American Civil Liberties Union Fund v. Livingston County
796 F.3d 636
6th Cir.2015Background
- ACLU sent 25 letters marked ‘legal mail’ to inmates at Livingston County Jail offering legal assistance regarding the jail’s postcard policy.
- Jail policy requires non-bona-fide legal mail to be on 4x6 postcards; legal mail may be in a sealed envelope and opened in the inmate’s presence.
- Jail did not deliver the letters nor notify the sender or inmates of nondelivery.
- ACLU alleged First and Fourteenth Amendment violations due to nondelivery and lack of notice.
- District court granted TRO and preliminarily enjoined the policy, ordering delivery of the letters.
- Defendant Cremonte’s discretionary interpretation of what constitutes ‘legal mail’ is at the center of the dispute; policy itself is not fully defined in writing.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the ACLU letters qualify as legal mail | ACLU argues letters are legal mail under Sixth Circuit precedent | Jail argues letters lack ongoing attorney-client relationship and aren’t privileged | Yes; letters are legal mail under governing standards |
| Whether Turner v. Safley applies to the policy | Turner factors support delivery of legal mail | Policy serves penological interests; Turner applies with caution | Turner factors support granting injunctive relief; policy invalidated for this purpose |
| Whether district court properly granted preliminary injunction | Injunction necessary to prevent First Amendment harm | Injunction overly broad and misapplies policy | District court's injunction affirmed; likelihood of success on merits shown |
| Whether the Fourteenth Amendment due-process claim is likely to succeed | Failure to provide notice and opportunity to contest nondelivery violates due process | No notice provision in policy? or insufficient showing | Fourteenth Amendment claim likely to succeed as related to legal mail handling |
Key Cases Cited
- Kensu v. Haigh, 87 F.3d 172 (6th Cir. 1996) (legal mail includes confidential communications with an attorney)
- Sallier v. Brooks, 343 F.3d 868 (6th Cir. 2003) (legal mail requires heightened protection of attorney communications)
- Muhammad v. Pitcher, 35 F.3d 1081 (6th Cir. 1994) (attorney correspondence can be legal mail even without attorney-client relationship)
- Jones v. Caruso, 569 F.3d 258 (6th Cir. 2009) (legal mail implicates right to petition and access to courts)
- Knop v. Johnson, 977 F.2d 996 (6th Cir. 1992) (uniform policy treating mail from attorneys and courts as privileged)
- Procunier v. Martinez, 416 U.S. 396 (1974) (prison censorship requires procedural safeguards for letters)
- Turner v. Safley, 482 U.S. 78 (1987) (regulation must be reasonably related to legitimate penological interests)