Filed Date: March 29, 2009
Clearinghouse coding complete
On March 29, 2009, a Muslim prisoner at the Gib Lewis Unit in the Texas Department of Criminal Justice filed this lawsuit in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Texas. The plaintiff, bringing the case pro se, sued the Texas Department of Criminal Justice (TDCJ). He sought a declaratory judgment that TDCJ's enforcement of grooming standards violated his First and Fourteenth amendment rights and the Religious Land Use and Institutionalized Persons Act (RLUIPA). He also sought a preliminary and permanent injunction to enjoin TDCJ from enforcing these standards. Specifically, he asked the court to require TDCJ to permit him to grow his beard a full fist length and wear Islamic head gear (Kufi), in line with his religious beliefs.
On June 4, 2009, District Judge Thad Heartfield put the case on hold pending a decision in Garner v. Morales, 2009 WL 577755 (5th Cir. 2009), which addressed the same issue in a different prison, and had recently been remanded by the Fifth Circuit back to the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Texas. Judge Heartfield denied all pending motions, including the plaintiff's motion for a preliminary injunction. 2009 WL 1586691.
On June 12, 2009, the plaintiff appealed Judge Heartfield's opinion to the Fifth Circuit. On appeal, the plaintiff also filed a motion asking the Fifth Circuit to compel the District Court to issue the preliminary injunction. The Fifth Circuit denied the motion to compel on December 29, 2009, but ultimately vacated the lower court's opinion. On May 28, 2010, the appeals court held that the lower court had erred in pausing the case without findings of fact or conclusions of law. It remanded the motion for preliminary injunction to the District Court. (J. E. Grady Jolly)607 F.3d 1046.
Meanwhile, in District Court, the plaintiff moved for a preliminary injunction on July 7th, 2009. Judge Heartfiled denied the motion.
In response to the Fifth Circuit's May 28th ruling, the District Court reopened the case. The plaintiff moved for appointment of counsel, but Magistrate Judge Judith Guthrie denied the motion on July 7, 2010.
Following an evidentiary hearing in District Court, Judge Heartfield dismissed the case with prejudice for failure to state a claim. Judge Heartfield noted that the Fifth Circuit had recently found in Gooden v. Crain, 353 Fed.Appx. 885 (5th Cir. 2009), that a District Court could credit prison officials' testimony that changing grooming codes could present a significant security concern. Judge Heartfield further held that the claim was moot because a temporary medical exemption had permitted the plaintiff to grow a beard. 2010 WL 3790823.
The plaintiff appealed the judgment on October 8, 2010. The Fifth Circuit issued a per curiam decision on July 18, 2011 partially vacating and remanding the lower court's ruling. (J. Fortunato Benavides, J. Carl E. Stewart, J. Edith Brown Clement). The court affirmed the District Court's dismissal of the plaintiff's RLUIPA claim challenging the head-covering policy, and its dismissal of the equal protection and first amendment claims. The Fifth Circuit vacated and remanded the District Court's dismissal of the plaintiff's RLUIPA claim challenging the grooming policy. It held that the issue was not moot because the medical exemption had been temporary and had most likely expired in January 2011. 434 Fed.Appx. 322 (5th Cir. Tex.).
Meanwhile, in District Court, the plaintiff sought a temporary restraining order to permit him to grow a beard. Judge Ron Clark denied the motion on April 4, 2011, finding that the plaintiff was asking the Court to grant him relief on an issue on which he had already failed to prevail. That summer, on August 23, 2011, the case was officially reassigned to Judge Ron Clark.
On October 24, 2011, the plaintiff filed another motion for a temporary restraining order, arguing that in a prior order, the Court had recognized that if Garner was successful in his case in the Southern District, the Plaintiff here could prevail as well. The plaintiff pointed to the Southern District's recent opinion granting declaratory relief to Garner, 2011 WL 2038581. Judge Clark denied the motion for a temporary restraining order on January 9, 2012 because the Garner case was stayed while on appeal. The next day, the plaintiff again moved for a preliminary injunction.
On January 31, 2012, the plaintiff appealed Judge Clark's opinion on the temporary restraining order. The Fifth Circuit dismissed the appeal and denied the motion on January 4, 2013. It held that it lacked jurisdiction to entertain an appeal on a temporary restraining order. The Court did remand the case, urging the lower court to reexamine the motion for a preliminary injunction. (per curiam decision, J. Judge Jerry E. Smith, J. Edward C. Prado, J. Stephen A. Higginson) 505 Fed.Appx. 369 (5th Cir. 2013).
