Opinion
No. CIV S-06-01413 ALA P.
November 15, 2007
ORDER
The Plaintiff is directed to file a response to the Defendants' motion for summary judgment within thirty-five days of the date of this order. Plaintiff's response or opposition should address the following questions:
One. Is there any genuine issue of fact in dispute regarding whether tobacco has been banned by the California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation?
Two. Should Plaintiff's claim against Governor Schwarzenegger be dismissed on the ground that no facts have been alleged which would support Plaintiff's claim against him?
Three. Is there any court decision that holds that the denial of all tobacco products including snuff deprives a prisoner of his or her Eighth Amendment right to be free from cruel and unusual punishment?
Four. Is there any case that holds that the use of snuff is a medical necessity?
Five. Is there any court decision that holds that the use of tobacco products such as snuff is a fundamental liberty interest protected by the Fourteenth Amendment against deprivation by a State?
Six. Does the banning of tobacco products such as snuff serve a legitimate penological interest to provide a healthy environment for prison inmates?
Seven. Are the Defendants entitled to assert the defense of qualified immunity, because the banning of tobacco products such as snuff, if such conduct does not violate clearly established federal statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would have known?
IT IS SO ORDERED.