Rha-Meir Bush v. Leone, et al.

Summary

The United States District Court for the District of Connecticut conducts an initial review of Rha-Meir Bush’s 42 U.S.C. § 1983 complaint concerning his placement in restrictive housing and designation as affiliated with a security risk group. The court allows Fourteenth Amendment procedural due process claims to proceed against four defendants and dismisses the First, Eighth, and Fourteenth Amendment equal protection claims, along with claims against four other defendants.

Holdings

1. A plaintiff seeking damages under § 1983 must plead facts establishing each defendant's personal involvement in the alleged constitutional violation; allegations based only on supervisory status or mere presence are insufficient. Bush failed to plead personal involvement by Kassoy, McCarthy, Marquis, and Guadarrama, so the claims against them in their individual capacities were dismissed.
2. Bush plausibly alleged a Fourteenth Amendment procedural due process claim based on his placement in restrictive housing pending an SRG affiliation determination, and the claim could proceed against Papoosha in both individual and official capacities.
3. Bush plausibly alleged a Fourteenth Amendment procedural due process claim against Leone, Rodriguez, Santiago, and Papoosha arising from the SRG designation hearing, because the allegations supported an inference that the hearing provided no meaningful opportunity to be heard and that the guilty determination was not supported by reliable evidence.
4. A plaintiff may proceed against state officials in their official capacities for prospective injunctive or declaratory relief when the complaint plausibly alleges an ongoing constitutional violation. Bush's official-capacity due process claims against Leone, Rodriguez, Santiago, and Papoosha therefore could proceed.
5. Bush failed to plausibly allege an Eighth Amendment deliberate-indifference claim because, even assuming the alleged restrictive-housing conditions were sufficiently serious objectively, he did not allege that any defendant was actually aware of the conditions.
6. Bush failed to state a plausible First Amendment claim based on the alleged use of his phone call, social media activity, and album cover in connection with his SRG designation; the claim was dismissed without prejudice.
7. Bush failed to state a plausible equal protection claim because he did not allege that he was treated differently from a similarly situated comparator or identify facts supporting a suspect-classification or class-of-one theory; the claim was dismissed without prejudice.

Questions Presented

1. Whether the complaint plausibly alleged a Fourteenth Amendment procedural due process violation arising from Bush's placement in restrictive housing pending an SRG affiliation determination.
2. Whether the complaint plausibly alleged a Fourteenth Amendment procedural due process violation arising from the SRG designation hearing.
3. Whether the complaint plausibly alleged personal involvement by Kassoy, McCarthy, Marquis, and Guadarrama sufficient to support claims for damages under § 1983.
4. Whether the complaint plausibly alleged Eighth Amendment deliberate indifference based on the conditions of restrictive housing.
5. Whether the complaint plausibly alleged First Amendment or Fourteenth Amendment equal protection violations.

Disposition

other