Supreme Court takes up religious claim by Rastafarian whose dreadlocks were cut by prison officials

1 minute, 51 seconds Read

WASHINGTON — Taking up a new religious rights case, the Supreme Court on Monday agreed to weigh a claim for damages brought by a devout Rastafarian whose dreadlocks were cut by Louisiana prison officials against his wishes.

At the time of the incident in 2020, Damon Landor had kept a religious vow not to cut his hair for almost 20 years.

Landor had served all but three weeks of his five-month sentence imposed for a drug-related criminal conviction in Louisiana when he was transferred to the Raymond Laborde Correction Center.

He was holding a copy of a court ruling that made it clear that practicing Rastafarians should be given a religious accommodation allowing them to keep their dreadlocks.

But a prison officer dismissed his concerns and Landor was handcuffed to a chair while two officers shaved his head.

Upon his release, Landor filed a lawsuit raising various claims, including the one at issue at the Supreme Court, which he brought under a federal law called the Religious Land Use and Institutionalized Persons Act.

Rastafarian Damon Landor before and after having his dreadlocks shaved off at Raymond Laborde Correction Center.
Rastafarian Damon Landor before and after having his dreadlocks shaved off at Raymond Laborde Correction Center in Louisiana.Supreme Court of the United States

At issue is whether people who sue under that statute can win money damages.

Louisiana Attorney General Elizabeth Murrill said in court papers that the state does not contest that Landor was mistreated and noted that the prison system has already changed its grooming policy to ensure that other Rastafarian prisoners do not face similar situations.

But she contests whether Landor can get get money damages for his claim.

A federal judge and the New Orleans-based 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals both ruled in favor of the state, saying that money damages are not available.

Landor’s lawyer point to a 2020 Supreme Court ruling that allowed such damages in claims arising under a similar law called the Religious Freedom Restoration Act. The laws have “identical language,” they said in court papers.

The court will hear oral arguments and issue a ruling in the case in its next term, which starts in October and ends in June 2026.

This is a developing story. Please check back for updates.

Similar Posts

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *