Home Menu ↓
Clicking on our sponsor links helps insure continued free access to this website.
Please support our efforts by visiting our sponsors:

 

Holt v. Hobbs

Docket No.: 13-6827
Certiorari Granted: Mar 3 2014
Argued: October 7, 2014
Decided: January 20, 2015

Topics:

Commerce Clause, EPA, First Amendment, Fourteenth Amendment, Free Exercise, preliminary injunction

PartyNames: Gregory Houston Holt, aka Abdul Maalik Muhammad v. Ray Hobbs, Director, Arkansas Department of Correction, et al.
Petitioner: Gregory Houston Holt, aka Abdul Maalik Muhammad
Respondent: Ray Hobbs, Director, Arkansas Department of Correction, et al.

Court Below: United States Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit
Citation: 509 Fed.Appx. 561
Supreme Court Docket

Gregory Houston Holt, aka Abdul Maalik Muhammad
v.
Ray Hobbs, Director, Arkansas Department of Correction, et al.
Consideration Limited:

LIMITED TO THE FOLLOWING QUESTION: "Whether the Arkansas Department of Correction's grooming policy violates the Religious Land Use and Institutionalized Persons Act of 2000, 42 U.S.C. $2000cc et sec., to the extent that it prohibits petitioner from growing a one-half-inch beard in accordance with his religious beliefs."

Question Presented:

I. Whether the Arkansas Department of Corrections' no beard grooming policy violates the Religious Land Use and Institutionalized Persons Act (RLUIPA). II. Whether a 1/2 inch beard would satisfy the security goals sought by the policy. III. Whether the no beard grooming policy violates Petitioner's First Amendment right to practice Islam as he believes it is supposed to be practiced by the wearing of the beard. IV. That the United States Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit has decided that the no beard grooming policy does not violate the RLUIPA, but this Court should decide the matter since it has not done so and should rule whether grooming policies of any Department of Correction that do not allow for a religious exception exemption are constitutional. V. That the United States Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit's decision in this case conflicts with other circuit's rulings on the matter. VI. That the ADC grooming policy of no beards is not the least restrictive means of achieving the desired objective of staunching the flow of contraband and identifying prisoners in the event of an escape.

Holt v. Hobbs
ORAL ARGUMENT

October 7, 2014

Listen to Oral Argument in Holt v. Hobbs
Holding: REVERSED AND REMANDED
Vote: 9-0
Majority: unanimous
Concurring: Ginsburg,Sotomayor
Opinion By:
Database Connection failed: SQLSTATE[HY000] [1045] Access denied for user 'restauz8_sophi'@'localhost' (using password: YES)