Supreme Court Prevents Rastafarian Ex‑Inmate From Pursuing Damages After Prison Staff Cut His Dreadlocks

High court bars former inmate Damon Landor from seeking damages after prison staff cut his dreadlocks.

Published On 23 Jun 202623 Jun 2026

The United States Supreme Court has determined that a Rastafarian man cannot sue prison officials who cut his dreadlocks for violating his religious beliefs.

In a decision issued on Tuesday, the court’s six‑member conservative majority held that Damon Landor, who served a five‑month term in Louisiana in 2020, lacks a legal basis to pursue a claim against individual prison employees under the Religious Land Use and Institutionalized Persons Act (RLUIPA). Justice Neil Gorsuch, writing for the majority, explained that the statute imposes obligations only on the state or local entity receiving federal funds, not on individual workers, because they have not consented to be sued.

“Mr. Landor’s case cannot proceed against them any more than a breach of contract action might proceed against a defendant who never formed a contract,” Gorsuch wrote.

This ruling upholds a lower‑court decision that barred incarcerated people from seeking financial damages from individual staff members, even when religious rights are infringed.

Despite the setback, Landor, through his attorneys, said he remains committed to seeking accountability. “I am disappointed but not defeated,” he stated. “What happened to me violated my faith and my dignity. I will continue pursuing accountability. What happened to me should not happen to anyone else.”

Landor, a Rastafarian, keeps his hair as a religious practice. Upon entering prison in 2020, he carried a 2017 appellate‑court ruling that protects religious prisoners’ dreadlocks. The Raymond Laborde Correctional Center in Louisiana, however, discarded the document and ordered the hair cut. Two guards held him down while a third shaved his head, according to court filings.

The court’s three liberal justices dissented. Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson wrote that RLUIPA is a law, not a contract, and that without personal liability there would be little incentive for officials to respect prisoners’ rights. “It is not often that a real‑life incident so clearly illustrates Congress’s reasons for adopting legislation,” she noted.

Source link