Cotton v. Florida Dept. of CorrectionsAlan J. Cotton is a prisoner in Florida's Everglades Correctional Institution who has been trying for several years to get the state Department of Corrections to provide him with kosher meals. Cotton was born and raised in the Jewish faith, and is a "sincere adherent of Orthodox Judaism" who "believes he is required to keep a kosher diet" in order to "conform to the divine will of God as expressed in the Torah." Such requests are not unusual, and federal prisons in Florida routinely accomodate requests for kosher food, as do the county correctional facilities in Broward, Miami-Dade and Palm Beach counties. In fact, a portion of the Florida administrative code governing state prison operation requires that "inmates who wish to observe religious dietary laws shall be provided a diet sufficient to sustain them in good health without violating those dietary laws." Cotton began his battle for a kosher diet in October 2000. Several grievances were denied, and a subsequent appeal was rejected. On September 19, 2002, a lawsuit (PDF format, 28K) was filed against the Florida Department of Corrections, charging violations of the Religious Land Use and Institutionalized Persons Act of 2000 ("RLUIPA"), the First and Fourteenth Amendments to the U.S. Constitution, the Florida Constitution, and the Florida Religious Freedom Restoration Act of 1998. On October 17, 2002, the Florida Department of Corrections moved to transfer venue to the Northern District of Florida, and dismiss the lawsuit. On November 22, The Becket Fund filed a memorandum in opposition to the motion to dismiss (PDF format, 179K), stating that the Department relied on "unsupported and irrelevant" assertions in making its motion, and that it "should be denied in its entirety." On January 30, 2003, U.S. Magistrate Judge John J. O'Sullivan issued a report and recommendation (PDF format, 158K) in which he found that "transfer of this case to the Northern District of Florida would be inappropriate," and recommending that the motion to transfer be denied. On March 11, 2003 Judge O'Sullivan issued a report and recommendation (PDF format, 41K) rejecting the state's motion to dismiss the complaint, ruling that necessary findings of fact in the case cannot be decided in a motion to dismiss. In October 2003, the Florida Department of Corrections finally relented, and entered into a Settlement Agreement (PDF format, 17K) under which FDOC agreed to "provide Cotton with Kosher meals that meet the Recommended Dietary Allowances or the Dietary Reference Intakes of the Food and Nutrition Board of the National Academy of Sciences." It stipulates that "any question as to whether a particular food item is Kosher may be resolved through FDOC's chaplaincy services, which shall consult a rabbi." The agreement allows FDOC to terminate Cotton's entitlement to Kosher meals if he is "observed providing his Kosher food to another inmate," if he engages in conduct "that threatens security or discipline," or if he "is observed willfully violating the religious dietary requirements that he professes in his Complaint." Cotton was represented in his lawsuit by The Becket Fund for Religious Liberty and local attorneys Elliot Scherker and Susana Betancourt of the Miami office of the law firm of Greenberg Traurig. Although The Becket Fund had filed amicus briefs in other prisoner cases brought under RLUIPA, this was the first case in which it represented a client seeking redress under the Act. The Aleph Institute, a non-profit organization that provides services to incarcerated Jews, made efforts to persuade state officials to change their policy on kosher food, without success. news release (PDF format, 368K) The lawsuit was filed after their efforts failed. A more general policy change was finally announced in a November 17, 2003 letter from FDOC Legislative Affairs Director Roxanne Siko to Florida State Senator Gwen Margolis (PDF format, 189K). The new policy, she wrote, is that "any inmate who is Jewish and requests kosher meals will receive the meals after verification that the inmate is following the guidelines set out by the Kashrut laws." Becket Fund attorney Derek Gaubatz, who litigated the Cotton case, called on FDOC to "swiftly implement this policy and ensure that all FDOC employees and inmates are made aware of the policy change, and not just members of the state legislature." On February 4, 2004, Gaubatz sent another letter to FDOC (PDF format, 22K), expressing "our concerns over certain features of the Department of Corrections' plan for implementing its obligation to provide a kosher meal plan to all inmates whose sincere religious beliefs require them to keep kosher." First, he noted, the department apparently plans to prepare the food "in a separate stand-alone kitchen despite the advice of kosher food experts to the contrary," and because "there is absolutely no guarantee under the Department's proposal that the food the Department claims will be kosher will in fact be in compliance with the Jewish laws governing the preparation of a kosher diet." Second, he expressed concern that the department apparently intends "to exclude all meat from its kosher diet plan (even the absence of meat is not necessary or contemplated to keep kosher) and that the kosher diet plan will only be offered at certain facilities, all of which are in locations far removed from South Florida where most of the Jewish inmates have community ties." The department's intention is apparently to serve "a deliberately unappealing died in an undesirable location" in order to "encourage as few inmates as possible to request a kosher diet." Third, he questioned FDOC's stated intention of spending $12.51 per day per inmate on providing kosher meals. "While the Department is certainly free to spend excessively, we are puzzled as to why the Department would make such a choice," he said, adding that "Gold Kosher Catering, a company that has helped other prisons establish and maintain a kosher diet plan, has informed the Department that it could provide three complete kosher meals for just $7 a day." On April 1, 2004, FDOC put in place its new kosher food program for inmates, adding a new twist to the plan: rather than having kosher food prepared by prison personnel under the supervision of a rabbi (as is required for institutional kosher food preparation), inmates would be afforded the opportunity to prepare their own kosher meals "family-style" (which presumably would not require the presence of a rabbi any more than meals prepared in individual homes). (Alan J. Cotton v. Florida Department of Corrections, et al., U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Florida, Case No. 02-22760-CIV-MOORE) Media Coverage: Program isn't kosher, groups say (Miami Herald, by Daniel deVise, April 2, 2004) [Requires registration] Inmate wins kosher fight (Associated Press, as published in Orlando Sentinel, October 29, 2003) [Links to Orlando Sentinel archive] Jewish inmate wins fight for kosher meals (Palm Beach Post, by Lona O'Connor, October 29, 2003) [Links to Palm Beach Post archive] Killer will get kosher meals (Miami Herald, by Larry Lebowitz, October 29, 2003) [Requires registration] Jewish inmate sues state over lack of kosher meals (Associated Press, as published in the Miami Herald, September 20, 2002) [Requires registration] Articles & News Items
|
