Because a jury could find the Weld County Sheriff’s Office did not have a legitimate interest in preventing Muslim detainees in the jail from gathering for weekly prayers unless there was an outside leader present, a federal judge last month permitted an inmate to proceed to trial with his First Amendment claim.

U.S. District Court Chief Judge Philip A. Brimmer agreed that several alleged failures of the jail to accommodate Nicholas Jason Hall’s religious beliefs did not actually burden his rights, as there were efforts to provide Hall a religious diet, secure a copy of the Quran and bring in an Islamic leader. But Brimmer could not definitively say the Weld County jail acted reasonably by declining to allow Muslim inmates to guide congregate prayer themselves.

“Unlike plaintiff’s other claims, WCJ’s policy requiring a volunteer to conduct religious services and prohibiting inmates from leading religious services ‘prevented the plaintiff from participating in an activity motivated by a sincerely held religious belief’,” he wrote in a Nov. 9 order.

Following Brimmer’s decision, Hall and the sheriff’s office announced an intent to settle the lawsuit. In the absence of a final agreement, a jury trial remains set for Dec. 19.

Previously, Hall brought suit against two sheriff’s employees: Sgt. Kenneth Leach and Lt. Matt Elbe, the latter of whom was the jail’s inmate services director during Hall’s incarceration from April 2017 to December 2018.

Hall lodged an excessive force claim against Leach for allegedly punching and kicking Hall during a confrontation in September 2017. Brimmer threw out the case against Leach in March of this year, finding Hall had neglected to complete the four-step grievance process at the jail that was required before filing his lawsuit.

The remaining claims against Elbe pertained to the allegedly-unconstitutional burden placed on Hall’s right to exercise his religious beliefs as a Muslim. First, Hall claimed Elbe denied his request for a diet that was halal, or permissible under Islamic law. Second, Hall wrote that Elbe did not immediately provide him with a copy of the Quran, following his requests. Third, Elbe did not bring an Islamic leader, an imam, into the jail, despite the access given for Christian and Jewish inmates to their faith leaders.

Finally, Hall could not attend Jumu’ah, meaning congregate prayer on Fridays.

Elbe, in moving to end the case in his favor, pointed out that Hall needed to show he had a sincerely-held religious belief that Elbe burdened substantially, without a legitimate corrections-related goal. A substantial burden, as courts have defined it, means inmates are prevented from participating in an activity their beliefs require, or are otherwise pressured into an activity that violates their beliefs.

Brimmer agreed with the defendant that on most of Hall’s claims, there was no proven First Amendment violation. 

For the halal diet, the judge noted Hall first received vegan meals in jail, which switched to a kosher diet at his request. By September 2017, the jail had honored Hall’s further request for halal-certified meals that contained meat.

“Plaintiff has not demonstrated that he was served any meals in violation of his religious beliefs or that he was provided meals so insufficient as to coerce him into violating his religious beliefs,” Brimmer wrote in finding no merit to the diet claim.

When Hall requested a copy of the Quran, the jail did not have any to provide. Chaplain Duane Duran attempted to obtain a donated book, and in the meantime printed parts of the text for Hall to reference. Elbe argued that nothing prevented Hall from obtaining his own Quran, while Hall countered that his ex-wife reportedly tried to mail him one, but jail regulations blocked her.

Ultimately, Hall received a Quran on the final day of Ramadan.

Brimmer decided that nothing placed an obligation on the jail to provide religious materials, and Duran’s printed excerpts of the Quran did not amount to a burden on Hall’s beliefs.

Similarly, Brimmer credited the chaplain’s efforts, albeit unsuccessful, at trying to bring an imam into the jail. Duran contacted mosques in northern Colorado and asked a group of Front Range jail chaplains for help in obtaining a volunteer imam.

“That’s one of our biggest talks,” Duran said of the group in his deposition. “It’s very difficult to find them.”

The circumstances were different, however, with Hall’s claim he could not participate in Jumu’ah because the jail required outside volunteers to lead religious services. Inmates, explained Elbe, were prohibited from “acting in a position of spiritual authority over other offenders.” Therefore, for safety reasons, the Muslim detainees could not lead congregate prayer.

“WCJ provided Plaintiff alternative means of religious exercise: accommodations to make his cell suitable for prayer, possible participation in group prayer or religious discussions in the dayroom, and available religious counseling from Chaplain Duran,” Elbe noted.

Brimmer agreed the policy was related to jail security. But it was not clear that the jail’s alternatives were acceptable. And Elbe had not put forward facts about the burden to the jail of accommodating Elbe’s proposed solution of letting detainees lead Jumu’ah.

Alternatively, Elbe argued he was entitled to qualified immunity, which shields government employees from civil liability unless they violate a person’s clearly-established legal rights. Brimmer countered that the “indefinite denial of any religious services” for prisoners is a clearly-established constitutional violation without a legitimate justification.

“Defendant does not provide any reasons why a prohibition on plaintiff’s ability to participate in Jumua’ah is distinguishable or argue that the law was not clearly established in 2017,” the judge concluded.

Brimmer permitted Hall’s sole claim for damages to proceed. Following his order, the parties agreed to substitute the sheriff’s office as the defendant in lieu of Elbe.

The case is Hall v. Weld County Sheriff’s Office.