In Turner v. Safley, the Supreme Court upheld the prison regulation on inmate marriages on the grounds that marriage is not a right protected in the Constitution.
True
False
The correct answer and explanation is:
The correct answer is False.
In Turner v. Safley (1987), the U.S. Supreme Court did not rule that marriage is not a right protected by the Constitution. Instead, it upheld the prison regulation that restricted inmates’ right to marry, but it did so on different grounds. The case involved a Missouri prison regulation that limited inmates’ ability to marry without the approval of prison authorities. The petitioners argued that the regulation violated their constitutional right to marry, which is protected under the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment.
The Court acknowledged that marriage is a fundamental right, but it also recognized that prisoners have limited rights while incarcerated. The majority opinion, written by Justice O’Connor, held that while the right to marry is protected, it can be subject to restrictions if the regulation is related to legitimate penological interests. The Court applied a test to determine whether the regulation was reasonable, weighing the restriction against the need for security, rehabilitation, and order within the prison system.
In this case, the Court found that the prison regulation limiting inmate marriages was reasonable and did not violate the Constitution. However, the decision was not based on the argument that marriage is not a constitutional right, but rather that prisoners’ rights can be restricted if the regulations serve valid penological interests. The ruling emphasized that the right to marry is not absolute and can be limited in specific circumstances such as those found in the prison context.
Therefore, the Court did not deny the constitutional protection of marriage but balanced it with the interests of maintaining order and security within the correctional system.