Tracking Prison Censorship in the United States

a prisoner at Marion reports that comrades from different organizations came together to address the ongoing censorship problem with the administration, who promised changes. The prisoners are still waiting.

Complaint: Documenting staff failed to follow policy and procedure with regards to unauthorized property notice. Mail denied in violation of policy.

On 3-10-16 books were mailed to me and denied 'due to content". See complaint attached hereto.

I request that books be ordered delivered to me at staff's earliest convenience.

Complaint detail:
On 3-10-16, i received an "unauthorized property notice" regarding books in which i had ordered. The reason stated in the notice - "denied due to content."

Offender Mail Procedures IS13-1.1 states that "a publication or item may not be rejected because its contents is religious, philosophical, social, sexual, or is unpopular or repugnant."

The materials in question have already been allowed into the institution, were placed on my property list and were sent home due to wear and tear, so new copies were ordered.

As held in the Supreme Court decision Procunier v. Martinez 416 U.S. at 415, prohibiting "inflammatory" prison speech fairly invites prison officials and employees to apply their own personal prejudices and opinions as standards for prisoner mail censorship and suppress unwelcome criticism. The Court has never repudiated Procunier's holding that prison officials may not censor speech simply because they deem it 'inflammatory."

The particular items in question are complex theoretical, political-economic journals. There is nothing that is inflammatory; racially or otherwise in said material.

The censorship of said materials clearly is violating my rights guaranteed under the 1st and 14th Amendments to the Unite States Constitution. These rights cannot be abridged by the State or any other individual as they are guaranteed to every citizen in this country.

Furthermore, complaintant has volumes of the same material that comes to him weekly for over the last 20 years and not one incident in violation of institutional rules, regulations or policies has ever occurred based on the content of said materials entering the institutions.

It should also be noted that the staff member(s) who initiated the unauthorized property notice, did not follow policy in that no notice was given to me as to where my books were, what options i had with regard to my property. Also, no notice was sent to the publisher (who has a right to appeal any censorship).

I am requesting that said material be delivered to me at staff's earliest convenience.

cc: Personal File
MIM(Prisons)/publisher
ACC-Classification Staff H.U.16
U.S. District Court, Southeastern Division
Venus Harry, Attorney-at-Law

Complaint: Documenting staff failed to follow policy and procedure with regards to unauthorized property notice. Mail denied in violation of policy.

On 3-10-16 books were mailed to me and denied 'due to content". See complaint attached hereto.

I request that books be ordered delivered to me at staff's earliest convenience.

Complaint detail:
On 3-10-16, i received an "unauthorized property notice" regarding books in which i had ordered. The reason stated in the notice - "denied due to content."

Offender Mail Procedures IS13-1.1 states that "a publication or item may not be rejected because its contents is religious, philosophical, social, sexual, or is unpopular or repugnant."

The materials in question have already been allowed into the institution, were placed on my property list and were sent home due to wear and tear, so new copies were ordered.

As held in the Supreme Court decision Procunier v. Martinez 416 U.S. at 415, prohibiting "inflammatory" prison speech fairly invites prison officials and employees to apply their own personal prejudices and opinions as standards for prisoner mail censorship and suppress unwelcome criticism. The Court has never repudiated Procunier's holding that prison officials may not censor speech simply because they deem it 'inflammatory."

The particular items in question are complex theoretical, political-economic journals. There is nothing that is inflammatory; racially or otherwise in said material.

The censorship of said materials clearly is violating my rights guaranteed under the 1st and 14th Amendments to the Unite States Constitution. These rights cannot be abridged by the State or any other individual as they are guaranteed to every citizen in this country.

Furthermore, complaintant has volumes of the same material that comes to him weekly for over the last 20 years and not one incident in violation of institutional rules, regulations or policies has ever occurred based on the content of said materials entering the institutions.

It should also be noted that the staff member(s) who initiated the unauthorized property notice, did not follow policy in that no notice was given to me as to where my books were, what options i had with regard to my property. Also, no notice was sent to the publisher (who has a right to appeal any censorship).

