Crime Justice & America, Inc. v. Honea, No. 15-16119 (9th Cir. 2017)
Annotate this CaseIn a 42 U.S.C. 1983 action challenging Butte County Jail's policy prohibiting the delivery of unsolicited commercial mail to inmates, the Ninth Circuit affirmed the district court's judgment for defendants and the denial of plaintiff's motion to reopen discovery and for relief from judgment. Plaintiff, publisher of a magazine aimed at county jail inmates, argued that the jail's mail policy violated the First Amendment. The panel evaluated the mail policy under the test established for reviewing constitutional challenges to prison regulations in Turner v. Safley, 482 U.S. 78 (1987), and held that the ban was rationally connected to a legitimate government interest; electronic kiosks were an adequate alternative; distributing the magazine itself would have a significant impact on the allocation of jail resources; and paper has created serious problems at the jail, and the jail's mail policy was not an exaggerated response to those problems. Finally, the panel held that plaintiff abandoned its remaining arguments.
Court Description: Prisoner Civil Rights The panel affirmed the district court’s bench trial judgment in favor of defendants and affirmed the denial of plaintiff’s motion to re-open discovery and for relief from judgment in a 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action challenging Butte County Jail’s policy prohibiting the delivery of unsolicited commercial mail to inmates. Plaintiff, a publisher of a magazine aimed at county jail inmates, argued that the jail’s mail policy violated the First Amendment. The panel held that each of the four factors set forth in Turner v. Safley, 482 U.S. 78 (1987) favored defendant and therefore that Butte County’s ban on inmates’ receipt of unsolicited commercial mail was reasonably related to a legitimate penological objective. The panel held that: (1) the ban was intended to limit inmates’ access to the type of paper most likely used to compromise jail security; (2) electronic kiosks where inmates could access an electronic version of the magazine were an adequate alternative; (3) defendant established that distributing the magazine would have a significant impact on the allocation of jail resources; and (4) paper had created serious problems at the jail, and the mail policy was not an exaggerated response to those problems. The panel held that plaintiff abandoned its arguments related to the post-trial admission of a declaration and its appeal of the district court’s denial of its motion for relief CRIME & JUSTICE AMERICA V. HONEA 3 from judgment and its motion to re-open discovery. The panel noted that plaintiff failed to explain why it objected to the admission of the declaration or what new evidence pertaining to the electronic kiosks it could have discovered.
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.