Tracking Prison Censorship in the United States

Director of Rehabilitative Programs and Services
North Carolina Department of Public Safety, Prisons
MSC 4221
Raleigh, NC 27699-4221

23 September 2016

RE: censorship of Under Lock & Key No. 51

Dear Sir/Madam,

This letter is in response to the Letter to Publisher, dated 2 September 2016, and received on 9 September 2016, from Publication Review Committee Chair, Doug Pardue. Once again, Mr. Pardue claims that Under Lock Key "encourages insurrection and disorder." For the latest issue he cites the article "Sept. 9 Day of Peace and Solidarity 2016" on page 1 of issue 51.

The Day of Peace and Solidarity is the opposite of violence and disorder.

As I reiterate with your office every two months, Under Lock & Key explicitly opposes prisoners taking up violence or insurrection in every issue. The continued claims that ULK promotes insurrection and disorder in every issue do not seem connected to the objectives of your department.

I am requesting that upon review of this incident that you will keep ULK 51 off of the list of banned publications, and deliver the copies that we have mailed to each subscriber held in your institutions. Recent decisions by your office to overturn censorship by the Publication Review Committee seem to have no practical application when subscribers still do not receive their issues of Under Lock & Key.

You are hereby advised that the following issue(s) of publication(s) sent to an offender of the Virginia Department of Corrections have been disapproved for delivery to offenders of the Department:

MIM Theory #14, 2001

for the following reasons:

D. Material, documents, or photographs that emphasize depictions or promotions of violence, disorder, insurrection, terrorist, or criminal activity in violation of state or federal laws or the violation of the Offender Disciplinary Procedure.

you may obtain an independent review of this decision by writing, within fifteen calendar days, to the Deputy Director, Division of Operations, Virginia Department of Corrections, P.O. Box 26963, Richmond, Virginia 23261.

Sincerely,

Melissa Welch
Chairman, Publication Review Committee

Warden Kimberly A. Seibel
Chuckwalla Valley State Prison
PO Box 2289
Blythe, CA 92225

3 October 2016

RE: Disapproval of Publication

Ms. Seibel,

This letter is in response to the “DISAPPROVAL OF PUBLICATION” notice sent to MIM Distributors dated 16 September 2016 in regards to Under Lock & Key Issue # 51.

First, I would like to acknowledge and thank you for your 5 July 2016 letter addressing previous mail censorship issues at your facility and working to make sure that we do not have those problems again. However, since then we have received reports from prisoners at Chuckwalla that the word is that the mailroom is returning all mail from MIM Distributors as of early September. Shortly after that the aforementioned disapproval notice for ULK 51, was received from Mailroom Lieutenant P. Fuller.

The reasoning given by Lt. Fuller for the disapproval was that “This publication contained Disturbing and Offensive content in the entire publication.” Government officials censoring correspondence because it disturbs or offends them is a violation of the First Amendment. Also see:

?"Government cannot regulate speech because it disagrees with the message conveyed." - Gentala v. City of Tucson, 213 F3d 1055 (9th Cir. 2000)

?"Government may not regulate speech based on its substantive content or the message it conveys." - Velazquez v. Legal Services Corp., 164 F3d 757 (2nd Cir. 1999)

In this light, I hope you will agree to reverse this decision, and to subsequently deliver Under Lock & Key 51 to each of the subscribers at Chuckwalla Valley State Prison.


Thank you for your time and attention to this matter,

Because of an intentional or negligent act of an SCIG employee I did not receive issue #50 of Under Lock & Key, which is the 50 year commeration issue of the Black Panther Party

This office is in receipt of your apeal and has reviewed all applicable documents. In your grievance and appeals, you continue to assert your belief that you did not receive a particular publication and conclude that an employee stole it. You seek the publication and additional monetary relief.

A review of the records reflects taht there is no evidence to suggest that this publicaiton arrived at the facility. There is nothing further to add to the responses you have already received. Your appeal and any request relief is denied.

The Director's Review Committee (DRC) has rendered a decision regarding your appeal of the Unit rejection of 12 pg letter advocates prison disruption mailed to you[prisoner] from

MIM Distributors

It is the decision of the DRC to REVERSE the Unit denial of the above-mentioned item(s); you will be allowed to receive the item(s).