Key Takeaways
Firestorm Books, Asheville Prison Books, and three South Carolina inmates are suing over a policy limiting mailed books to six approved vendors.
The lawsuit says the policy prevented a Buddhist inmate and a Muslim inmate from receiving religious books related to their faiths.
South Carolina corrections officials say the restrictions were introduced after a drug-smuggling scheme involving books.
The plaintiffs argue that less restrictive security measures could stop contraband without blocking access to religious, legal, and educational books.
Why Are South Carolina Inmates Being Blocked From Receiving Religious Books?
A federal lawsuit is challenging a South Carolina prison policy that restricts where incarcerated people can receive books from, including books about their religious beliefs.
Firestorm Books, an independent bookstore in Asheville, North Carolina, joined Asheville Prison Books and three South Carolina inmates in filing the lawsuit on May 8 against South Carolina Department of Corrections Director Joel Anderson.
The lawsuit alleges that the approved-vendor policy violates the First and Fourteenth Amendments. Two incarcerated plaintiffs, one Buddhist and one Muslim, also argue that blocking access to books about their faith violates federal protections for religious exercise in prisons.
Which Religious Books Were Rejected?
One plaintiff, Christopher Santiago, is a practicing Buddhist incarcerated at Kirkland Correctional Institution.
According to the lawsuit, Santiago requested a Buddhist book through Asheville Prison Books. Firestorm mailed him When Things Fall Apart by Pema Chödrön in April, but prison officials allegedly did not deliver the book or return it to the bookstore.
Santiago also sought another Buddhist book from Sravasti Abbey, along with the Jailhouse Lawyer's Manual. The lawsuit says the prison policy prevented him from receiving those materials as well.
Another plaintiff, Eric Spears, is a practicing Muslim. Spears attempted to order religious books from an Islamic bookstore that carried materials consistent with his beliefs, but his order was denied because the bookseller was not an approved vendor.
The lawsuit also cites nonreligious books that were rejected, including Howard Zinn's A People's History of the United States.
Why Does South Carolina Restrict Which Bookstores Can Send Books to Inmates?
The South Carolina Department of Corrections currently allows inmates to receive books only from a small list of approved sellers, including Barnes & Noble, Books-A-Million, and several companies specializing in books for incarcerated readers.
Books sent by other sources are rejected and may be sent to contraband for disposal. The department says the restrictions are intended to reduce the risk of contraband entering prisons.
A department spokesperson previously said the policy followed the discovery of a smuggling operation involving a former employee and former inmate. According to SCDC, books containing drug-soaked pages were mailed to more than 20 inmates across 14 prisons.
The plaintiffs do not dispute that prisons have a legitimate interest in stopping drugs. Instead, they argue that the approved-vendor rule goes too far.
Firestorm and Asheville Prison Books say they follow prison security procedures and would comply with reasonable screening requirements. Their lawsuit argues that inspecting incoming books would be a less restrictive alternative to automatically rejecting materials based solely on who sent them.
Do Prison Inmates Have a Right to Religious Books?
People do not lose all of their religious rights when they enter prison.
The Religious Land Use and Institutionalized Persons Act, commonly known as RLUIPA, provides specific protections for the religious exercise of people held in prisons and other institutions.
Under the law, the government generally cannot impose a substantial burden on an inmate's religious exercise unless it demonstrates that the restriction serves a compelling governmental interest and is the least restrictive means of achieving that goal.
Santiago and Spears argue that South Carolina's policy substantially burdens their religious exercise because some specialized Buddhist and Islamic materials are not available through the state's approved vendors.
That makes the case about more than access to books. It asks whether a generally applicable prison security rule becomes a religious freedom problem when it prevents inmates from obtaining materials needed to study and practice their faith.
Is the South Carolina Policy a Religious Book Ban?
Not specifically.
The policy applies to books based on where they come from rather than whether their content is religious. Religious, legal, political, educational, and recreational books can all be affected if they come from an unapproved source.
That distinction will likely matter in court.
The plaintiffs argue that even a generally applicable policy can unlawfully burden religious exercise under RLUIPA. They also contend that the rule violates First Amendment rights to send and receive publications and Fourteenth Amendment due process protections because books may be rejected or destroyed without adequate notice or an opportunity to appeal.
Why Does the Lawsuit Matter for Religious Freedom?
Religious books can be particularly difficult to replace through a limited list of mainstream retailers.
An incarcerated Christian may be able to find many commonly requested Bibles through a major bookseller, for example, while someone following a smaller denomination or minority religion may depend on a specialized religious publisher for texts connected to their beliefs.
The lawsuit therefore raises a broader question: Can a prison impose a uniform security policy if that policy makes it significantly harder for some inmates to access materials related to their faith?
Prison officials argue that controlling the sources of incoming books helps prevent drugs and other contraband. The plaintiffs argue that security can be maintained through less restrictive methods that preserve access to religious materials.
A federal court will ultimately have to determine where that balance should be drawn.
What Happens Next?
As of August 26, 2026, the South Carolina Department of Corrections continues to list its approved-vendor restrictions on its website. The policy states that books from other sources will be rejected and sent to contraband for disposal.
The lawsuit, Firestorm Books et al. v. Anderson, remains a federal civil rights case in the U.S. District Court for the District of South Carolina. The plaintiffs are seeking a court order preventing enforcement of the policy as well as changes to how rejected books are handled.
Whether the policy survives the challenge could help define how far prisons can go in restricting access to books when security measures collide with freedom of speech, due process, and religious exercise.
Meta description: South Carolina inmates and a bookstore are suing over a prison policy that blocked Buddhist and Islamic books from unapproved vendors.
Excerpt: A bookstore and three inmates are challenging South Carolina's prison book policy after Buddhist, Islamic, legal, and other books were rejected.
