United States District Court, E.D. Arkansas, Northern Division
RECOMMENDED DISPOSITION
The
following Recommended Disposition
(“Recommendation”) has been sent to United States
District Judge Kristine G. Baker. You may file written
objections to all or part of this Recommendation. If you do
so, those objections must: (1) specifically explain the
factual and/or legal basis for your objection; and (2) be
received by the Clerk of this Court within fourteen (14) days
of the date of this Recommendation. If you do not file
objections, Judge Baker can adopt this Recommendation without
independently reviewing all of the evidence in the record. By
not objecting, you may waive the right to appeal questions of
fact.
I.
Introduction
In this
pro se § 1983 action, Plaintiff Mondrea Renee
Scott (“Scott”) alleges that, while she was an
inmate in the McPherson Unit of the Arkansas Department of
Correction (“ADC”), Defendants Warden James Banks
(“Banks”) and Warden Darryl Golden
(“Golden”) violated her due process and equal
protection rights by refusing to grant her applications to
marry Shana Struble (“Struble”), a former inmate
in the McPherson Unit.[1]
Banks
and Golden have filed a Motion for Summary Judgment, a Brief
in Support, a Statement of Facts, and a Reply, arguing that
they are entitled to judgment, as a matter of law, on the due
process and equal protection claims Scott is asserting
against them.[2] Docs. 69, 70, 71 & 78. Scott
has filed a Response, a Brief, and two Statements of Facts in
opposition to Defendants' Motion. Docs. 74, 75, 76
& 77.
Scott
has also filed a Motion for Summary Judgment, and supporting
motion papers. Docs. 52, 59, 60, 61 & 62.
Defendants have filed Responses, Briefs and Statements of
Fact in opposition to Scott's Motion. Docs. 56, 57,
58, 63, 64 & 65.[3]
Before
addressing the merits of the parties' cross Motions for
Summary Judgment, the Court will summarize the relevant facts
giving rise to Scott's constitutional claims:
1. ADC
Administrative Directive 13-59 (“AD 13-59”) sets
forth the ADC's policy governing inmate marriages.
See Att. A to Ex. 1 of Doc. 69. It provides that
inmates “are permitted to marry when such action is
consistent with the laws of the state of Arkansas and follows
the procedures set out [therein.]” The directive makes
it clear that an inmate's “right to marry …
must be exercised in a manner that is consistent with the
security and good order of the institution.”
Id. §§ I & II.
2. An
inmate must file an application to marry with the unit
warden, who has the discretion to grant or deny the
application, based on whether it is deemed to be
“consistent with the security and good order of the
institution.” Id. §§ I, II, III,
IV(A) & (M).
3. The
chaplains at each ADC prison have administrative
responsibilities under AD 13-59 § III. After being
informed by an inmate of his or her intention to marry, a
unit chaplain sends the inmate a “marriage packet,
” which includes instructions and a marriage
application form. See Doc. 9 at 2 & Ex. E.
4. The
marriage application form states that the prospective spouse
must be on the inmate's “approved visitor list,
” but neither AD 13-59 nor the instructions in the
“marriage packet” explain: (1) how an
inmate should go about getting a prospective spouse added to
his or her approved visitation list; or (2) the
criteria for allowing a prospective spouse to be on that
list. The chaplain's written instructions to the inmate
state only that, if the prospective spouse is not on
the approved visitation list, the “request for marriage
will be denied by the Warden.” Doc. 9, Ex. E.
5. On
June 26, 2015, the Court issued its decision in
Obergefell v. Hodges, 135 S.Ct. 2584 (2015), which
recognized that individuals have a Fourteenth Amendment right
to marry someone of the same sex.
6. On
September 21, 2015, Struble[4] e-mailed ADC Director Wendy
Kelley asking when AD 13-59 would be changed to allow inmates
to marry partners of the same sex. Doc. 35, Ex. 1.
Struble was a former inmate in the McPherson Unit
who had served time with Scott, and had been released on
parole for about five years. Doc. 60 at 2; Doc. 77
¶7. In her e-mail, Struble advised Director Kelley
that she and Scott, who was still incarcerated in the
McPherson Unit, planned to get married. Doc. 35, Ex.
1.
7. In
her e-mail response to Struble, dated September 21, 2015,
Kelley stated that she did “not believe a change to our
[marriage] policy will be required, ” and that
“[t]he inmate in question [Scott] need[ed] to initiate
the [marriage] process with the chaplain.” Id.
