This weekend, a group of activists are to hold a rally to protest treatment of Muslim Detainees inside a Miami ICE detention center. Reports say that for months Muslim detainees have been forced to eat either pork or expired food. Because of the Coronavirus pandemic, the Krome Center in Miami switched their food services to a satellite- feeding program where all of the food is premade and given to the detainees already plated. Before the pandemic, detainees were able to choose what foods they wanted to eat, now that their food is pre plated, they can either starve, eat the pork, or eat spoiled Halal food. Many of the detainees have reported illnesses such as stomach pain, vomiting, and diarrhea. Muslim Detainees apporached the Krome Center’s Chaplain to seek assisance, he replied, “It is what it it,” allegedly. Since then, many formal requests have been made to the center to have accommodations. There was no immediate response to the requests, other than two tweets that included the existing religious policies. Muslim advocates have filed suits for the detained men. The marches to take place this weekend are being held in hopes that Halal food will become available to the detainees and that the men withholding the Halal food are held responsible for their actions.
The ICE handbook, states that, “All facilities shall provide detainees requesting a religious diet a reasonable and equitable opportunity to observe their religious dietary practice, within the constraints of budget limitations and the security and orderly running of the facility, by offering a common fare menu.”(P. 237 Section 4.1) The question at stake here is, does a Global Pandemic give the Krome center in Miami the right to deny religious dietary requests from its Muslim detainees? It is in their part of their policy to acknowledge requests, but only if it is within the constraints of the budget. The First Amendment states that Congress shall make no law prohibiting the free exercise of religion. But if an institution is directly prohibiting a religious group from following their preferred diet, does that prohibit them from practicing their religion? The pandemic has created an obstacle in many institutions who have to provide food for their inhabitants. It has been deemed safer for places to pre package and pre plate food to limit touches between workers and food recipients. This new method makes it safer for everyone in terms of slowing the spread of the coronavirus, but creates new limitations for the options that are available. The advocates for the Muslim detainees are claiming that since the start of the pandemic, the religious rights of those incarcerated are being infringed upon and that change needs to initiate immediately.
This issue is extremely important for all of those in the United States who have been detained by ICE, whether they are guilty or not. Instances like these can set a major precedent for the treatment of those detained by ICE and for those who are incarcerated in prisons. It is important that as long as you are in the United States, you can still reap the benefits outlined in the constitution. Just because a person has broken the law, does not mean that their religious rights should be stripped. In this case, I agree with the Muslim detainees and advocates. The ICE, Krome facility in Miami should be required to uphold their promises to provide religious food requests, even amid a pandemic. Those who are withholding the Halal food should be held accountable. The detention center is certainly prohibiting the free exercise of the Muslim religion. Because the food rules are so prominent in the Muslim faith, detainees are getting sick which could potentially lead to death. Since the facility already stated that they will complete requests for religious meals, they need to uphold that promise, despite the inconveniences from the pandemic. Prior to the Pandemic, the Krome center was very accessible to those who wished to consume a Halal diet. In a 1997 case Ashelman v. Wawrzaszek, was a case that ruled it was a violation of their free exercise rights to not provide Orthodox Jews non- Kosher Meals. The prisoners rights to practice their religion was found to outweigh the cost and inconvenience of the specially requested meals. It is a direct violation to the exercise of religion which causes a very prominent health risk to those detained. Even in an unprecedented time, religions still exist and deserve to be acknowledged. Though, this may cause a slippery slope effect and other detainees may start making absurd religious dietary requests, it is something that needs to be taken as a case by case basis. In this case, the Muslim detainees are having their rights violated and the Krome center in Miami needs change their behavior and take responsibility in obeying their own policies.
5 comments:
I agree with your analysis and that the First Amendment right's of the prisoners are being violated. I think that it really does not seem like it would take much more effort to ensure that there are a few meals pre-packaged set aside that would enable the prisoners to follow their diet according to their religion. Even if it was a true burden to do something like that, I think the Supreme Court has made compelling arguments that it does not matter whether or not something poses a burden or inconvenience to someone if someone else's rights are being violated as was made clear in the majority argument for the Cantwell v. Connecticut case and the dissenting opinion in Braunfeld v. Brown where religious beliefs could have "burdened" Catholics and granting exemptions to labor laws could have posed an inconvenience, respectively.
Abby, I agree that the ICE, Krome detention center is violating the free exercise rights of the detainees. In this case I do not believe a pandemic should justify the lack of food options for detainees who practice part of their religion through what they can and cannot eat. The fact that the detention center had previously ensured meals that were in accordance to dietary restrictions of detainees is important because it demonstrates how their new food plan directly targets religion, whether that was the intent or not. Just because having pre packages Halal meals may be an inconvenience on the budget of the detention center, should not mean the detainees can no longer practice their religion through their diet. Just as Newton Cantwell and his soliciting may have been a burden or an inconvenience to the people of the neighborhood did not mean his First Amendment rights could be violated. I also agree that if such religious dietary restrictions were ignored, there would be a slippery slope when it comes to the rights of future detainees or incarcerated persons.
I am in agreement with your argument. I believe that just because the cost of these specially requested meals exceed the ICE, Krome facility in Miami’s budget, the detainee’s right to free exercise of religion overrides this inconvenience. The ICE promised to provide religious food requests, even amid a pandemic and thus, in a time like this, they should still hold to their promise. I also agree with the fact that because of this food restriction, detainees are suffering a substantial health burden, many are starving and suffering malnutrition, with a possibility of death.
I agree with this analysis. ICE centers have a constitutional obligation to provide edible Halal food for those who need it even during a pandemic. This is different from other religious cases in which the pandemic is a justifiable reason to burden religion because providing Halal food in no way hurts efforts to curb the pandemic such that not wearing a mask or meeting in person would. Halal food is still able to be packaged in the way that any other food is packaged. It is their responsibility to be able to provide this food.
I agree that the free exercise of the Muslim men in this case are being infringed upon by denying them access to a healthy religious diet, and a global pandemic does not stop the exercise of religious practices that are not putting anyone in harm's way. I think it is also notable that people employed by ICE are being paid to deny these men their right to religious exercise, which seems to me like an entanglement of church and state.
Post a Comment