The United States Supreme Court has ruled that a Rastafarian man cannot sue prison officials who forcibly cut his dreadlocks, determining that prisoners cannot seek monetary damages from individual staff members under federal religious liberties law. The high court's six-justice conservative majority upheld a lower court's decision in favor of the prison officials.

Damon Landor, who is Rastafarian and whose faith requires him to grow his hair, was incarcerated in Louisiana in 2020. His religion considers dreadlocks a sacred practice. Despite Landor presenting a court ruling that protected prisoners' religious hair practices, prison officials proceeded to cut his hair.

Writing for the majority, Justice Neil Gorsuch stated that while Landor's religious rights might have been violated, the lawsuit against the prison staff was improper. Gorsuch explained that the Religious Land Use and Institutionalized Persons Act (RLUIPA) imposes obligations on the governmental entity receiving federal funds, not on individual employees, who have not consented to be sued under the statute. He likened the situation to a breach of contract claim against someone who never agreed to a contract.

The ruling has significant implications for prisoners seeking legal recourse for religious freedom violations. While the court acknowledged the potential violation of Landor's rights, it has closed the door for individuals to sue employees directly for damages under RLUIPA, potentially limiting accountability for specific actions.

Landor, through his lawyers, expressed disappointment but vowed to continue seeking accountability. "What happened to me violated my faith and my dignity," he stated. "I will continue pursuing accountability. What happened to me should not happen to anyone else." His legal team indicated they would explore other avenues to pursue justice.

The incident occurred after Landor was transferred to the Raymond Laborde Correctional Center. Court documents indicate a guard discarded his legal document supporting his religious practice, and the warden subsequently ordered his hair to be cut. Guards reportedly held Landor down while his head was shaved.

The three liberal justices on the Supreme Court dissented from the majority opinion. They argued that RLUIPA is intended to protect individuals from such violations and that the majority's interpretation unduly restricts prisoners' ability to seek redress.

This decision clarifies the scope of RLUIPA concerning individual liability, emphasizing that claims for monetary damages must be directed at the institutional entity rather than its employees, even when specific rights are allegedly infringed.