Tracking Prison Censorship in the United States

The correspondence was disapproved in accordance with Title 15, Section 3136 as it pertains to Section 3006 and or 3135:
Title 15, Section 3006 CONTRABAND:
(c)(5) Plans to disrupt the order, or breath the security, of any facility (such as riot, escape, strike, etc.)
(c)(7) Coded messages.

It violates regulations or local procedures:
Promotes gang activities [CCR, Title 15, Section 3023 (a)]
Unauthorized inmate-to-inmate correspondence and/or inmate-to-parolee/probationer correspondence [CCR, Title 15, Section 3139]
Third party correspondence [PBSP DOM Addendum, section 54010, Attachment 10, #33]

Additional information: Mass mailing from MIM DISTRIBUTORS advocating the continuation of a state wide hunger strike/disturbance. Contains reports from several unidentified California inmates located throughout the state.

The disposition of the letter/mailing is as follows:
Confiscated by GP ISU. The mailing is disallowed per Title 15, Sections 3006, 3135, and 3136.

Signed M. Cleary, Correctional Officer, Investigative Services Unit
and B.W. Freeland, Correctional Captain, Investigative Services Unit

Warden Leroy Cartledge
McCormick Correctional Institution
386 Redemption Way
McCormick, SC 29899

19 October 2011

Warden Cartledge:

This letter is regarding the ongoing censorship of reading material from MIM Distributors to Mr. XXX, a prisoner held at McCormick Correctional Institution.

Recently MIM Distributors sent Mr. XXX an envelope which contained information about MIM(Prisons), a prisoner support organization; a list of mail that has recently been sent from MIM Distributors to Mr. XXX; a brief missive from MIM(Prisons) informing Mr. XXX of his study group status; and some information on how Mr. XXX can write articles for MIM Distributor's newsletter Under Lock & Key.

It is my understanding that most mail from MIM Distributors to Mr. XXX is censored because of the SDOC policy that prisoners in isolation are not permitted to receive newspapers. I have written to the Director Boyd regarding the Constitutionality of these practices, so I will not get into that issue here. What I would like to protest is the censorship of the letter outlined above. What is the reason for this censorship? It is even more obviously illegal than the censorship of Under Lock & Key. It must be addressed.

Therefore, we are asking for your assistance in resolving censorship of mail from MIM Distributors to Mr. XXX. First, if the CRC believes that mail from MIM Distributors is unfit for delivery to prisoners at McCormick CI, they must notify the prisoners subject to this censorship and give them an opportunity to appeal the decision (Procunier v. Martinez 416 U.S. 396), and they must explain why (Procunier v. Martinez 416 U.S. 396).

We appreciate your assistance in this matter and look forward to your response.

Sincerely,

Bailey Clarke, Legal Assistant
MIM Distributors
PO Box 40799
San Francisco, CA 94140

CC: Affected parties

The grievance is denied. The Mailroom Supervisor discussed this issue with the Package Room staff. Mailroom staff correctly forwarded this parcel/package of over 20 newspapers to the package room. The grievant did not have a subscription to this newspaper and the entire contents are deemed a package. The grievant is advised to follow the directions on his Contraband notice.

[X] I disagree with the IGRC response and wish to appeal to the Superintendent.

Superintendent John Kerestes
SCI Mahanoy
301 Morea Road
Frackville, PA 17932

6 October 2011

Dear Superintendent Kerestes,

This letter is regarding many issues of the newsletter Under Lock & Key that were denied to a prisoner held at SCI Mahanoy, Mr. XXX. We were recently informed by Mr. XXX that he neither received the issues, nor received notification that they were being denied. It is United States law that the sender and prisoner must be notified if an item of mail is being censored by prison administrators or staff (Procunier v. Martinez, 416 U.S.396. 94 S.Ct 1800, and Montcalm Publ'g Corp. v. Beck, 80 F.3d 105, 106 (4th Cir.), cert. denied, 519 U.S. 928 (1996)). In spite of this, MIM Distributors was also no notified of this censorship.

Here is a list of the issues of Under Lock & Key which were denied to Mr. XXX, without notification as described above:

Issue 9 (July 2009)
Issue 10 (September 2009)
Issue 11 (November 2009)
Issue 12 (January 2010)
Issue 13 (March 2010)
Issue 14 (May 2010
Issue 15 (July 2010)
Issue 16 (September 2010
Issue 17 (November 2010)
Issue 18 (January 2011)
Issue 19 (March 2011)
Issue 20 (May 2011)

We recently sent Mr. XXX issues 21 (July 2011) and 22 (September 2011) and have not received notification of denial, or confirmation that Mr. XXX has received them.

Please look into this issue, as this censorship is obviously illegal. We appreciate your assistance in this matter and look forward to your response.

Sincerely,

MIM Distributors

CC: Affected parties

My 602 appeal was predicated upon the 2009 Prison Legal News legal settlement, and a Pelican Bay Memorandum that is dated October 21, 2008 which reversed/lifted the ban on MIM publications.

It violates regulations or local procedures:
Third-party correspondence [PBSP DOM Addendum, Section 54010, Attachment 10, #33]

The disposition of the letter/mailing is as follows:
Other (describe): Confiscated by GP ISU. The mailing is disallowed as per the CCR, Title 15, Sections 3006, 3135, and 3136.