Damon Landor didn’t expect his faith to be the biggest challenge he’d face during a five-month prison sentence. But when Louisiana correctional officers pinned him down and shaved off the dreadlocks he’d grown over two decades as a devout Rastafarian, it sparked a legal battle that’s now headed to the U.S. Supreme Court.
This fall, the justices will hear Landor’s case—a deeply personal fight that could redefine what religious freedom means for people behind bars. The court isn’t just looking at whether his rights were violated. It’s deciding something bigger: can individual prison guards be held personally responsible for religious violations under federal law?
A Haircut That Went Too Far?
Landor had been growing his dreadlocks for nearly 20 years, a core part of his religious beliefs as a Rastafarian. He’d followed this path long before he entered the Louisiana prison system. For the first part of his sentence, he was allowed to wear a rastacap or keep his hair untouched. But that changed when he was transferred to Raymond Laborde Correctional Center.
There, officers denied his religious exemption and ordered his head shaved. When Landor resisted, saying it violated his spiritual beliefs, they strapped him down and forcibly shaved his head anyway.
“It wasn’t just a haircut,” Landor said through his legal team. “It was a violation of my soul.”
The Legal Question: Who Can Be Sued?
At issue is a 2000 federal law known as the Religious Land Use and Institutionalized Persons Act—RLUIPA for short. It was passed to protect the religious rights of people in jails, prisons, and other institutions.
Everyone agrees Landor’s rights were violated. Even the court that dismissed his case acknowledged that. But they also said the law doesn’t let individuals—like the officers who shaved him—be sued for money damages. Only the state or the institution can be held responsible.
That’s what the Supreme Court is being asked to decide: Should individual guards be held accountable when they trample someone’s faith?
What Makes This Case So Important
It might sound like a technical debate over legal wording, but this case touches something deeper—whether people working in government roles can be personally liable when they knowingly violate someone’s religious beliefs.
In 2020, the Supreme Court ruled that a similar law—known as RFRA—allows individuals to sue federal officials. Landor’s lawyers say the same should be true for RLUIPA, which was written using nearly identical language.
Supporters say that without accountability, these laws are meaningless. “If prison officials can violate someone’s religious rights and just walk away without consequence, what’s the point of having the law?” one legal analyst said.
Critics worry that allowing lawsuits against individual staff could discourage people from working in already understaffed prisons—or lead to frivolous claims.
More Than a Legal Fight—It’s Cultural Too
This isn’t just about courtrooms and statutes. It’s also about what religious identity looks like in real life—and why that matters. For Rastafarians like Landor, hair isn’t just fashion. Dreadlocks are a sacred symbol of a spiritual covenant, just like turbans for Sikhs or head coverings in Islam and Judaism.
When Landor’s hair was taken from him, he says it felt like something sacred had been stripped away.
What Happens Next
The Supreme Court will hear arguments in October, and a decision is expected next June. If the justices rule in Landor’s favor, it could change how religious rights are protected in every prison in America.
If they don’t, RLUIPA’s limits will stand—and faith behind bars will remain protected only in theory, not in the form of personal accountability.
For Landor, it’s already been a long road. His sentence ended years ago, but his fight is still going.
“I followed the rules. I lived by my beliefs. And they still took something from me that can’t grow back overnight,” he said.
