Conditioning desirable privilege such as family visitation on a prisoner’s participation in program that incorporated Alcoholics Anonymous doctrine was unconstitutional because it violated the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment.
A parole officer had lost qualified immunity because he forced Alcoholics Anonymous on a Buddhist defendant.
A state supported non-coercive, non-rewarding faith based program violates the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment because an alternative was not available.
First Amendment violations can have consequences for drug court staff.
The county governmental agency violated the Establishment Clause of the First amendment by requiring probationer convicted of driving under the influence to participate in Alcoholics Anonymous.
A Washington court held that mandating attendance AA/NA classes does violate the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment. But where alternative classes without religious-based content are provided, there is no constitutional violation.
A federal Court held that the First Amendment is violated when the state coerces an individual to attend a religion-based drug or alcohol treatment program.
The Eighth Circuit ruled that requiring a Missouri prisoner to attend and complete a non-secular substance abuse program in order to be eligible for early parole violated the Establishment Clause.