WASHINGTON — Judge Samuel A. Alito Jr. is having an effect on the Supreme Court before the Senate even takes up his nomination.
The justices agreed Monday to hear a Pennsylvania prison officials' appeal -- based on a dissent by Alito -- challenging a ruling that said even the most disruptive and dangerous prison inmates were entitled to receive newspapers and magazines.
The case, to be heard in the spring, is the latest that seeks to draw a line between the rights of prisoners and the rules set by prison authorities. In the last two decades, the high court has said judges who are faced with such cases generally should defer to the judgment of prison managers.
The dispute involves about 40 inmates held in the "long-term segregation unit" of a state prison near Pittsburgh. Under the state's policy, inmates who break the rules lose privileges, such as watching television or using tobacco. Those who end up in the unit are "the most incorrigible ... and have demonstrated the most behavior conflicts," the state said.
For the first 90 days in the special unit, inmates are denied all reading material, except for legal papers and religious materials. The inmates sued to challenge the rule.
"Precluding them from receiving information from periodicals about current political, social and other activities outside the prison walls ... offends the free speech component of the 1st Amendment," their lawyer said.
A federal judge upheld the prison policy, but the issue was appealed to a three-judge panel of the U.S. 3rd Circuit Court of Appeals in Philadelphia.
Two judges agreed with the inmates and struck down the prison policy as unconstitutional. They reasoned that although prison officials could enforce rules involving safety or security, barring newspapers or magazines did not promote security behind bars.
Alito dissented and called the majority's reasoning unsound. Prison authorities may take away privileges from inmates who misbehave, he wrote.
"These regulations are reasonably related to the legitimate penological goal of curbing prison misconduct," Alito wrote. For that reason, they should be upheld, he added.
State officials urged the Supreme Court to hear the case of Beard vs. Banks to overturn the lower court, and the justices said they would take it up.
Also on Monday, the court said it would hear a California case that could make it somewhat harder for inmates to file lawsuits in court over prison grievances.
