28 C.F.R. § 540.70
Purpose and scope
Except when precluded by statute (see § 540.72), the Bureau of Prisons permits an inmate to subscribe to or to receive publications without prior approval and has established procedures to determine if an incoming publication is detrimental to the security, discipline, or good order of the institution or if it might facilitate criminal activity. The term publication, as used in this subpart, means a book, booklet, pamphlet, or similar document, or a single issue of a magazine, periodical, newsletter, newspaper, plus such other materials addressed to a specific inmate such as advertising brochures, flyers, and catalogs.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 15
cases (2 in the last 5 years), 1987–2026 · leading case: Thornburgh v. Abbott, 490 U.S. 401 (1989).
Thornburgh v. Abbott, 490 U.S. 401 (1989). “II We are concerned primarily with the regulations set forth at 28 CFR §§ 540.70 and 540.71 (1988), first promulgated in 1979.”
Prison Legal News v. Fed. Bureau of Prisons, 944 F.3d 868 (10th Cir. 2019). “ADX’s Review of Incoming Publications We describe (1) the BOP regulations set forth in 28 C.F.R. §§ 540.70 to 540.72 and (2) the ADX institutional supplement, a document establishing policies specific to a BOP prison facility.”
Jacklovich v. Simmons, 392 F.3d 420 (10th Cir. 2004). “The current policy represents a change from the unrestricted policy in effect before; on remand there ought to be an evidentiary basis for the claims made by either party. Also relevant, other institutions apparently permit receipt of gift publications, including the Federal…”
Prison Legal News v. Charles Ryan, 39 F.4th 1121 (9th Cir. 2022). “at 416–17 (quoting 28 C.F.R. §§ 540.70 , 540.71(b) (1988)). On this point, we conclude that the district court was correct.”
Jack Abbott v. Edwin Meese, Iii, Attorney Gen. of the United States, 824 F.2d 1166 (D.C. Cir. 1987). “We set forth in an Appendix the governing regulations, 28 C.F.R. § 540.70 and § 540.71(b), (c), (d), and (e), as well as a portion of a Bureau Program Statement No.”
Owen v. Wille, 117 F.3d 1235 (11th Cir. 1997). “The Supreme Court there considered 28 C.F.R. §§ 540.70 , .71 (1988), which govern federal prisons.”
Koger v. Dart, 114 F. Supp. 3d 572 (N.D. Ill. 2015). “28 C.F.R. § 540.70 ; id. § 540.71. The Illinois Department of Corrections’ policy is even more lenient: “[I]nmates can receive publications, including .”
Daker v. Ferrero, 475 F. Supp. 2d 1325 (N.D. Ga. 2007). “The guidelines also provided several criteria for rejection, including whether the publication “depicts or describes procedures for the construction or use of weapons, ammunition, bombs or incendiary devices,” “depicts, encourages, or describes methods of escape from…”
Sisneros v. Nix, 884 F. Supp. 1313 (S.D. Iowa 1995). “In Abbott , the Court was primarily concerned with regulations set forth at 28 C.F.R. §§ 540.70 and 540.71 (1988). “These generally permit an inmate to subscribe to, or to receive, a publication without prior approval, but authorize the warden to reject a publication in certain…”
Nichols v. Nix, 810 F. Supp. 1448 (S.D. Iowa 1993). “In Abbott , the court was primarily concerned with regulations set forth at 28 C.F.R. §§ 540.70 and 540.71 (1988). "These generally permit an inmate to subscribe to, or to receive, a publication without prior approval, but authorize the warden to reject a publication in certain…”
Daker v. Ferrero, 506 F. Supp. 2d 1295 (N.D. Ga. 2007). “The regulations provided several criteria for rejection, including whether the publication “depicts or describes procedures for the construction or use of weapons, ammunition, bombs or incendiary devices,” “depicts, encourages, or describes methods of escape from correctional…”
Lyon v. Grossheim, 803 F. Supp. 1538 (S.D. Iowa 1992). “In Abbott , the court was primarily concerned with regulations set forth at 28 C.F.R. §§ 540.70 and 540.71 (1988). “These generally permit an inmate to subscribe to, or to receive, a publication without prior approval, but authorize the warden to reject a publication in certain…”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the
Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and
treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.