THE NORTH CAROLINA PRISONERS' LABOR UNION INCLUDED APPROXIMATELY 2,000 MEMBERS AND HAD OPERATED FOR MANY MONTHS IN THE NORTH CAROLINA PRISONS. ALTHOUGH MEMBERSHIP WAS TOLERATED INITIALLY BY STATE CORRECTIONS OFFICIALS, THEY LATER ISSUED REGULATIONS FORBIDDING MEETINGS OF THE UNION, INMATE-TO-INMATE SOLICITATION, AND BULK MAILING PRIVILEGES FOR THE UNION. THE UNION BROUGHT AN ACTION FOR DECLARATORY AND INJUNCTIVE RELIEF. IT CLAIMED INFRINGEMENT OF THE MEMBERS' FIRST AMENDMENT AND EQUAL PROTECTION RIGHTS, BECAUSE OTHER GROUPS ENJOYED SIMILAR PRIVILEGES OF MEETING AND BULK MAILING. A THREE-JUDGE FEDERAL DISTRICT COURT HELD THAT THE PRISON REGULATIONS VIOLATED THE PRISONERS' FIRST AMENDMENT AND EQUAL PROTECTION RIGHTS. WHERE A UNION WAS PERMITTED TO EXIST, THE COURT REASONED, IT WAS IRRATIONAL TO PROHIBIT MEETINGS AND INMATE-TO-INMATE SOLICITATION. THE COURT OBSERVED A LACK OF EVIDENCE THAT THE UNION HAD BEEN USED TO DISRUPT THE OPERATION OF THE PENAL INSTITUTIONS. THE SUPREME COURT, HOWEVER, DECLARED THE DISTRICT COURT'S ANALYSIS INAPPROPRIATE FOR NOT RECOGNIZING THE PECULIAR RESTRICTIVE CIRCUMSTANCES OF PENAL CONFINEMENT. FOR ITS DETERMINATION, THE COURT RELIED ON SPECULATION BY TWO NORTH CAROLINA CORRECTIONAL OFFICIALS AS TO THE UNION'S POTENTIAL THREAT TO THE PRISON ENVIRONMENT. THE COURT IN EFFECT ALLOWED THE PRISON OFFICIALS, NOT THE DISTRICT COURT, TO DETERMINE THE REASONABLE RESPONSE. THIS APPROACH PRESENTED AN ALMOST ABSOLUTE BARRIER TO THE INMATES' CLAIMS. AS A RESULT, THE JONES CASE IS A SIGNIFICANT DEPARTURE FROM THE PRIOR CASES USING DEFERENCE AS A FACTOR IN THE REASONABLENESS TEST FOR BALANCING FIRST AMENDMENT PRISONERS' CLAIMS, AND WILL RETURN THE COURT TO ITS FORMER 'HANDS-OFF' POSTURE. THIS ABDICATION MAY LEAVE PRISONERS WITH NO EFFECTIVE FORUM FOR OBTAINING RELIEF. (RCB)