For greater than 20 years, the Perfect Court docket has issued an extended collection of wins for plaintiffs in the hunt for to offer protection to their non secular practices. On June 23, 2026, although, the bulk delivered an unusual defeat on this contentious space.
Landor v. Louisiana Division of Public Training and Protection, a 6-3 judgment, rejected the declare of Damon Landor, a Rastafarian whose hair used to be forcibly shaved in jail. Landor had worn lengthy dreadlocks for nearly twenty years as an expression of his ideals – a part of a biblical observe referred to as the “Nazarite vow.”
Like decrease courtroom judges, the Perfect Court docket didn’t dispute that officers violated Landor’s rights. On the other hand, the excessive courtroom’s majority dominated that he may now not sue person officers on the jail.
The case sticks out for no less than 3 different causes.
First, Landor v. Louisiana underscores the complexity and far-reaching nature of spiritual freedom rules in america and the an increasing number of numerous religion traditions to which they practice. Christians now constitute 62% of the American inhabitants, down from 78% in 2007, whilst 29% haven’t any non secular association and seven% belong to different religion traditions.
2d, Landor’s case received enhance from many teams most often at odds over how to offer protection to non secular freedoms – teams disenchanted with this week’s resolution.
In spite of everything, the case highlights the non secular rights of the just about 2 million other people in U.S. prisons, jails and detention and correctional amenities – and the problem of preserving their public workers responsible when the ones rights are violated.
Spiritual vow
Landor used to be incarcerated in Louisiana in 2020 for possessing methamphetamine, cocaine, amphetamine and marijuana.
To start with, officers revered his non secular observe. Simply 3 years previous, a federal appeals courtroom affirmed that Rastafarian inmates should be allowed to stay their dreadlocks beneath a federal legislation handed in 2000: the Spiritual Land Use and Institutionalized Individuals Act.
As an indication of religion, many Rastafarians don’t lower their hair.
Mattstone911/Wikimedia Commons, CC BY-SA
Towards the top of his sentence, Landor used to be transferred to another correctional facility within the state. There – with 3 weeks left for Landor to serve – the warden unnoticed the judicial order, directing guards to shackle Landor and forcibly shave his head.
After completing his sentence, Landor filed go well with for cash damages beneath the Spiritual Land Use and Institutionalized Individuals Act. The act forbids the federal government and its officers from implementing “substantial burden(s)” on incarcerated other people’s First Modification proper to the loose workout of faith. It additionally protects non secular teams from discrimination thru zoning restrictions.
Adventure throughout the courts
In 2022, a federal trial courtroom in Louisiana condemned Landor’s remedy however rejected his declare, concluding that cash damages weren’t a suitable treatment beneath the act.
The next 12 months, the fifth U.S. Circuit Court docket of Appeals “emphatically condemn(ed) the treatment that Landor endured.” On the other hand, the panel unanimously affirmed the decrease courtroom’s resolution, in line with its previous ruling that plaintiffs can not sue govt officers of their person capacities for financial damages – best the establishment.
Landor’s legal professionals then sought an “en banc” listening to. On this unusual process, events search additional overview through all the judges in a federal circuit. The courtroom denied this request, as a majority of judges within the circuit wrote that this used to be a query for the Perfect Court docket.
The Perfect Court docket agreed to listen to an enchantment after numerous organizations, together with the government, submitted amicus curiae, or “friend of the court,” briefs in want of Landor. Those integrated American citizens United for Separation of Church and State, for instance, which most often helps plaintiffs wishing to stay faith out of public existence. Additionally they integrated the Becket Fund, which typically represents other people in the hunt for to extend religion’s function in public existence, and the Trump management.
At factor used to be now not whether or not Landor’s rights have been violated however whether or not he may sue a person reliable, specifically the warden, for financial damages. Right through oral arguments on Nov. 10, 2025, the Perfect Court docket appeared skeptical.
Criminal quandary
That skepticism used to be mirrored within the courtroom’s final ruling. It used to be necessarily a procedural ruling concerning the Spiritual Land Use and Institutionalized Individuals Act slightly than a judgment at the deserves of Landor’s non secular freedom declare.
Justice Neil Gorsuch wrote the bulk opinion, joined through Leader Justice John Roberts and Justices Clarence Thomas, Samuel Alito, Brett Kavanaugh and Amy Coney Barrett. Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson’s dissent used to be joined through Justices Sonia Sotomayor and Elena Kagan.
U.S. Perfect Court docket justices attend inauguration ceremonies within the rotunda of the U.S. Capitol on Jan. 20, 2025.
Chip Somodevilla/Getty Pictures
The bulk’s argument that Landor may now not sue focused at the spending clause of the U.S. Charter – the supply of Congress’ authority to create the Spiritual Land Use and Institutionalized Individuals Act. The spending clause permits the legislature to spend cash to supply for the “general Welfare of the United States.” If a state or establishment makes use of federal budget, their officers comply with sure stipulations; in the event that they violate the ones stipulations, Congress can take away investment.
However the spending clause does now not give Congress authority to carry person workers responsible, Gorsuch argued in his 18-page opinion. Jail officers had now not “voluntarily and knowingly consented to answer private suits” beneath the act, and they may now not be held at once accountable for financial damages. In a different way, Congress would have “effectively unbridled police power.”
Jackson’s 29-page dissent disagreed with the bulk’s interpretation of the spending clause. The ruling, she contended, “jettisons ‘a long line of this Court’s precedents’” beneath which “Congress has been able to use its spending power to reach beyond direct recipients of federal funds.” As such, she frightened that the courtroom’s order imposed a “novel consent requirement.”
Jackson additionally lamented the verdict’s attainable penalties for inmates. Despite the fact that the function of the Spiritual Land Use and Institutionalized Individuals Act used to be to offer protection to prisoners’ religion practices, she frightened that individuals “like Landor who suffer violations of their religious freedom in state prisons – no matter how blatant – will often be left remediless.”
Larger image
At a look, the Landor case seems to be a procedural war of words slightly than one over non secular freedom.
On the other hand, I argue Landor v. Louisiana should be considered as a setback for non secular liberty, elevating a major query about whether or not minority faiths have as a lot coverage beneath the First Modification as better religions. The verdict could also be one thing of a marvel to me, for the reason that Perfect Court docket has lately upheld loose workout rights in a couple of high-profile instances, virtually all of which contain Christianity – corresponding to a soccer trainer’s talent to wish at the box after public faculty video games.
Parts of this newsletter at first seemed in a prior article revealed on Nov. 6, 2025.
