MIM Legal Notes 183
Michigan censors Spanish

The Michigan Department of Corrections(MDOC) has been one of the states most 
fiercely censoring the news and history of the People. MIM has sent things 
such as "Settlers: The Mythology of the White Proletariat" to prisoners at 
the Marquette Branch Prison which were censored because it is a history book 
telling the truth of Amerikan genocide against indigenous and African peoples. 
Copies of _Palante: The History of the Young Lords Party_ have been censored 
and classified as material pertaining to gangs. Note that _Palante_ is read 
at the University of Michigan for classes and details the historical development 
of a political organization, not a 'gang'.

But most disturbing is the more recent and systematic censorship of mail or 
books written in Spanish. This categorically is a way to censor MIM Notes 
because there is always one page of Spanish in the paper. It is also a way 
to censor Spanish-English dictionaries and text books. This means prisoners 
who speak Spanish as a first language have little or no means of getting 
their stories heard or communicating with the outside world.

The mail of prisoners working with Hispanic Americans Striving Towards 
Advancement (HASTA) has been censored repeatedly and MIM received the 
following information from HASTA (edited by MIM):

In defending against the Notice of Package/Mail Rejection when a letter is 
written in a foreign language, the following is to be utilized as your foundation.

Under MCL 800.43(1) "The department may prohibit from receiving or possessing 
any material that the department determines under this section is detrimental 
to the security, good order, or discipline of the institution, or that may 
facilitate or encourage criminal activity, or that may interfere with the 
rehabilitation of any prisoner. The department shall not prohibit a prisoner 
from receiving or possessing any material solely because the content of that 
material is religious, philosophical, political, social, or sexual, or because 
it is unpopular or repugnant. Material that may be prohibited under this 
section includes, but is not limited to any of the following: ... (d) Material 
that is written in code."

In response to this legislative authority, the department amended the Prisoner 
Mail Policy PD-05.03.0118 by adding the following language:
DD. "Prisoners are prohibited from receiving mail that is a threat to the 
security, good order, or discipline of the facility, that may facilitate or 
encourage criminal activity, or that may interfere with the rehabilitation of 
the prisoner. The following pose such risks within a correctional facility 
under all circumstances and therefore shall be rejected:

15. "Mail written in a foreign language that cannot be interpreted by staff, 
thus preventing an effective search of the mail. Mail written in a foreign 
language shall not be rejected for this reason if staff capable of interpreting 
the mail are readily available."

Essentially, the department included letters written in a foreign language in 
the category of letters written in code. This means letters will be rejected 
where no interpreter is readily available; this goes beyond the scope of the 
statutory authority of MCL 800.43(1). 

Prohibited material must be predicated upon the following:
1. that the material is detrimental to the security, good order, and discipline 
of the institution; 
2. that may facilitate or encourage criminal activity; or 
3. that may interfere with the rehabilitation of any prisoner.

Due process, in accordance with _Wolf v McDonnell_, 418 US 539,94 S.Ct. 2963, 
41 L.Ed.2d 935 (1974), mandates that a prisoner be given the opportunity to 
challenge the evidence against him. In the instant case, the evidence is a 
letter written in a foreign language that is being denied solely upon the 
basis that there are no staff readily available to interpret the letters, 
and not because the contents pose a risk as contemplated by the statute. 
Therefore, a prisoner is entitled to have the contents read at a hearing so 
that the hearings officer can make a determination whether the letter is 
detrimental to the security, good order, and discipline of the institution, 
or that may facilitation or encourage criminal activity; or that may interfere 
with the rehabilitation of any prisoner. If the hearings officer cannot 
establish this, then the prisoner is entitled to the letter.