8. On
October 2, 2015, Scott submitted an application to marry
Struble. Doc. 71 ¶ 6; Doc. 76 ¶ 2. As the
McPherson Unit Warden, [5] Banks was responsible for deciding
whether to grant or deny Scott's same-sex marriage
application.
9. On
December 2, 2015, Keith Chamberlain, a chaplain at the
McPherson Unit, sent a memo to Scott which stated:
“Your application for marriage has been denied by the
Warden [Banks] .” Doc. 35, Ex. 2. No reason
was given for Banks's denial of Scott's application
to marry Struble.
10. In
early January of 2016, Golden replaced Banks as Warden of the
McPherson Unit. Doc. 30 ¶ 5. Shortly
thereafter, Scott submitted a second application to marry
Struble. Doc. 71 ¶ 6. It then became
Golden's responsibility to grant or deny Scott's
same-sex marriage application.
11. On
February 26, 2016, Nicole Lang, a chaplain at the McPherson
Unit, sent a memo to Scott which stated: “Please be
advised that Warden Golden has denied your application for
marriage.” Doc. 35, Ex. 3. No reason was given
for Golden's denial of Scott's application to marry
Struble.
12. It
is undisputed that Struble was a parolee for a number of
years before Scott filed her applications to marry her. There
is nothing in Defendants' summary judgment papers about
the conviction that led to Struble's incarceration; her
disciplinary history while incarcerated in the McPherson
Unit; when she was paroled; or how she performed while on
parole.
13. At
the time Scott submitted her marriage applications, Struble
was not on Scott's “approved visitation
list.” Doc. 56, Ex. A at 39-41 (Scott Dep.);
Doc. 36, Ex. C at 2 & 5. There is nothing in the
record suggesting that Struble ever attempted to visit Scott,
after she was released on parole, or that Scott ever tried to
have Struble added to her “approved visitation
list.”
14. On
March 12, 2016, Scott filed a Grievance, complaining that
both Banks and Golden had denied her separate
applications to marry Struble “due to [her] partner and
[her] being the same sex.” Doc. 36, Ex. C at
3. She also explained why she believed her
constitutional rights had been violated:
Marriage is a fundamental constitutional right that I can
retain whether confined or not. To deny this right violates
… my constitutional right in marrying someone I've
been with for 10 years. I shouldn't be discriminated
against based on my sexual orientation.
Id.
15. On
April 6, 2016, Golden wrote a “Memorandum” to
Scott, which stated the following:
Please be advised that I have received your grievance
regarding your request to marry. In your grievance you allege
that I am denying your opportunity to marry Shana M. Struble
because you are of the same sex. I absolutely deny this as
the reason why I have denied Ms. Struble and you to marry.
You were denied the opportunity because of several reasons.
First, Ms. Struble is a convicted felon that is
still on supervised parole until 2019. In reviewing your
application for approval this fact contradicts the
agency's responsibility to ensure appropriate security
practices on inmates [sic] contact with other known felons in
and outside the prison. Secondly, Ms. Struble and
you had an offender separation during her incarceration here
in the Arkansas Department of Correction which is still in
effect and will be enforced if ever she returns.
Thirdly, Ms. Struble is not listed on your approved
visitors list or on your relatives and associates list
because of her status as a parolee. Let me assure you we will
follow the laws of this land and our state in regards to
allowing those who are eligible to marry and who meet our
security and policy practices and guidelines regardless of
sexual orientation. The issue of you not being afforded the
opportunity to marry Ms. Struble is solely due impart [sic]
with her present status on parole and your status as an
inmate here at the McPherson Unit.
Doc. 36, Ex. C at 5 (emphasis added).
16. On
April 20, 2016, Golden filed a Response to Scott's
Grievance, finding it was without merit. In his Response, he
used the identical language from his April 6, 2016
Memorandum to explain his reasons for denying Scott's
application to marry Struble. Doc. 36, Ex. C at 2.
17. On
May 4, 2016, ADC Deputy Director Dexter Payne affirmed the
denial of Scott's Grievance. Doc. 36, Ex. C at
1.
18. In
February or early March of 2017, Scott was paroled from the
ADC. Doc. 19. On March 18, 2017, Scott and Struble
were married in Tarrant County, Texas. See
https://ccrecordse.tarrantcounty.com/Marriage/SearchResults.aspx.
19. The
current record contains nothing at all about the
reasons Banks denied Scott's first application to marry
Struble. As far as Golden's reasons for denying
Scott's second application, the record contains only his
Memorandum and Response to her Grievance, which state vague
“security concerns” that are in no way
...