Three of the provisions contained in the first amendment in the US Bill of rights have changed the way prisoners are treated and how they seek fair treatment in the hands of the criminal justice system (Witte & Nichols 2011). Firstly, that individuals, as well as the press, have the right to express themselves freely without undue influence from congress or laws made by congress. Secondly, that individuals and entities have the right to petition the government and thirdly, the right to choose one's religion. The above provisions, are particularly important to prisoners since prior to the amendment, prisoners in the hands of the criminal justice system were highly viewed as subjects of the law who had to be reprimanded without a right to be heard and who mostly were never given an opportunity to defend themselves (Moss 2007).
The provisions cut across such that religion, for example, is chosen by an individual as opposed to authorities preferring one religion over the other. Similarly, the right to expression is applied to the prisoner much the same way it is applied to the prison officials or anyone else. Overall, anyone can easily petition the government when it acts in excesses regardless of the rank of the affected individual. This way, the laws are able to take care of both the prisoners, officials and indeed any other affected citizen.
Of the three provisions, I find the right to petition the government as particularly important for the prisoners. Over time, there have been a series of cases in which prisoners were unfairly treated, and there was never a provision through which they could challenge the unfair treatment. Through the first amendment, however, the prisoners are now able to freely petition the government when it treats them unfairly.
References
Witte, J., & Nichols, J. A. (2011). Religion and the American constitutional experiment (pp. 170-73). Boulder, CO: Westview Press.
Moss, S. A. (2007). Students and workers and prisoners-Oh, my! A cautionary note about excessive institutional tailoring of First Amendment doctrine. UCLA Law Review, 54, 06-44.