I am requesting that said material be delivered to me at staff's earliest convenience.

cc: Personal File
MIM(Prisons)/publisher
ACC-Classification Staff H.U.16
U.S. District Court, Southeastern Division
Venus Harry, Attorney-at-Law

Complaint: Documenting staff failed to follow policy and procedure with regards to unauthorized property notice. Mail denied in violation of policy.

On 3-10-16 books were mailed to me and denied 'due to content". See complaint attached hereto.

I request that books be ordered delivered to me at staff's earliest convenience.

Complaint detail:
On 3-10-16, i received an "unauthorized property notice" regarding books in which i had ordered. The reason stated in the notice - "denied due to content."

Offender Mail Procedures IS13-1.1 states that "a publication or item may not be rejected because its contents is religious, philosophical, social, sexual, or is unpopular or repugnant."

The materials in question have already been allowed into the institution, were placed on my property list and were sent home due to wear and tear, so new copies were ordered.

As held in the Supreme Court decision Procunier v. Martinez 416 U.S. at 415, prohibiting "inflammatory" prison speech fairly invites prison officials and employees to apply their own personal prejudices and opinions as standards for prisoner mail censorship and suppress unwelcome criticism. The Court has never repudiated Procunier's holding that prison officials may not censor speech simply because they deem it 'inflammatory."

The particular items in question are complex theoretical, political-economic journals. There is nothing that is inflammatory; racially or otherwise in said material.

The censorship of said materials clearly is violating my rights guaranteed under the 1st and 14th Amendments to the Unite States Constitution. These rights cannot be abridged by the State or any other individual as they are guaranteed to every citizen in this country.

Furthermore, complaintant has volumes of the same material that comes to him weekly for over the last 20 years and not one incident in violation of institutional rules, regulations or policies has ever occurred based on the content of said materials entering the institutions.

It should also be noted that the staff member(s) who initiated the unauthorized property notice, did not follow policy in that no notice was given to me as to where my books were, what options i had with regard to my property. Also, no notice was sent to the publisher (who has a right to appeal any censorship).

I am requesting that said material be delivered to me at staff's earliest convenience.

cc: Personal File
MIM(Prisons)/publisher
ACC-Classification Staff H.U.16
U.S. District Court, Southeastern Division
Venus Harry, Attorney-at-Law

Complaint: Documenting staff failed to follow policy and procedure with regards to unauthorized property notice. Mail denied in violation of policy.

On 3-10-16 books were mailed to me and denied 'due to content". See complaint attached hereto.

I request that books be ordered delivered to me at staff's earliest convenience.

Complaint detail:
On 3-10-16, i received an "unauthorized property notice" regarding books in which i had ordered. The reason stated in the notice - "denied due to content."

Offender Mail Procedures IS13-1.1 states that "a publication or item may not be rejected because its contents is religious, philosophical, social, sexual, or is unpopular or repugnant."

The materials in question have already been allowed into the institution, were placed on my property list and were sent home due to wear and tear, so new copies were ordered.

As held in the Supreme Court decision Procunier v. Martinez 416 U.S. at 415, prohibiting "inflammatory" prison speech fairly invites prison officials and employees to apply their own personal prejudices and opinions as standards for prisoner mail censorship and suppress unwelcome criticism. The Court has never repudiated Procunier's holding that prison officials may not censor speech simply because they deem it 'inflammatory."

The particular items in question are complex theoretical, political-economic journals. There is nothing that is inflammatory; racially or otherwise in said material.

The censorship of said materials clearly is violating my rights guaranteed under the 1st and 14th Amendments to the Unite States Constitution. These rights cannot be abridged by the State or any other individual as they are guaranteed to every citizen in this country.

Furthermore, complaintant has volumes of the same material that comes to him weekly for over the last 20 years and not one incident in violation of institutional rules, regulations or policies has ever occurred based on the content of said materials entering the institutions.

It should also be noted that the staff member(s) who initiated the unauthorized property notice, did not follow policy in that no notice was given to me as to where my books were, what options i had with regard to my property. Also, no notice was sent to the publisher (who has a right to appeal any censorship).

I am requesting that said material be delivered to me at staff's earliest convenience.

cc: Personal File
MIM(Prisons)/publisher
ACC-Classification Staff H.U.16
U.S. District Court, Southeastern Division
Venus Harry, Attorney-at-Law