Corrections_Today_November_December_2019

Correctional Chaplain Perspectives

policy. Both requests were denied. However, the prison later agreed to exclude the Christian chaplain. On Jan. 28, 2019, Ray filed a motion to stay the execution in the United States District Court, alleg- ing violation of his rights under the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment and under the Reli- gious Land Use and Institutionalized Persons Act (RLUIPA). 3 He claimed that excluding his Imam while al- lowing a Christian chaplain to be in the execution chamber violated these laws. On Feb. 1, 2019, the District Court denied the motion finding (i) Ray had inexcusably delayed filing his motion, (ii) no substantial burden was being placed on Ray’s religious exercise by excluding his Imam and (iii) there was not a less restric- tive way to promote security in the execution chamber. On Feb. 6, 2019, the 11 th Circuit Court of Appeals disagreed with the District Court and stayed the execution. On Feb. 7, 2019, in a 5 to 4 deci- sion, the U.S. Supreme Court vacated the stay and allowed the execution to proceed, because Ray waited until the “last minute” to seek relief. 4 Chief Justice Roberts and Justices Alito, Thomas, Gorsuch and Kavanaugh were in the majority. Justices Kagan, Ginsburg, Breyer and Sotomayor dissented, stating that (i) the policy allowing the state’s Christian chap- lain in the execution chamber but not allowing spiritual advisors of other faiths shows preference for one religious denomination over another in violation of the Establishment Clause, (ii) there are less restrictive ways to guarantee security in the execution chamber (for example, train Ray’s Imam and hold the Imam

istock/StockPhotosArt

adviser would be permitted inside the execution chamber. On March 5, 2019, the TDCJ responded that per its policy, only staff chaplains would be permitted inside the execution chamber. The TDCJ employed no Buddhist staff chaplains. On March 20, 2019, Murphy pe- titioned the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals for a Writ of Prohibition ask- ing that the execution be delayed until a decision could be made regard- ing the attendance by his Buddhist spiritual adviser. On March 25, 2019, the Writ was denied because it was not timely filed. On March 26, 2019, Murphy filed a motion to stay the execution in the United States District Court, which was denied because Murphy had engaged in inexcusably dilatory litigation. On March 27, 2019, the 5 th Circuit Court of Appeals denied the stay finding the District Court had not abused its discretion. On March 28, 2019, in a 6 to 3

in contempt if he interferes), (iii) Ray learned from the warden of the policy on Jan. 23, 2019 and timely filed his motion on Jan. 28, 2019, (iv) the warden refused to give Ray a copy of the policy, (v) an Alabama statute states that an inmate’s spiritual advi- sor “may be present at an execution” and (vi) Ray’s religious rights will be violated “at the moment the state puts him to death.” 5 Murphy v. Collier 6 In 2003, Patrick Henry Murphy was convicted of murder in Texas and sentenced to death. In 2012, the Texas Department of Criminal Justice (TDCJ) made public a policy allowing only staff chaplains to be inside the execution chamber dur- ing an execution. In 2018, Murphy’s execution date was set for March 28, 2019. On Feb. 29, 2019, Mur- phy’s attorney sent a letter to the TDCJ asking if his Buddhist spiritual

Corrections Today November/December 2019 — 9