Case Explained: JOSHUA LAMBERT V. ROBERT MCKAY, ET AL

Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit Filed: 2026-07-02 Docket: 2:19-cv-01829-BJR-SKV The Ninth Circuit affirmed the district court’s judgment in favor of the defendants in Joshua D. Lambert’s civil rights action brought under 42 U.S.C. § 1983, which alleged violations of his First Amendment rights regarding mail policies and telephone access while incarcerated in Washington state. The court held that the district court correctly granted summary judgment on Lambert’s First Amendment claim against Island County and Chief Briones because Lambert failed to raise a triable dispute proving that the defendants’ publisher-only mail policy was unconstitutional, citing *Bell v. Wolfish* and noting that the policy prohibited only specific computer-generated materials rather than imposing a blanket ban. The court further affirmed the dismissal of conspiracy and retaliation claims against Plaintiff’s attorney McKay and Lieutenant Bingham, finding Lambert failed to allege facts demonstrating either a conspiracy or an underlying constitutional violation regarding his telephone access rights. Additionally, the court upheld the dismissal of claims against Island County and Chief Briones concerning confiscated books because Lambert cited no official policy supporting the claim and conceded that none of his books were actually taken. The court also affirmed the dismissal of a claim alleging Sergeant Piechowski threatened retaliation for Lambert subpoenaing him to testify in a criminal trial, ruling that the alleged comment did not state a sufficient constitutional claim under Section 1983. As a practical consequence, the judgment against the defendants stands, and Lambert’s motion to strike the answering briefs was denied. Do It For The Case Law is a news reporting service. Nothing in this episode constitutes legal advice.