CA11: Inmate email has same 1A protection snail mail does

Prison email to family members is protected by the First Amendment. “Just as the Fourth Amendment protects against searches by technology unknown in the 18th century, see Kyllo v. United States, 533 U.S. 27, 34-38 (2001), the First Amendment protects correspondence transmitted by means developed in the 20th or 21st centuries.” Benning v. Comm’r, Ga. Dep’t of Corr., 2023 U.S. App. LEXIS 15851 (11th Cir. June 23, 2023).

“Plaintiff’s allegations and the written notice provided to plaintiffs make clear that they received due process before the City entered their property to abate a nuisance. Plaintiffs have not established that the individual defendants’ entry into their backyard constituted a search under the Fourth Amendment, and plaintiffs have not alleged facts suggesting that defendants violated the Fourth Amendment. For similar reasons, the removal of personal property from plaintiffs’ backyard to abate a public nuisance does not constitute a violation of the Takings Clause of the Fifth and Fourteenth Amendments. See Keystone Bituminous Coal Ass’n v. DeBenedictis, 480 U.S. 470, 491 (1987). “[T]he government owes a landowner no compensation for requiring him to abate a nuisance on his property, because he never had a right to engage in the nuisance in the first place.” Cedar Point Nursery v. Hassid, 141 S. Ct. 2063, 2079 (2021).” Tate v. City of Bartlesville, 2023 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 108525 (N.D. Okla. June 23, 2023).*

Alleged sexual assault by a TSA officer was cognizable under the Federal Tort Claims Act. Leuthauser v. United States, 2023 U.S. App. LEXIS 15985 (9th Cir. June 26, 2023) (following other circuits).*