or Judaism. Put differently, the traditional requirements of Christian worship, such as weekly services and periodic prayer, tend to be less time-consuming and disruptive of the SDC program than the requirements of Islamic worship, which involves group services, prayers five times per day, and strict dietary restrictions. Although both Christian and Muslim inmates are given comparable opportunities to practice their religions, the Muslim religion’s more rigorous requirements may mean that SDC’s boot camp regimen has a disparate impact on Muslims. Yet, the Supreme Court has never held that a prison regulation’s disparate impact on an inmate’s unconventional religious practices is constitutionally significant. Cf. Washington v. Davis, 426 U.S. 229, 96 S.Ct. 2040, 48 L.Ed.2d 597 (1976) (<HOLDING>). Nor is this surprising; a contrary rule would
holding that title vii proscribes racial discrimination against whites upon the same standards as racial discrimination against nonwhites holding that racial discrimination is not a personal injury tort holding that disproportionate impact standing alone was insufficient to prove unconstitutional racial discrimination holding official immunity is available in claims of discrimination if plaintiff fails to establish his treatment by defendants was so at variance with what would reasonably be anticipated absent racial discrimination that racial discrimination is the probable explanation holding that racial discrimination is a personal injury tort