Omar Grayson v. Harold Schuler

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• holding that “the Act can no longer do [a plaintiff] any good” when “he’s since been released from prison”
• concluding that “[RLUIPA] does not create a cause of action against state employees in their personal capacity.”
• finding that policy allowing Rastafarians to maintain long hair but denying the privilege to sincere African Hebrew Israelite of Jerusalem was arbitrary discrimination
• observing that completely “scrupulous . . . observance” cannot be the standard
• noting that the First Amendment protects the religious rights of heretics
• explaining how a prison’s unequal treatment of different religions “could not reasonably be thought consti- tutional”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).