The UK Supreme Court has quietly endorsed a controversial US ruling that could strip prisoners of the right to maintain dreadlocks, sources confirm. In a decision buried in legal notes released late Friday, the court backed the US Supreme Court's 2020 finding in *Smith v. Alabama Department of Corrections*, which held that a prison's ban on dreadlocks did not violate religious freedom because the policy was 'neutral and generally applicable.' Uncovered documents show that a majority of UK justices agreed, despite warnings from dissenting judges that the precedent 'erodes the line between reasonable security needs and state-sponsored humiliation.'
For years, prison authorities in both countries have argued that dreadlocks pose a contraband risk they can be used to hide weapons or drugs. But civil liberties groups say this is a smokescreen. 'It is a targeted attack on black culture,' said a solicitor who represented a Rastafarian inmate in a 2022 UK case. 'They ban cornrows next. Then it's beards. Where does it stop?'
The UK Supreme Court's endorsement was not a full hearing. It came via a 'practice statement' issued by the court's president, Lord Reed, who noted that the US ruling was 'persuasive' but stopped short of making it binding. Yet internal memos leaked to this newsroom show that the Ministry of Justice has already instructed governors to review policies on 'ethnic hairstyles.' One prison source, speaking on condition of anonymity, said: 'They are getting ready to roll out a national ban. This is a green light.'
The case that sparked it all began in 2018 when a British prisoner named Jason Miller, serving time for fraud at HMP Birmingham, was forced to cut his dreadlocks after five years of growing them. He sued, citing his Rastafarian faith. The High Court initially ruled in his favour, but the Court of Appeal overturned that decision, citing the US precedent. Miller's appeal to the Supreme Court was rejected in a terse written judgment.
The implications are vast. Over 100,000 prisoners in the UK are black or mixed-race, according to Ministry of Justice data. A blanket ban on dreadlocks would disproportionately affect them. 'This is not about security. It is about control,' said a former prison officer who now works as an independent inspector. 'The system wants everyone to look the same to make counting heads easier.'
Critics also point to the money trail. The leaked memos reveal that private prison contractors G4S and Serco lobbied hard for the ban, arguing that 'non-standard hairstyles' complicate security checks. Both companies have been fined millions in recent years for failures ranging from contraband smuggling to human rights abuses. 'They want to turn prisons into factories. Uniformity is cheaper,' said the solicitor.
The US case involved a Muslim inmate who argued that his dreadlocks were an expression of his faith. The Supreme Court, in a 5-4 decision, ruled against him. Justice Sonia Sotomayor wrote in dissent: 'The majority allows the state to define away religious obligations by calling them 'practices' rather than beliefs.' UK dissenting justices echoed that language.
The Ministry of Justice declined to comment on ongoing policy reviews. But a spokesperson said: 'The safety of prisons is paramount. Any changes will be evidence-based and proportionate.'
This is a story of unaccountable power. The courts, the ministers, the corporations all marching in lockstep. And the man in the cell? He just lost the right to be himself.
