October Term 2014 · Docket 13-6827

Does a half-inch beard violate prison security rules?

A prisoner seeks to grow a beard for religious reasons. Arkansas claims this rule threatens prison safety.

Official caption
Holt v. Hobbs
Latest argument session
Latest official Court activity
Latest verified event
Argued
Sources analyzed through
Official Transcript

Verified source milestones

  1. — An official oral-argument transcript was verified.

The arguments, in order

This case may have been argued more than once. Each entry below uses that session's official transcript. Later arguments do not erase earlier ones.

  1. Argument 1 ·

    What happened at the argument

    Laycock argued forty prison systems allow beards. He stated Arkansas rejects evidence to seek absolute deference.

    Curran argued the beard aids disguise. He claimed it threatens identification and contraband concealment.

    Yang argued the state failed its burden. He stated forty states allow such beards without issue.

    Read the official transcript for this argument · Official argument details

    Sources used for this argument breakdown

A citizen's guide to the whole case

What this case is about

Salah Horn argues his faith requires a beard. Arkansas officials ban beards to prevent contraband and disguise. The lower court sided with the state. Horn asks the Supreme Court to reverse that result.

Official sources for this section

How the case got here

The Supreme Court heard oral argument in this case on October 7, 2014.

Official sources for this section

What each side wants

Horn wants the Court to strike down the beard ban. He argues his religious rights outweigh the state's security claims.

Arkansas wants the Court to uphold the beard ban. It argues the rule is essential for maximum security.

Official sources for this section

What each side says

Horn's counsel argues forty other prison systems allow beards. They claim Arkansas rejects valid evidence to gain absolute deference.

Arkansas's counsel argues a half-inch beard aids disguise. They claim this threatens identification and contraband concealment.

Official sources for this section

What the justices asked

Justice Ginsburg asked if a quarter-inch rule would satisfy the standard. She noted other inmates receive similar accommodations.

Justice Kennedy asked if RLUIPA displaces the Turner standard. He questioned the specific burden on prisons under strict scrutiny.

Official sources for this section

Why it matters

This case defines the balance between religious freedom and prison security. It sets the standard for evaluating inmate accommodation requests. The outcome impacts how states manage religious practices in custody.

Official sources for this section

What happens next

This article currently covers the argument record. Use the official docket link for later case activity.

Official sources for this section

Official Court provenance

Official docket and case history · Official Supreme Court oral-argument detail page

Title and summary sources

Revision history

  1. Revision 1 · Official Transcript ·

    Correction: Rewritten to the concise citizen-facing editorial standard.

  2. Revision 2 · Official Transcript ·

    Correction: Migrated to the dated official Court activity contract without model use.

Download this sanitized case as JSON