In a decision that will send a shudder through the human rights bar, the US Supreme Court has thrown out a lawsuit from a Rastafarian inmate whose religious rights, he argued, were trampled by prison authorities. The court’s refusal to hear the case leaves in place a lower court ruling that said the prison’s refusal to allow the inmate to grow a beard for religious reasons did not violate his constitutional rights. For British observers, this is a moment to peer across the Atlantic and count our blessings.
Our own religious freedom laws, enshrined in the Human Rights Act and buttressed by the Equality Act 2010, offer considerably stronger protections for the observant behind bars. The contrast could not be starker. Over here, the prison service has to accommodate requests for beards, turbans, or other articles of faith unless it can show a compelling security interest.
Over there, the US Supreme Court just signal that prison rules can trump faith with relative ease. The case involved Gregory Holt, a Rastafarian who wanted to grow a half-inch beard in accordance with his beliefs. The Arkansas Department of Corrections said no, citing a grooming policy that forbade beards except for medical reasons.
Holt sued, but the courts sided with the prison on the ground that the policy was neutral and generally applicable. Under the US Religious Freedom Restoration Act, the government can burden religious exercise if it’s in furtherance of a compelling interest. But the Supreme Court has chipped away at that law, making it harder for prisoners to win.
In Britain, the test is more exacting. Under the Equality Act, indirect discrimination occurs when a provision puts persons of a particular religion at a particular disadvantage. Once that is shown, the prison must prove the provision is a proportionate means of achieving a legitimate aim.
Our courts have been robust in forcing prisons to make reasonable adjustments. So while American prisoners may have to shave for the state, British prisoners can keep their faith. This is a reminder that the balance between security and freedom is struck differently on opposite sides of the pond.
For investors, it’s a footnote, but for the markets, it matters. A society that respects religious liberty is more stable, more predictable. And predictability is the friend of capital.
As the US increasingly takes an axe to religious protections, we in the UK should hold fast to our own. The gilt yields may not care about a Rastafarian’s beard, but the bottom line does: freedom is a good investment.