Meanwhile, in District Court, the defendant moved for summary judgment and the plaintiff again moved to appoint counsel. On March 29 2012, the U.S. Department of Justice appeared as Amicus Curiae stating that the United States believed TDCJ's "blanket prohibition on religious beards is not narrowly tailored to the generalized budgetary and security interests it asserts" and asking the court to deny TDCJ's motion for summary judgment. Without deciding on either motion, Magistrate Judge Guthrie stayed the proceedings pending the appeal on the temporary restraining order opinion on April 11, 2012.
After the Fifth Circuit remanded the case, on June 3, 2013, the plaintiff brought an objection to the District Court's handling of the case. In particular, he complained that the Magistrate Judge had made so many of the rulings. He asked that the District Judge perform his duty. A month later, on July 2, 2013, he asked the Fifth Circuit to order the District Court to do its job. He alleged that the District Court had failed to decide on injunctive relief, even after the Fifth Circuit had urged it to reexamine the motion for a preliminary injunction. On August 12, 2013, the Fifth Circuit denied the plaintiff's request, but with the caveat that the plaintiff could reinstate it if the District Court had not ruled in 180 days.
On December 19, 2013, two pro bono lawyers were appointed as counsel for the plaintiff, and on January 17, 2014, Judge Clark assigned the case to Magistrate Judge Zack Hawthorn.
On February 4, 2014, Judge Hawthorn granted the plaintiff's motion for a temporary restraining order and a preliminary injunction enjoining TDCJ from enforcing a policy prohibiting the plaintiff from maintaining a quarter-inch beard. 2014 WL 495162.
A bench trial was held in July 2014 before Magistrate Judge Hawthorn. On September 26, he granted declaratory and injunctive relief requiring TDCJ to allow the plaintiff to wear a fist-length beard and a Kufi. 69 F.Supp.3d 633. The state appealed the decision on October 16, 2014.
The case was stayed for several months pending resolution in Holt v. Hobbs [135 S.Ct. 853], but after the Supreme Court found for the prisoner plaintiff in that case, the Fifth Circuit affirmed the District Court's judgment and permanent injunction on May 2, 2016. 822 F.3d 776.
Meanwhile, on December 3, 2014, Magistrate Judge Hawthorn denied the defendant's motion to stay the judgment pending the appeal in the Fifth Circuit. On April 29, 2015, he order the defendant to pay the plaintiff $16,312.72 in costs and $214,160.44 in attorney's fees and expenses. The defendant appealed the ruling on May 18, 2015, but withdrew the appeal on May 16, 2016. There has been no significant activity since 2016, and the case appears closed.
Summary Authors
Gabriela Hybel (7/6/2017)
For PACER's information on parties and their attorneys, see: https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/4865577/parties/ali-v-quarterman/
Clark, Ron (Texas)
Albritton, Eric M. (Texas)
Benefield, Michael Aaron (Indiana)
Cunniff, Celamine (Texas)
Gardner, M. Carol (Texas)
See docket on RECAP: https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/4865577/ali-v-quarterman/
Last updated April 9, 2025, 1:21 p.m.
State / Territory: Texas
Case Type(s):
Special Collection(s):
DOJ Civil Rights Division Statements of Interest
Key Dates
Filing Date: March 29, 2009
Case Ongoing: No reason to think so
Plaintiffs
Plaintiff Description:
Muslim inmate at the Gib Lewis Unit in the Texas Department of Criminal Justice
Plaintiff Type(s):
Public Interest Lawyer: No
Filed Pro Se: Yes
Class Action Sought: No
Class Action Outcome: Not sought
Defendants
Texas Department of Criminal Justice, State
Defendant Type(s):
Facility Type(s):
Case Details
Causes of Action:
Religious Freedom Rest. Act/Religious Land Use and Inst. Persons Act (RFRA/RLUIPA)
Constitutional Clause(s):
Available Documents:
Injunctive (or Injunctive-like) Relief
Outcome
Prevailing Party: Plaintiff
Nature of Relief:
Injunction / Injunctive-like Settlement
Preliminary injunction / Temp. restraining order
Source of Relief:
Content of Injunction:
Amount Defendant Pays: 230,473.16
Order Duration: 2014 - None
Issues
General/Misc.:
Discrimination Basis:
Affected Sex/Gender(s):