Conraad Hoever v. P. Belleis, et al.

For many faiths, certain observances are important but not mandatory. In a free exercise case, a plaintiff must establish that the government imposed a substantial burden on the exercise of her faith. The court of appeals created a circuit split by holding that only a burden on a practice mandated by a prisoner’s faith can constitute a substantial burden. The first question presented is: Does the First Amendment extend to a prisoner’s non-mandatory religious exercise?

Section 42 U.S.C. 1997e(e), a provision of the Prison Litigation Reform Act, states that a prisoner may not bring a claim “for mental or emotional injury” unless the prisoner makes “a prior showing of physical injury or the commission of a sexual act.” In six circuits, this provision permits prisoners to recover compensatory damages for First Amendment violations unaccompanied by a physical injury or sexual act. In five other circuits, the opposite is true: compensatory damages are prohibited. The second question presented is: Does 42 U.S.C. § 1997e(e) permit a prisoner to recover compensatory damages against prison officials who violate the First Amendment?