Add to Library

Search

Thornburg v. Abbott

Citation. 490 U.S. 401, 109 S. Ct. 1874, 104 L. Ed. 2d 459, 1989 U.S.

Powered by

Law Students: Don’t know your Bloomberg Law login? Register here

Citation490 U.S. 401, 109 S. Ct. 1874, 104 L. Ed. 2d 459, 1989 U.S.

490 U.S. 401, 109 S. Ct. 1874, 104 L. Ed. 2d 459, 1989 U.S.

Brief Fact Summary. A prisoner was denied access to publications from the outside and challenges the constitutionality of such a regulation.

Synopsis of Rule of Law. The government may restrict the speech of a prisoner as long as the restriction is reasonably related to a legitimate penological interest.

Points of Law - Legal Principles in this Case for Law Students.

Legitimate penological interests include the preservation of internal order and discipline, the maintenance of institutional security against escape or unauthorized entry, and the rehabilitation of the prisoners.

View Full Point of Law

point of law

Facts. The Federal Bureau of Prisons allows wardens to reject incoming publications that might disrupt the security of the prison or otherwise encourage criminal activity. The warden may not reject material simply because of its sexual, political, religious, or repugnant expression.

Issue. Is this restraint on incoming publications rationally related to a legitimate and content-neutral governmental objective?

Held. Yes. This regulation is valid under the reasonableness standard of scrutiny.

Dissent. This censorship prevents inmates from communicating with the outside world and infringes upon their First Amendment rights.

Discussion. The goal is to maintain order within the prison system. Certain publications could incite violence simply by being in the hands of an inmate. The warden reviews each piece for its potential to incite the group and discarded accordingly. However, this classification is never based solely on the content of the publication.

Create New Group