Dist. Ct. did not err in granting defendants-prison officials’ motion for summary judgment in action alleging that defendants’ interception of plaintiff-prisoner’s pornographic magazines violated plaintiff’s First Amendment rights. Instant magazines contained pictures of naked or scantily clad women, as well as pictures of sexual acts, and plaintiff failed to present any evidence to counter opinion of former warden that instant magazines posed danger to prison because: (1) inmates would engage in black-market trading of pornography; (2) inmates would engage in more inmate-on-inmate violence; (3) female employees at prison would be objectified by inmates more often; and (4) inmates would engage in masturbation more frequently. Ct. observed, though, that defendants should have supported former warden’s opinions with data, and that other data existed that would dispute some claims made by warden.
Federal 7th Circuit Court
Civil Court
Prisoners