Tracking Prison Censorship in the United States

Warden Catherine S. Bauman
Industrial Park Drive
P. O. Box 600
Munising, MI 49862

20 December 2010

Dear Warden Bauman,

This letter is regarding the consistent censorship of the newsletter Under Lock & Key from MIM Distributors to prisoners held in Alger Correctional Facility by mailroom staff person T. Immel. Immel alleges that Under Lock & Key (May/June 2010) issue 14, (July/August 2010) issue 15, and (September/October 2010) issue 16 all should be censored pursuant to PD 05.03.118 for the reason "mail advocating or promoting violence, group disruption or insurrections is prohibited."

Immel has been censoring Under Lock & Key even though page 2 of all issues clearly states:

"Our current battles in the United States are legal ones. We encourage prisoners to join these battles while explicitly discouraging them from engaging in any violence or illegal acts. MIM(Prisons) and its publications explicitly oppose the use of armed struggle at this time in the imperialist countries (including the United States)."

Ironically page 2 is consistently cited as a sample page that "promotes unrest and insurrection" on these rejection notices. In addition to page 2, the articles published on pages 1-16 follow this same logic. This newsletter does not promote violence, group disruption or insurrection.

Policy Directive 05.03.118 is a statewide policy that applies to all facilities in the Michigan Department of Corrections. Yet Immel is the only mailroom staff person who believes that Under Lock & Key in any way should be censored per PD 05.03.118. How is this possible? Is the mailroom staff employed at Baraga Max Correctional Facility, Gus Harrison Correctional Facility, Kinross Correctional Facility, Mound Correctional Facility, among others, incompetent in the correct application of PD 05.03118? Or, more likely, is the mailroom staff at Alger Correctional Facility, T. Immel in particular, incorrectly applying this Policy Directive?

In light of the above facts, I would like to request an independent review of the newsletters Under Lock & Key issues 14, 15, and 16 by an objective third party to determine their relationship to PD 05.03.118.

I appreciate your effort in investigating this matter and your timely response. For your convenience I have included with this letter copies of the rejection notices in question and the sample pages cited.

Sincerely,

MIM Distributors

CC: Affected parties

Warden Catherine S. Bauman
Industrial Park Drive
P. O. Box 600
Munising, MI 49862

15 December 2008

Warden Baumen,

We received the two Mail Rejection notices sent by S. Andrews on December 2, 2008 regarding issue 5 of Under Lock & Key sent to XXXXX and YYYYYY This letter is to appeal that decision.

The notices cite pages 2, 9 and 11. The articles on pages 2 and 9 both go into detail regarding MIM(Prisons)?s position that is given in the ?What is MIM(Prisons)?? box on page 2 of every issue of Under Lock & Key: ?Our current battles in the united states are legal ones. We encourage prisoners to join these battles while explicitly discouraging them from engaging in any violence or illegal acts.?

The articles encourage discipline and patiently addressing any problems through legal venues. Therefore PD 05.03.118 would not apply. It is a violation of the First Amendment to censor materials because they are critical of the department or promote ideas that people in the government disagree with. It is also threat to the security of the institution to cut off avenues for grievances through the media and the courts.

We hope that upon review of this decision you will agree that this censorship was an incorrect application of the rules and contrary to the interests of the department as well as those being held prisoner at Alger Maximum.

Sincerely,

Ann Barsch, Administrative Assistant
Industrial Park Drive
P. O. Box 600
Munising, MI 49862

10 January 2009

Dear Ann Barsch,

We are in receipt of your letter from December 29, notifying us that the censorship of Under Lock & Key 5 has been upheld and you are attempting a system wide ban of MIM?s literature. I am taking you up on your offer for requesting more information on this matter.

You restate my reasons for appeal but you give no reasons to justify the decisions. Is this a secret hearing or can you inform the public as to why certain publications are banned? If you can inform us as to what the justifications were for this decision it would be very helpful to us in understanding the problem here.

Sincerely,

Warden Catherine S. Bauman
Industrial Park Drive
P. O. Box 600
Munising, MI 49862

15 December 2008

Warden Baumen,

We received the two Mail Rejection notices sent by S. Andrews on December 2, 2008 regarding issue 5 of Under Lock & Key sent to XXXXX and YYYYYY This letter is to appeal that decision.

The notices cite pages 2, 9 and 11. The articles on pages 2 and 9 both go into detail regarding MIM(Prisons)?s position that is given in the ?What is MIM(Prisons)?? box on page 2 of every issue of Under Lock & Key: ?Our current battles in the united states are legal ones. We encourage prisoners to join these battles while explicitly discouraging them from engaging in any violence or illegal acts.?

The articles encourage discipline and patiently addressing any problems through legal venues. Therefore PD 05.03.118 would not apply. It is a violation of the First Amendment to censor materials because they are critical of the department or promote ideas that people in the government disagree with. It is also threat to the security of the institution to cut off avenues for grievances through the media and the courts.

We hope that upon review of this decision you will agree that this censorship was an incorrect application of the rules and contrary to the interests of the department as well as those being held prisoner at Alger Maximum.

Sincerely,