An inmate former housed at Southwestern Illinois Correctional Center can continue with his First Amendment retaliation claim against a prison guard, according to a ruling by a federal district court judge. The ruling shows that an inmate can state a cognizable retaliation claim by showing that prison officials retaliated against an inmate simply because the inmate filed grievances against the guards.
Antonio Aldava, who is now incarcerated at Menard Correctional Center, filed a federal lawsuit, contending that prison guard Andre Taylor retaliated against him after Aldava filed grievances against Taylor.
Aldava contends that after he filed grievances, the guard shook down his cell and bunk, confiscated his prescription glasses, and gave him unjustified disciplinary tickets.
“Prison officials may not retaliate against inmates for filing grievances, exercising First Amendment rights, or otherwise complaining about their conditions of confinement,” wrote U.S. District Judge for the Southern District of Illinois Staci M. Yandle in Aldava v. Taylor.
According to the complaint, “Taylor took actions that were aimed at deterring Aldava from engaging in protected speech.”
(See Prisoners’ rights)
Judge Yandle explained that, at this early stage of the litigation, Aldava’s complaint was sufficient to state a First Amendment claim. This is because prison officials should not punish or retaliate against inmates simply because the inmates have filed grievances.
The reality is that inmates still possess some level of constitutional rights even though they are incarcerated. As Justice Sandra Day O’Connor wrote in Turner v. Safley (1987): “Prison walls do not form a barrier separating inmates from the protections of the Constitution.”
To ensure these words from the U.S. Supreme Court have meaning, lower court judges must do as Judge Yandle did in this case and consider the merits of inmates’ claims and not assume they are frivolous.