and signed by mail room personnel M. Engle for a letter sent to Mr. XXXXXX XXXXXX. It claims the content of the letter "Depicts, describes or encourages activities which may lead to the use of physical violence or group disruption."
The letter in question was an essay describing the problem of LGBT youth and homelessness in this country. This subject matter is clearly not related to violence or group disruption at your facility. Therefore I am requesting that this letter be delivered to Mr. XXXXXX (a copy of which you have on file).
If you cannot complete my request to deliver this letter then please respond to me with an explanation of what portion of the letter in question you find to be a threat.
Letter Filed: from Assistant Warden of Programs to MIM Distributors
Show Text
We are in receipt of your letter regarding an "Unauthorized Mail Return Receipt" dated 12/15/14 involving inmate...
It would appear that you are aware of the policies and procedures of the Florida Department of Corrections based on your numerous publications that are mailed to our inmate population. As such, after review, the letter in question will not be delivered to inmate... Inmate... has the option to grieve our action by participating in the inmate grievance process.
Sincerely,
Nan Jeffcoat
Assistant Warden of Programs
Mayo Correctional Institution - Annex
pg. 13 is dangerously inflammatory in that it advocates or encourages riot, insurrection, disruption of the institution, violation of department or institution rules[Download Documentation]
MIM Distributors appeals impounding of ULK36
Show Text
Department of Corrections
ATTN: Library Service Administrator
501 S Calhoun St
Tallahassee, FL 32399-2500
23 February 2014
RE: Impounding of Under Lock & Key No. 36 at Mayo Correctional Institution
Dear Sir/Madam,
This letter is to appeal the decision by Mayo CI to impound Under Lock & Key No. 36. The reason given is that pg.13 is ?dangerously inflammatory.? That page contains an article that is critical of Florida Department of Corrections policies and actions. Please note that it is against the law to censor materials because they are critical of your department or because you disagree with them politically (see Walker v. Sumner (9th Cir. 1990) 917 F.2d 382, 385).
I am requesting that you allow all individuals held by FDOC to receive Issue 36 of Under Lock & Key.
Depicts, describes or encourages activities which may lead to the use of physical violence or group disruption. [Download Documentation]This was overturned
Martha Humphries, Warden
8784 US Highway 27 West
Mayo, Florida
32066-3458
August 31, 2009
Warden Humphries,
This letter is in reference to the denial of a letter that was sent to X at Mayo Correctional Institution. The letter was sent from MIM Distributors in San Francisco, CA and was their "Censorpack" which contains information to help prisoners fight censorship. It instructs them to appeal their mail denials through the grievance process. It also instructs them to send us copies of communications with the prison administration, so that we can keep track in case we need to go to court.
However, mail room personnel S. Grantham denied the admittance of this "Censorpack" because it "depicts, describes or encourages activities which may lead to the use of physical violence of group disruption." If you are talking about the repression that prisoners who file grievances often come under from the prison administration, then yes, we are encouraging activities which may lead correctional officers to exert physical violence on prisoners.
It is ridiculous that a document that encourages prisoners to use legal means of fighting censorship could lead to group disruption, etc. We request an independent review of this error and for the "Censorpack" to be admitted to Mr. X, as well as any other prisoner in contact with MIM Distributors at Mayo CI.
We appreciate your consideration and look forward to hearing from you.
Sincerely,
MIM(Prisons)
09/23/2009
Legal Department reverses decision on Censorpack but upholds censorship of ULK Download Documentation
![[Download Documentation]](https://www.prisoncensorship.info/docs/c5785.jpg){kind=link}
![[Download Documentation]](https://www.prisoncensorship.info/docs/c5546.jpg){kind=link}
