On October 10, 2014, Prison Legal News (PLN) filed a suit in the United States District Court for the Southern District of California under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 against the County of San Diego. The plaintiff, represented by public interest and private counsel, sought declaratory relief, injunctive relief, and damages, claiming that the county's mail policies and practices in its jails violate the First and Fourteenth Amendments. Specifically, PLN claimed that the County's postcard-only mail policy and its book size limitation unconstitutionally limit PLN's ability to communicate with prisoners. Further, PLN contended that the County violated the Due Process Clause by failing to provide them with adequate notice and an opportunity to appeal these censorship decisions, and that by prohibiting the delivery of PLN's publications but allowing the delivery of the publications of others who are similarly situated, the County deprived PLN of equal protection under the law.

On May 7, 2015, the Court (Judge M. James Lorenz) granted in part and denied in part PLN's motion for a preliminary injunction requesting that the Court enjoin the County from continuing to enforce both the postcard-only mail policy and the soft-cover book size limitation, as well as a mandate that County comply with due process requirements. Finding that PLN had established a likelihood of success on the merits, the Court (Judge M. James Lorenz) ordered the County to suspend enforcement of the postcard-only policy for incoming mail no later than May 21, 2015, and to provide written notice and an administrative appeal process to senders and inmates when the County refuses to deliver publications and correspondence to inmates at the County's jails. The Court (Judge M. James Lorenz) denied PLN's motion to enjoin the book size restriction, concluding that PLN failed to establish a likelihood of success on its claim that the restriction violated its First Amendment rights.

On June 5, 2015, the County sought an interlocutory appeal in the 9th Circuit. On November 18, 2015, PLN and the County moved for a joint settlement. The county agreed to allow plaintiffs to receive both unsolicited and subscription non-postcard mail, as long as such material does not conflict with regular mail policy. The agreement also held that any time a piece of mail was not delivered, both the sender and the receiver would receive notice of the censorship, with information on how to appeal the decision to a person who is not the original censor. Both the interlocutory appeal and the original claims were dismissed with prejudice. The settlement agreement will remain enforceable until January 2021, at which time the defendant may file a motion to dismiss, contingent on a showing of substantial compliance.

Robert Lake - 06/01/2015
Carolyn Weltman - 02/28/2016


compress summary