Your Incarcerated Loved Ones Have a Constitutional Right to Send and Receive Mail!
Washington DOC is notorious for rejecting prisoners' written communication, but what a lot of people don't know is that prisoners have a constitutionally protected right to send and receive mail. Witherow v. Paff, 52 F.3d 264, 265 (9th Cir. 1995)(citing Thornburgh v. Abbott, 490 U.S. 401, 407 (1989)).
That is, your incarcerated loved ones have a First Amendment right to communicate by mail. Morrison v. Hall, 261 F.3d 896, 906 (9th Cir. 2001). This right is protected by the due process clause of the Fourteenth Amendment. Krug v. Lutz, 329 F.3d 692, 697 (9th Cir. 2003). This means that anytime a prisoner's incoming or outgoing mail is rejected, DOC MUST give that prisoner (1) notification of the rejection of the communication, (2) a reasonable opportunity on the part of the inmate to appeal, and (3) referral of the appeal to a prison official other than the person who originally rejected the correspondence. Procunier v. Martinez, 416 U.S. 396, 418-19 (1974), overruled on other grounds, Thornburgh, 490 U.S. at 407 (1989).
This protected right is evident under Washington law, Washington Administrative Code (WAC) 137-48-050(1), which provides in pertinent part. "If an individual's outgoing mail is restricted, written notification will be provided to the individual by the mailroom staff. This notice shall contain the specific reason for this action.''
DOC cannot just reject your loved one's mail for ANY reason. ''It is well settled that the First Amendment protects the flow of information to prisoners; any limitations must reasonably relate to a legitimate penological interest.'' Crofton v. Roe, 170 F.3d 957, 959 (9th Cir. 1999). If DOC rejects mail and does not provide a written notification for the rejection, that's an intentional violation of your loved one's constitutionally protected right to send and receive mail.
If your loved one is deprived of any rights protected under federal law while they are incarcerated, they are allowed to file a Civil Rights Action under 42 U.S.C. §1983. A 42 U.S.C . §1983 Civil Rights Action aims ''to deter state actors from using the badge of their authority to deprive individuals of their federally guaranteed rights.'' Anderson v. Warner, 451 F.3d 1063, 1067 9th Cir. 2006 (quoting McDade v. West, 223 F.3d 1135, 1139 (9th Cir. 2000)).
If the individual DOC staff gets sued under 42 U.S.C §1983, the State of Washington indemnifies their illegal behaviors. See generally RCW 4.92.075. BUT (at least ostensibly) the Attorney General will correct the abhorrent behavior after the first judgment is entered against the State. The sad part of it all is that DOC will continue its illegal behaviors until the courts tell them otherwise. Therefore, its up to each of you, individually, to hold Washington DOC to the letter of the law.
“If an individual’s outgoing mail is restricted, written notification will be provided to the individual by the mailroom staff. This notice shall contain the specific reason for this action.’”
