Sisney v. Kaemingk, No. 16-4313 (8th Cir. 2018)
Annotate this CasePlaintiff filed a pro se civil rights action against four South Dakota corrections officials, asserting both facial and as-applied challenges to the State's prison-pornography policy. The Eighth Circuit found it prudent to decide whether the policy was constitutional as applied to plaintiff before reaching his facial challenges. However, the court could not adopt the district court's as-applied analysis because it was error to resurrect and apply the 2000 Policy. The court explained that this was not the policy that plaintiff actually challenged, nor was it the authority under which SDSP staff withheld the rejected materials. Accordingly, the court vacated the district court's summary judgment order and remanded for it to reevaluate defendant's as-applied claims based on the 2014 Policy.
Court Description: Gruender, Author, with Benton, Circuit Judge, and Tunheim, District Judge] Prisoner case - Prisoner Civil Rights. In facial and as-applied overbreadth challenge to provisions of the State of South Dakota's prison-pornography policy, the court would first examine whether the policy was unconstitutional as applied to Sisney's in order to avoid the need to reach the claims of facial unconstitutionality; such an approach reflects the proper deference owed corrections officials and would permit the fashioning of more limited relief; the court cannot adopt the district court's as-applied analysis because it was error for the district court to resurrect and apply the prison's 2000 policy after it found the 2014 policy was facially unconstitutional; once the court facially invalidated the 2014 policy, there was nothing left to apply, given that South Dakota Department of Corrections policies supercede rather than amend previous provisions in their entirety; in light of this error, the best policy is to vacate the district court's order and allow the district court to reevaluate Sisney's as-applied claims based on the 2014 policy; only after the district court makes this determination, will the district court be able to decide whether and to what extent it is appropriate to consider Sisney's facial challenges to the policy.
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.