Inmates OK to grow hair without religious reason

Arkansas prison inmates can now grow facial and head hair of any length -- without having to prove their religion dictates the fashion.

The Board of Correction voted 4-to-2 Thursday to pass the administrative directive. Board members Bobby Glover and Buddy Chadick dissented.

"It's gotten to where the inmates are running the prison. They can have a beard down to their knees and hair down to the back of their knees," Glover said after the meeting. "I just feel the inmates have taken over. I'm not afraid of lawsuits. Let them bring them."

The latest policy change comes after the board in February lifted its prohibition on facial hair and agreed to allow it only for inmates who could prove a "deeply held" religious belief.

In January last year, the U.S. Supreme Court sided with inmate Gregory Houston Holt, who goes by the name Abdul Maalik Muhammad, in a lawsuit filed against the Arkansas Department of Correction because he was not allowed to grow a half-inch beard for religious reasons.

Since that time, about 5,600 -- more than a third of the state's male prison inmates -- applied for religious accommodations, and more than 600 filed grievances related to the policy. The numbers overwhelmed prison administrators and chaplains who had to process the applications and decide if the inmate's religious beliefs were sincere.

More than 2,000 personnel hours were dedicated to the surge in activity concerning prisoner beards, said Jim DePriest, the Correction Department's deputy director and legal counsel.

"That does not include my time nor the review committee's hours," DePriest said. He added that several inmate lawsuits against the Correction Department have also been filed since that time.

"One was filed this morning naming me as a defendant," DePriest said.

Director of Chaplaincy Services Joshua Mayfield told the board that having to approve or deny the religious exemption applications put the prison chaplains in an enforcement position with the inmates, hampering the chaplains' traditional role as counselor.

"This has been crippling over the last year," Mayfield said.

DePriest said he was "fully aware" of the board's point of view about inmate beards, but he hoped they could "balance that with existing legal issues."

Chadick asked why there wasn't a limit on beard or hair length in the new policy.

"In order for them to grow it down to their waist, they're going to have to have a religious accommodation, right?" Chadick said.

DePriest and Correction Department Director Wendy Kelley simultaneously answered, "No."

Chadick shook his head.

Any limitation on beard or hair length would be challenged legally and would likely be upheld by the U.S. Supreme Court, DePriest said.

Board Chairman Benny Magness pointed out that the U.S. Supreme Court's decision in the Holt case involved a half-inch beard. In that instance, the Supreme Court justices disagreed with the Correction Department's assertion that inmates could hide dangerous contraband in beards or could shave to disguise themselves.

"There's a whole lot of difference between what you can and cannot hide depending on the different beard measurements," Magness said, then suggested the beard lengths be capped at 6 inches.

DePriest said that the department fielded a "substantial number of requests" since February from inmates who claimed Scripture prohibited that the beard be trimmed in any way.

"One of the key issues is that we not adopt an inch limit," DePriest said.

"What about the military?" Chadick countered, referring to the fact that soldiers in the armed forces are required to adhere to standard facial and head hair policies regardless of their religion.

"The problem with these inmates is that they've never been disciplined," Chadick said. "We have an attorney general's office full of lawyers to defend us."

Board Member Mary Parker-Reed said that although she "doesn't like it," a policy is needed that will allow the department to "survive lawsuits."

"We're beating our heads against the law," Parker-Reed said. "We have to have evidence that inmates have misused the privilege they've been given. We don't have that."

She explained that because the inmates were not allowed to have facial hair or long head hair in previous years, there is no historical data that show disciplinary or safety issues directly related to the issue.

"At this point in time we don't have a lot of options," she said.

"We don't have a constitutional right? Let someone sue us," Chadick said.

Kelley said the new policy without the length limitations on facial or head hair had unanimous support from the chaplains and staff.

"We need this policy," she said.

Kelley asked the board to give the prisoners the "benefit of the doubt," saying most would likely not take advantage of the policy.

Magness said after the meeting that if his vote as chairman had been needed to break a tie, he would have approved the new directive despite his preference that inmates be well-groomed, with short hair and clean-shaven faces.

The new administrative directive -- which immediately went into effect -- requires that those inmates with facial hair wear it loose, clean and neatly combed. The inmate will be photographed with the beard and also will be required to submit to a clean-shaven photograph for security purposes, according to the policy.

Inmates who arrive at a state prison with long hair will not be forced to cut it, but they must submit to two photographs -- one with the hair loose and the other with it pulled back from the face.

No hairstyles are permitted that make it difficult to search the hair -- such as cornrows, braids, ponytails, dreadlocks or hairpieces, weaves, or wigs.

Metro on 01/15/2016

Upcoming Events